By COGwriter
What if the most faithful Christian church preceded Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism? Would it make sense that some would excessively criticize it? Well, as it turns out, some have derogatorily accused the genuine Church of God of being a cult.
What is a cult? Does the Bible endorse or warn against a "cult" of Christians who also believe what is commonly considered to be the Jewish law? This article will try to answer those questions and deal with some common accusations.
The term cult has been defined as follows:
cult noun ( RELIGION ) Definition
• [C] a religious group, often living together, whose beliefs are considered extreme or strange by many people
Their son ran away from home and joined a religious cult.
• [C] a particular system of religious belief
(the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press. viewed 04/07/12)
The genuine Church of God is not a group that people run away from their homes to join. It is also not some type of commune where its members live together. Of course, true followers of Jesus have always been considered to be extreme by many non-faithful.
As far as the second definition, a particular system of religious belief, that definition seems to apply to any religious system.
Notice the particular system of religious belief that Jesus taught:
4 "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.'" (Matthew 4:4)
And that is what we in the Continuing Church of God teach, It is not some wierd brain washing--it is to believe Jesus and obey God and His commands (cf. Revelation 14:12).
History shows that various ones did not look kindly to towards real Christians:
22 But we desire to hear from you what you think; for concerning this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere. (Acts 28:22)
Can you handle a faith that is spoken against everywhere?
Most cannot.
In May 2015, Time ran the following:
They probably wouldn't like what it looks like
With political season kicking off again, so is the season where folks begin to use the term “Christian nation.” Some claim we were one, some claim we are one, and some say we need to become one. Yet, each time I hear that phrase I have an inner Princess Bride moment where I say to myself, “you keep using that word, but it doesn’t mean what you think it means.”
So, what if we became a Christian nation? Well, a few things would have to change… drastically. Here’s a few quick examples:Because truth be told, if America actually were to become a Christian nation, I don’t think the people who advocated for it would be too happy with the end product. ...
We’d Have To Abolish the 2nd Amendment.
The 2nd Amendment is so beloved by American Christians that this alone would likely be the sticking point preventing us from ever becoming a Christian nation. Jesus taught his disciples that they were to never use violence to respond to evil (Matthew 5:39) and that they were to actively love their enemies. He also lived a life of nonviolent enemy love as a model for us to follow– and living our lives patterned after how he lived his is the ultimate proof that we belong to God (1John 2:6). A Christian nation would have no room for the 2nd Amendment.
No, the USA would not have to get rid of the 2nd amendment (cf. Luke 22:36). But it would have to cease being a warlike nation (see Military Service and the Churches of God: Do Real Christians Participate in Carnal Warfare or Encourage Violence?) and also its love of violent sports (see Is American Football Evil?).
But the reality is that relatively few in the USA would tolerate original, true Christianity.
Most who claim to be Christian in the USA condemn the original Christian faith as cultic. This is despite the fact that Jude wrote "to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).
Most do not understand original Christianity and do not want to. You can learn about it if you are interested in the truth:
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE?
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from Acts 2 in the first century to the 21st century. Two related sermon links would include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries. In Spanish: Marque aquí para ver el pdf folleto: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Let me also add that if that a lot of what people consider to be 'Christian' in this age is certainly not biblical nor Christ-like.
Were you aware that the original Christians, were considered to be part of a cult? Notice that Paul was charged with being the leader of a religious cult:
2 When Paul was called in, Tertullus presented the charges against Paul in the following address to the governor: "Your Excellency...5 We have found this man to be a troublemaker who is constantly stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the cult known as the Nazarenes...
10...Paul said, "I know, sir, that you have been a judge of Jewish affairs for many years, so I gladly present my defense before you. 11 You can quickly discover that I arrived in Jerusalem no more than twelve days ago to worship at the Temple. 12 My accusers never found me arguing with anyone in the Temple, nor stirring up a riot in any synagogue or on the streets of the city. 13 These men cannot prove the things they accuse me of doing.
14 "But I admit that I follow the Way, which they call a cult. I worship the God of our ancestors, and I firmly believe the Jewish law and everything written in the prophets.
(Acts 24:2,5,10-14, New Living Translation ®, copyright © 1996, 2004 by Tyndale Charitable Trust.)
Christians with "Nazarene" practices have long been accused of being part of a cult (or "sect," Acts 24:14, NKJV/NJB) by persecutors of various types. Jesus warned that the faithful would be persecuted and insulted:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matthew 5:10-12, NIV)
Paul even claimed that "all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecutions" (2 Timothy 3:21). So, of course, keeping the same practices that Jesus of Nazareth, the Nazarene ringleader called the Apostle Paul, and others throughout history does not make one part of an inappropriate "cult" (see also Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes?).
