Church of God News

Protestant Reformer Martin Luther 

COGwriter 

Although Protestants like to think positively about Martin Luther because of his supposed belief in sola Scriptura (the Bible alone), the truth is that Martin Luther changed parts of the Bible and discounted the value of many books.

Notice a change he admitted to regarding Romans 3:28:

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).

This passage strongly suggests that Martin Luther viewed his opinions, and not the actual Bible as the primary authority–a concept which this author will name prima Luther. By “papists” he is condemning Roman Catholics.

Regarding the New Testament Book of Hebrews Martin Luther stated,

It need not surprise one to find here bits of wood, hay, and straw (O’HarePF. The Facts About Luther, 1916–1987 reprint ed., p. 203).

He also wrote,

St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw…for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it” (Luther, M. Preface to the New Testament, 1546).

Perhaps none of Martin Luther’s writings on the Bible are as harsh as what he wrote about “The Revelation of Jesus Christ” (Revelation 1:1). Specifically he wrote,

About this book of the Revelation of John…I miss more than one thing in this book, and it makes me consider it to be neither apostolic nor prophetic…I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it. Moreover he seems to me to be going much too far when he commends his own book so highly-indeed, more than any of the other sacred books do, though they are much more important-and threatens that if anyone takes away anything from it, God will take away from him, etc. Again, they are supposed to be blessed who keep what is written in this book; and yet no one knows what that is, to say nothing of keeping it. This is just the same as if we did not have the book at all. And there are many far better books available for us to keep…My spirit cannot accommodate itself to this book. For me this is reason enough not to think highly of it: Christ is neither taught nor known in it” (Luther, M. Preface to the Revelation of St. John, 1522).

As the following quotes show, Martin Luther did not care for several books in the Old Testament either:

“Job spoke not as it stands written in his book, but only had such thoughts. It is merely the argument of a fable. It is probable that Solomon wrote and made this book.”…

“Ecclesiastes ought to have been more complete. There is too much incoherent matter in it…Solomon did not, therefore, write this book.”…

“The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much…”

“The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (as quoted in O’Hare, p. 202).

Furthermore, Martin Luther had little use for the first five books of the Old Testament (sometimes referred to as the Pentateuch):

Of the Pentateuch he says: “We have no wish either to see or hear Moses” (Ibid, p. 202).

Martin Luther hated the Jews, which may be why he was against Esther, the first five books of the Bible, and other parts of the Hebrew scriptures.

Notice that Martin Luther advised his followers,

…to burn down Jewish schools and synagogues, and to throw pitch and sulphur into the flames; to destroy their homes; to confiscate their ready money in gold and silver; to take from them their sacred books, even the whole Bible; and if that did not help matters, to hunt them of the country like mad dogs (Luther’s Works, vol. Xx, pp. 2230-2632 as quoted in Stoddard JL. Rebuilding a Lost Faith, 1922, p.99).

Because of his writings, I believe that Martin Luther actually believed more in prima Luther (the primacy of Luther) above sola Scriptura.  And this was also reflected in certain of his doctrines and other practices as well.

Those of us in the