The relatively small size of the genuine Church of God is consistent with the type of church that Jesus said He would have:
32 "Do not fear, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. (Luke 12:32, NKJV)
32 Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased your Father to give you a kingdom. (Luke 12:32, Douay-Rheims)
Note that both Protestant and Greco-Roman Catholic renderings of Jesus' words demonstrate that His followers should NOT be afraid of the fact that His real flock will be little. Jesus also taught only a few would find the way to eternal life in this age (Matthew 7:14; 20:16). The Apostle Jude indicates that the number of saints was relatively small (Jude 14), while the Apostle Paul called the small group a “remnant” (Romans 11:5).
If the Roman Catholic Church was actually very small, it is likely that most modern Protestants would consider it a strange cult with its incense, how its clergy dress, its acceptance of pagan traditions, its reliance on apparitions and claims of messages from angels, and its use of relics, to name just a few examples. But because of its size, the world instead accepts it as "orthodox," while condemning true followers of Jesus and the word of God as a cult.
The Apostle Paul wrote:
14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? 15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said:
"I will dwell in them
And walk among them.
I will be their God,
And they shall be My people."17 Therefore
"Come out from among them
And be separate, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you."
18 'I will be a Father to you,
And you shall be My sons and daughters,
Says the Lord Almighty." (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)
Because the world's churches do NOT have the same respect for following the word of God as we do, plus do not contend for the original faith, we do not consider them to be brothers and sisters in Christ. We consider them to be neighbor that we love.
And we teach what Jesus said to do about them:
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48)
19 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' (Matthew 19:19)
Yes, we pray for those who surse and persecute us. And yes, we honor our parents even if they are not COG.
So, yes, for those who are not COG, we love them and do not hate them. But we are not part of their religions.
This is not new to us.
There is an old Arabic Islamic manuscript that reports about those considered to be Judeao-Christians. It was published in English in 1966 by Shlomo Pines as The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity according to a New Source. It was originally written by an Arabic Muslim around the tenth century named Abd al-Jabbar and called Tathbit Dala'il Nubuwwat Sayyidina Mahammad. One chapter of it is believed to be an Islamic interpretation of a lot of "Judeo-Christian" writings (some probably from true Nazarenes, others from Essenes, etc.).
Shlomo Pines translated much of the one chapter of it into English, and here is the translation of one section of it:
(71a) 'After him', his disciples (axhab) were with the Jews and the Children of Israel in the latter's synagogues and observed the prayers and the feasts of (the Jews) in the same place as the latter. (However) there was a disagreement between them and the Jews with regard to Christ.
The Romans (al-Rum) reigned over them. The Christians (used to) complain to the Romans about the Jews, showed them their own weakness and appealed to their pity. And the Romans did pity them. This (used) to happen frequendy. And the Romans said to the Christians: "Between us and the Jews there is a pact which (obliges us) not to change their religious laws (adyan). But if you would abandon their laws and separate yourselves from them, praying as we do (while facing) the East, eating (the things) we eat, and regarding as permissible that which we consider as such, we should help you and make you powerful, and the Jews would find no way (to harm you). On the contrary, you would be more powerful than they."
The Christians answered:"We will do this."
(And the Romans) said: "Go, fetch your companions, and bring your Book (kitab)." (The Christians) went to their companions, informed them of (what had taken place) between them and the Romans and said to them: "Bring the Gospel (al-injil), and stand up so that we should go to them."
But these (companions) said to them: "You have done ill. We are not permitted (to let) the Romans pollute the Gospel. In giving a favourable answer to the Romans, you have accordingly departed from the religion. We are (therefore) no longer permitted to associate with you; on the contrary, we are obliged to declare that there is nothing in common between us and you;" and they prevented their (taking possession of) the Gospel or gaining access to it. In consequence a violent quarrel (broke out) between (the two groups). Those (mentioned in the first place) went back to the Romans and said to them: "Help us against these companions of ours before (helping us) against the Jews, and take away from them on our behalf our Book (kitab)." Thereupon (the companions of whom they had spoken) fled the country. And the Romans wrote concerning them to their governors in the districts of Mosul and in the Jazirat al-'Arab. Accordingly, a search was made for them; some (qawm) were caught and burned, others (qawm) were killed.
(As for) those who had given a favorable answer to the Romans they came together and took counsel as to how to replace the Gospel, seeing it was lost to them. (Thus) the opinion that a Gospel should be composed (yunshi`u) was established among them…a certain number of Gospels were written. (Pines S. The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity according to a New Source. Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Volume II, No.13; 1966. Jerusalem, pp. 14-15).
The above, which appears to be accurate, would seem to have taken place in the second century--probably around 134/135 A.D.. It is interesting for a number of reasons. It shows that there were two groups that professed Christ then. One called "Christians" above, and the other (the faithful ones) called "companions." The fact that the companions would no longer associate with the compromisers showed that in whatever area the above occurred in, there were definitely two groups. Notice also that the Roman-connected group wanted the faithful to be persecuted. And there has been direct and indirect persecution from governmental leaders and/or religious leaders since then.
Shortly after the incident in Jerusalem, Polycarp of Smyrna, a man ordained directly by the original Apostles, wrote that “many” (which likely included many in Rome and Alexandria as well as others with affiliation) were following vain/false forms of Christianity:
“For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist,” and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil; and whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan. Wherefore, forsaking the vanity of many, and their false doctrines, let us return to the word which has been handed down to us from the beginning (Polycarp. Letter to the Philippians, Chapter VII).
The "vanity of many" was an emerging group calling itself Christian, that had compromised.
By the early third century, another COG leader, Serapion of Antioch, declared:
That ye may see also that the proceedings of this lying confederacy, to which is given the name of New Prophecy, is abominated among the whole brotherhood throughout the world. (Serapion. From the epistle to Caricus and Ponticus. As translated by Roberts & Donaldson)
That lying confederacy ended up being the Greco-Roman church, with its patriarchs in Jerusalem, Rome, and Alexandria. After Serapion died, Antioch and later Constantinople joined that confederacy. The five Greco-Roman sees exist to this day and are looking to more fully rejoin.
That said, we see that there are documented incidents in early Christianity where the faithful warned against the compromisers.
And let me add that the compromisers did not like that.
Name calling against faithful Christians has continued throughout the church era.
After declaring that Passover should be kept on Sunday, instead of the biblical date of Passover at his Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., the Roman emperor Constantine stated:
Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way. (Eusebius' Life of Constantine, Book III chapter 18)
I do not recall Jesus indicating that Jews were detestable (He was a Jew) or that He changed the date of Passover--our Saviour, Jesus, did not teach to go against the Bible, like Constantine. But apparently sun-worshipping Constantine, who without even being baptized, declared himself a lay bishop at the Council of Nicea he called in 325 A.D., felt he had the authority to do otherwise. And the Sunday observance is now known as Easter (it is because sun-worshiping practices, cowardice, and the avoidance of practice that were considered to "Jewish" that is really why Easter is observed when it is; see also Did Early Christians Celebrate Easter?). That said, notice Constantine labeled those who would hold to the original biblical date as "detestable Jewish crowd."
What kind of man was Constantine? Here is something from someone who liked him:
1. He was divorced and remarried. His first wife was Minervina, and he divorced her to marry his second wife was Fausta.
2. Constantine killed his second wife. In AD 326, he had his first son Crispus (from his first marriage) killed. He also had his second wife Fausta killed. Both names were removed from public documentation. After Constantine had his second wife killed, he never married again until his death at age 65. https://taylormarshall.com/2017/07/11-facts-constantine-first-christian-roman-emperor.html
Let me add that Emperor Constantine also declared the death penalty against Christians in Jerusalem who refused to eat pork (Pines S. The Jewish Christians of the Early Centuries of Christianity according to a New Source. Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Volume II, No.13; 1966. Jerusalem, pp. 31-32).
And while he declared he wanted to "have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd" he continued to put pagan gods on his coinage, even after he claimed to see a vision of Jesus which some claim resulted in his conversion.
Many who declare the truth Church of God as a cult, have endorsed and adopt pagan worship practices (see also the free online books: Should You Keep God's Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?, Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?, and Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism).
Shortly before his death, in 332, Constantine issued his Edict against the Heretics (Chapter LXIV.—Constantine’s Edict against the Heretics. This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at Calvin College). He included those with COG views as heretics, despite the fact that they, not he, were faithful.
In an Imperial decree in 380, Emperor Theodosius declared that the “Catholic Church” was the official religion of the Roman Empire (Theodosian Code XVI.1.2. Cited in Bettenson H, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, London: Oxford University Press, 1943, p. 31).
He also issued an Imperial decree that said any who would not embrace his definition of the Godhead were prohibited to use the term “catholic,” and he also labelled such persons as “foolish madmen” and “heretics” (ibid).
Historical scholar Jonathan Roberts (who was not in the COG) wrote:
Until Theodosius commanded his subjects to believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, and enforced his commands upon them by the most inhumane ways, that doctrine was rejected and resisted by the Greek and Roman followers of the Christos ... That so senseless and unnatural doctrine should have been forced upon any people, by any means, however tyrannical is a mystery even more mysterious than the arithmetic that can make one three, and three one (Roberts JM. Antiquity Unveiled: Ancient Voices from the the Spirit Realms Disclose the Most Startling Revelations, Proving Christianity to be of Heathen Origin ... Published by Oriental publishing co., 1894. Original from the University of Michigan, Digitized May 21, 2007, p. 468).
What kind of man was Theodosius?
Well, in order to get his trinity doctrine across, he removed the Patriarch of Constantinople as he would not accept it. Yes, Theodosius removed Demophilus from being the Patriarch of Constantinople because he would NOT accept the Emperor’s trinitarian Nicene Creed. The 5th century Greco-Roman historian Socrates Scholasticus wrote:
When the emperor found the Church in this state, he began to consider by what means he could make peace, effect a union, and enlarge the Churches. Immediately therefore he intimated his desire to Demophilus, who presided over the Arian party, and inquired whether he was willing to assent to the Nicene creed, and thus reunite the people, and establish concord. Upon Demophilus's declining to accede to this proposal, the emperor said to him, “Since you reject peace and unanimity, I order you to quit the churches.”
Which when Demophilus heard, weighing with himself the difficulty of contending against superior power, he convoked his followers in the church, and, standing in the midst of them, thus spoke: “Brethren, it is written in the Gospel.' If they persecute you in one city, flee ye into another. ' ' Since therefore the emperor excludes us from the churches, take notice that we will henceforth hold our assemblies without the city. (Socrates Scholasticus, pp. 265-266)
Therefore, consider that: 1) trinitarianism was not the position of the patriarchy of Constantinople, 2) Arian meant Semi-Arian above (and this happens in other writings), 3) an emperor removed the patriarch Demophilus for not endorsing the Nicene Creed, 4) that political considerations, not theological, looks to have been the reason to push trinitarianism and 5) Theodosius resorted to name-calling against those who held to the original biblical position.
Furthermore, let’s see something written about his actions in 390 A.D. by a contemporary witness and Greco-Roman theologian named Theodoret who reported this about Emperor Theodosius:
The emperor was fired with anger when he heard the news, and unable to endure the rush of his passion, did not even check its onset by the curb of reason, but allowed his rage to be the minister of his vengeance. When the imperial passion had received its authority, as though itself an independent prince, it broke the bonds and yoke of reason, unsheathed swords of injustice right and left without distinction, and slew innocent and guilty together. No trial preceded the sentence. No condemnation was passed on the perpetrators of the crimes. Multitudes were mowed down like ears of grain in harvest-tide. It is said that seven thousand perished. (Theodoret. Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret. Dalcassian Publishing Company, 2019, p. 200).
Theodosius also had people killed (called Quartodecimans) who retained the biblical date of Passover (Gibbon E. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume III, Chapter XXVII. ca. 1776-1788).
“To the reign of Theodosius belonged the glory or the infamy of establishing Inquisitors of Faith, who seem to have been specially enjoined to look after the crime of the Quartodecimans” (Smith W. A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology: Oarses-Zygia. J. Murray, 1890 Item notes: v.3, p. 1064).
The change to trinitarianism was finalized by the Council of Constantinople, which was a council of men convened by Theodosius, in 381 A.D. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
245 The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was announced by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381) (Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 72).
Remember that the apostles had all been dead for hundreds of years before the trinitarian position with the Holy Spirit was agreed upon.
Most Protestants have accepted the trinitarian change and many follow Theodosius’ general example of considering non-trinitarians as part of a cult.
Shortly after Theodosius' decree, Greco-Roman Catholic scholars such as Jerome and Epiphanius referred to later Christians who held aspects of original catholic doctrines as Nazarenes.
Notice also the following statement about the faithful Nazarene:
From Justin to Jerome, however, the Nazarenes were viewed as doctrinally within the fold of what could be called “catholic Christianity.” (Varner W. Baur to Bauer and Beyond: Early Jewish Christianity and Modern Scholarship. Academ.edu, Received November 16, 2019)
And it should be noted that the Nazarene “catholics” were not part of the church that Justin Martyr and Jerome were affiliated with. But the Nazarenes held doctrines consistent with the Church of God in Smyrna.
In his Letter 112 to Augustine, Jerome called those with the original Christian practices, "a most pestilential heresy." So, more name calling.
Yet, notice an interesting, but highly important, observation by the late Roman Catholic priest Bellarmino Bagatti:
In conclusion, regarding the Nazarenes, both St. Epiphanius and St. Jerome have nothing to condemn them for except the observance of customs forbidden by the Councils. (Bagatti, Bellarmino. Translated by Eugene Hoade. The Church from the Circumcision. Nihil obstat: Marcus Adinolfi. Imprimi potest: Herminius Roncari. Imprimatur: +Albertus Gori, die 26 Junii 1970. Franciscan Printing Press, Jerusalem, p. 35)
And that is a major difference between the Continuing Church of God and most others who consider themselves Christian. The Greco-Roman-Protestants accept several Imperial (and other) Councils as divinely authoritative (they are selective about the various councils as some contradict others) as their basis to change from aspects of the original beliefs (or at least accepted those changed beliefs), while we in the CCOG consider those councils of mainly historical interest.
But the name calling has continued from the trinitarians against those of us who still hold to original Christian beliefs.
Yet, this was not to be unexpected for the true followers of Jesus:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you (Matthew 5:10-12)
32 But recall the former days in which, after you were illuminated, you endured a great struggle with sufferings: 33 partly while you were made a spectacle both by reproaches and tribulations, and partly while you became companions of those who were so treated; (Hebrews 10:32-34)
4 ... they think it strange that you do not run with them in the same flood of dissipation, speaking evil of you. (1 Peter 4:4)
The fact that people name call against true Christians has occurred throughout the church age.
For another example, notice what happened during the Middle Ages"
The Paulicians did not call themselves Paulicians or Tonrakians, but the Universal and Apostolic Church. To them the orthodox churches, … had apostatized from the faith, lost their orders, and forfeited their sacraments. As to their Mariolatry and adoration of saints and pictures and crosses, it was all nothing but idolatry. (Arpee L. Armenian Paulicianism and the Key of Truth. The American Journal of Theology, Vol. 10, No. 2, Apr., 1906: 267-285)
They called themselves the Apostolic Catholic church, but … nicknamed Paulicians by their enemies … (Paulicians. The Encyclopaedia Britannica: Mun to Pay. 1911, p. 961; Blackwell D. A HANDBOOK OF CHURCH HISTORY: A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology. April 1973, p.29)
The Paulicians claimed to be THE ‘holy universal and apostolic church’ founded by Jesus Christ and his apostles. Of the false churches, they would say: “We do not belong to these, for they have long ago broken connection with the church.” … 6th century. (Lesson 50 – What Became of the Church Jesus Built? 58 Lesson: Ambassador College Bible Correspondence Course, 1968, p. 13).
Those called Paulicians considered that they were part of the original catholic church and that those who called themselves Greco-Roman Catholics were idolaters who long before had broken connection to the faithful church. More on them can be found in the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?
Understand that Greco-Roman Catholics seem to consider that the doctrine of the trinity, as adopted at an Imperial Council in 381, is the expression of the unity of God:
Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed. Indeed the unity of God is so fundamental (Joyce G.H. The Blessed Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company).
The Unity and Trinity of God ... The numerical unity or identity of the divine nature in the Three Persons is indicated in the trinitarian formulas (Ott L. Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Nihil Obstat: Jeremiah j. O’Sullivan. Imprimatur: +Cornelius Ep. Corgagiensis ei Ap. Amd. Rossensis, 7 October 1954. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1974, pp. 58-59).
However the Greco-Roman Catholics seems to feel that the Antichrist and those associated with him will be opposed to the adopted concept of the trinity. Notice the following Roman Catholic writing:
Jeanne le Royer (Sister of the Nativity--died 1798). "When the reign of Antichrist draws near, a false religion will appear which will deny the unity of God and will oppose the Church. Errors will cause ravages as never before..." (Dupont, p.58).
As far as ravages go, other Greco-Roman Catholic prophecies (see Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies: Do They Mirror, Highlight, or Contradict Biblical Prophecies?) warn that their end time faith will be hit by heretics (like those who believe the Bible), that this will cause problems, but between signs and wonders and government power, the Greco-Roman Catholics will (for a time) win. Many Greco-Roman Catholics teach that the Trinity is essentially the expression of the “unity of God.”
The fact that we do not teach Theodosius' trinity, we have been, and will be called a cult.
Let is also be understood that although Pope Francis claims he wants unity of all Christendom, that unity does NOT extend to non-trinitarians. It should also be pointed out that in the 21st century, the World Council of Churches still does not allow non-trinitarian churches to be members and that the Vatican's 2020 document, The Bishop and Christian Unity: An Ecumenical Vademecum, is also aimed at trinitarian churches. Because we do not want them unless they convert, and they do not want us unless we compromise on doctrine, the bulk of those who claim Christianity will consider us in the CCOG to be a cult. Bartholomew, Patriarch of Constantinople, has labeled those opposed to his unity plans as “unacceptably fanatical” (see Bartholomew I Patriarch of Constantinople Opposes Those Who Warn Against Catholic Unity). Pope Francis has called those who oppose his unity plans as having the devil as their father (see Pope Francis misunderstands the devil’s unity). He also said that those who claim to hold to fundamental Christian beliefs are a "scourge" (see Pope Francis speaks of ancient Ephesus and also condemned ‘fundamentalists’).
So, yes, you can expect more name-calling against the CCOG.
One of the reasons that the true Church of God is considered to be a cult by the Greco-Roman Catholics, Protestants, and certain secular scholars is that the Church of God has not accepted traditions of men to change our basic beliefs.
The Orthodox Catholic Church claims that it is the church of the seven councils. What does that mean?
Well, it means that they accept doctrinal changes from men that were agreed to at those councils. That is the lens in which they view doctrine. So, if scripture is in conflict with one of those councils, they differ to the council for doctrine. There are other traditions of men that the Eastern Orthodox also accept, but the main official one is the church councils.
The Roman Catholic Church claims to accept both scripture and something it calls the 'living magisterium.' Yet, 1) the Church of Rome also accepts the decisions of those and some other councils, even where they are in conflict with scripture and 2) based on certain papal pronouncements, the Vatican has accepted as church dogma various non-biblical doctrines, including some related to Jesus' mother Mary.
Neither the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic Church hold to the teachings of the original catholic church on many matters. This is documented in detail in the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?
The Protestant movement claims sola Scriptura (the belief that doctrine should come from the Bible alone), but despite that being its early ralling cry, Martin Luther did not believe in it and declared numerous books of the Bible as questionable (see Sola Scriptura or Prima Luther? What Did Martin Luther Really Believe About the Bible?). Furthermore, although Martin Luther once stated that he looked upon the Bible "as if God Himself spoke therein" he also stated,
My word is the word of Christ; my mouth is the mouth of Christ" (O'Hare PF. The Facts About Luther, 1916--1987 reprint ed., pp. 203-204).
[Specifically, what Martin Luther wrote in German was ""Ich bin sehr gewiss, dass mein Wort nitt mein, sondern Christus Wort sei, so muss mein Mund auch des sein, des Wort er redet" (Luther, 682) - also translated as "I am confident that it is not my word, but Christ's word, so my mouth is His who utters the words"(God's words - the violence of representation. Universitatea din Bucuresti, 2002. http://www.unibuc.ro/eBooks/filologie/meanings/1.htm, September 25, 2003).]
The Bible, in Romans 3:28, states:
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.
Martin Luther, in his German translation of the Bible, specifically added the word "allein" (English 'alone') to Romans 3:28-a word that is not in the original Greek. Martin Luther reportedly said:
You tell me what a great fuss the Papists are making because the word alone in not in the text of Paul ... say right out to him: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,' ... I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very well that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin or the Greek text (Stoddard J. Rebuilding a Lost Faith. 1922, pp. 101-102; see also Luther M. Amic. Discussion, 1, 127).
So, the major Protestant Reformer, Martin Luther, accepted opinions and preferences of men over the word of God.
Martin Luther also made other INTENTIONAL mistranslations to the Bible. Other translators have sometimes followed suit--instead of translating the New Testament Greek as it should be, they mistranslated passages related to keeping the seventh day Sabbath (see The Sabbath in the Early Church and Abroad) and the biblical holy days (see Should You Keep God's Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?). Speaking of not relying on the Bible for the Sabbath, the Church of Rome teaches that Sunday came from its decisions apart from the Bible and that if Protestants believed in sola Scriptura, they would all keep the seventh day Sabbath (see a series of late 19th century Roman Catholic articles on The Christian Sabbath).
Furthermore, the Protestant churches have tended to accept many decisions of the same councils of men that the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic churches do. Yet we, in the Continuing Church of God, are not Eastern Orthodox Catholic, Roman Catholic, or Protestant do not hold the decisions of those councils as authoritative and do not accept any decisions they came to as valid that are in conflict with the Bible. More on why we are NOT Protestant (and why the Protestants are in error) can be found in the free online book: Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism.
When I have tried to point out the acceptance of traditions of men and abandonment of sola Scriptura by Protestants, they tend to argue back that 1) the mistranslations are accurate--when they can be proven to be false and 2) they believe the Bible, but they simply have a different interpretation. Well, they often have a "different interpretation" all right, but that interpretation is based on the acceptance of vain human traditions and philosophy.
Notice that in the New Testament, the Apostle Paul warned:
8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. (Colossians 2:8)
Paul is warning Christians to NOT let traditions or philosophies of men deceive us.
Yet, that is what has basically happened to the Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants as well as most who fell away from the Church of God the late 20th century (see The Falling Away: The Bible and WCG Teachings).
The Apostle Peter added:
18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. (1 Peter 1:18-19)
Do not cling to family religious traditions above the word of God. We are to be unblemished and not believe or love lies.
Yet, because we in the CCOG do not, we are considered to be a cult by many who profess Christ.
Related to those what accept human traditions and philosophies above scripture, Jesus said:
8 "These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'" (Matthew 15:8-9)
Yes, those that consider the Continuing Church of God to be a cult are, if they claim to worship Jesus at all, are worhshiping Him in vain.
We in the Continuing Church of God do not engage in odd activities like polygamy, shaving heads, ritual animal sacrifices, or building armed compounds, etc. that are associated with 'cults' in the minds of many secularists and others.
So, why do some critics claim that the Church of God is a cult?
The anti-Church of God websites and other sources that suggest that the COG is a fraud, scam, and/or terrible doomsday cult are wrong. We teach the GOOD NEWS that Jesus and the Kingdom of God are the true hope for this world and that Jesus will prevail and usher in a uptopian time (see also The Gospel of the Kingdom of God).
Some COG critics make direct outrageously false statements, while others are more subtle and pretend to be trying help. Yet, the Bible teaches that it is "the Devil" (Satan) who is "the accuser of our brethren" (Revelation 12:9,10). The Bible also warns that although Satan's "ministers" try to appear to be righteous, they will come to their end (2 Corinthians 11:14-15)--none should follow false accusers.
Perhaps the most famous critic against the Church of God was the late Dr. Walter Martin, who prefers to use negative labels such as "Armstrongism" (see also What is Armstrongism?). He prefered that possibly because he knew that the expression Church of God is used extensively throughout the New Testament for the true Church (about 12 times in singular and plural forms), and he preferred to call the true Church of God derisive names. Here is something from one of his books:
The Armstrong cults believe that Armstrong was God’s sole channel of divine truth. (Martin W. The Kingdom of the Cults. Baker Books, 2003, p. 502)
But that is not true.
That was never the position of any truly in the Philadelphia remnant.
Plus, Herbert Armstrong made errors and I and certain other COG leaders have repeatedly acknowledged that he did. Sadly, however, COG critics tend to like to listen to other COG critics and often accept improper assertions about the COG as facts. Notice something else that Herbert Armstrong taught:
“Don't believe me – BELIEVE YOUR BIBLE – BELIEVE GOD!” (Armstrong HW. Personal. Plain Truth magazine, September 1963, p. 1)
All non-biblical doctrinal literature, including what someone like Herbert Armstrong wrote, should be proven by the Bible to be believed (cf. Acts 17:11). Dr. Walter Martin is basically bearing false witness, but many have relied on him instead of checking for the truth.
Of course, the Bible shows that "many false witnesses came forward" against Jesus (Matthew 26:60) and there were many "witnesses" with false charges against the Apostle Paul (Acts 24:1-14). Just being falsely accused by a lot of people, then, obviously does not disqualify one from being faithful. The Apostles, like Peter and others, also warned that some who at one time claimed to have association with the true church could turn bitter (Acts 8:18-23; Hebrews 12:14-15)--sadly many of more vocal accusers seem to be in that category. Notice also what Jesus Himself taught:
20 If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you (John 15:20).
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you (Matthew 5:10-12).
The Apostle Paul taught:
12 Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. (2 Timothy 3:12)
16 At my first defense no one stood with me, but all forsook me. May it not be charged against them. (2 Timothy 4:16)
If you really believe that you should follow Jesus, please do not be turned aside by those who speak against those who teach His message--Jesus and the Apostle Paul both suggested that those were signs of being part of the true Church of God.
In my view, the main reason that some have made claims about the genuine Church of God supposedly being a cult is that they "are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God" (Matthew 22:29).
One Protestant-type website, GotQuestions.com refused to correct errors when I provided documented proof (see What is Armstrongism?). And then there are anti-COG sites who like to claim they post the truth, like Banned by HWA, but mainly function as accusers of the brethren.
Jesus Himself taught about love (Matthew 5:53-45; 12:29-31), the need for repentance (Matthew 3:2; Luke 13:3), His sacrifice (Matthew 26:26-32), the law (Matthew 5:17-18; see also What Did Jesus Teach About the Ten Commandments?), the Holy Days (Luke 22:14-21; John 7:37), monogamy (Matthew 19:4-6), avoiding unclean meats (Luke 11:11-12; Matthew 7:9-11; see also The New Testament Church and Unclean Meats), the "beginning of sorrows" (Matthew 24:4-8), the coming Great Tribulation (Matthew 24:21), protection for the Philadelphian Christians (Revelation 3:7,10; see also There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians), and His return (Matthew 24:30-31). We in the Continuing Church of God do as well.
Basically in the Continuing Church of God, "we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God" (1 Corinthians 1:23-24). Many were offended by Jesus' actual teachings when He was on the earth (John 6:66), and many still are today.
Here is a listing of some of the beliefs of the Church of God:
There are more beliefs and they can be found at www.cogwriter.com and www.ccog.org. See also the Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God.
While many who profess Christ do not follow the practices of the original Christians, those in the Continuing Church of God strive to. The true Christian Church of God has long been spoken against since New Testament times (Acts 28:22).
Roman Emperors such as Constantine and Theodosius labeled us with derisive terms. Those whose beliefs connect to their councils of men (325 and 381 A.D. respectively) to this day consider the faithful to be cultic. Calling the CCOG a cult is consistent with that.
Genuine Christianity is about love. Love to God (Matthew 22:37-38) and love to neighbor (Matthew 22:39). And that “the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (James 2:8) and that we help show love towards God and neighbor by obeying Jesus and trying to fulfill Matthew 24:14; 28:19-20. God's entire plan is based on love (e.g. John 3:16; see also The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN: Why Did God Create Anything? Why Did God Make You?). Despite human flaws (and no one in the Church of God is perfect nor was anyone in the early apostolic church), the faithful in the COG strive to teach and practice what the Bible teaches.
Of course, it was Jesus who foretold that the true church would be a “little flock” (Luke 12:32), hated by the world (Matthew 10:22), persecuted (Matthew 10:23), and called names (Matthew 10:25). He also foretold only a few would find the way to life in this age (Matthew 7:14; cf. Matthew 12:31-32) and that most would let outside influences stop them from following the true way now (cf. Matthew 13:18-23).
Jesus said of some of His critics:
25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, 'They hated Me without a cause.' (John 15:25)
Of course, the critics claim to have a cause, but do not realize that it is Satan's cause they are promoting. Satan does not want people to be in the Kingdom of God nor does he want the Gospel of the Kingdom of God preached to the world as a witness as that will lead to the end (cf. Matthew 24:14). (An article related to some anti-COG websites is available: Banned by HWA and Ambassador Watch).
We of the Continuing Church of God urge repentance in this age, explain the love of God, and warn the world of the results of its sins and God’s ultimate judgment. We believe that those called, chosen, AND converted in this age are being saved to serve in support of getting the message of God out as a witness in this age and in the age to come. We believe that those called of God in this age to be faithful Philadelphia Christians will be moved to support that. The Bible shows that truly God is a God of love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:16) and has an exciting plan of salvation. And that we individually are called to give in a unique way (for more details, please read the free online book: The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN: Why Did God Create Anything? Why Did God Make You?).
Please study your Bible and check out what we teach. For truly God is a God of love and has an exciting plan of salvation (two free online books of possibly related interest may be Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? and Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism).
The Bible teaches that "the Devil" (Satan) is "the accuser of our brethren" (Revelation 12:9,10). Jesus said the Devil was "a liar and the the father of it" (John 8:44). Do not be dissuaded by those who do not really believe the Bible and make misleading comments about the COG: "lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices" (2 Corinthians 2:11) as the Apostle Paul wrote. The Apostle Paul also warned that Satan's ministers can seem to be "ministers of righteousness" (2 Corinthians 11:14-15) so all should be careful about Church of God accusations. If you hear one, first find out if it is REALLY true (most I have read are not upon detailed investigation), and then if it is, if that should according to scripture disqualify the entire church--and even then consider what happened related to the faithful in scripture.
The Apostle Paul himself was often accused of being the ringleader of a cult that professed Christ that also believed in biblical practices that some Jews also believe. We in the Continuing Church of God strive to hold to the same version of Christianity that Jesus taught and that the original apostles and their followers strove to follow: see also The History of Early Christianity page.
If you are not sure what to do, please be like the Bereans of old and "search the scriptures" and valid historical sources to demonstrate what if what is stated here is true (cf. Acts 17:10-11).
Note: We truly of the Continuing Church of God only accept as inspired the 39 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New Testament and no other document (see also Who Gave the World the Bible? The Canon: Why do we have the books we now do in the Bible? Is the Bible complete?). Therefore, although other current and historical documents/articles/books/booklet/posts by various Church of God leaders throughout history often have value, as they generally also tend to contain personal opinion, we do not consider that any of them are on the same level as sacred scripture, and hence believe that they can contain error.
Thiel B. Is the Genuine Church of God a Cult? www.cogwriter.com COGwriter 2012/2013/2015/2016/2017/2019 /2020 /2022 /2024 0710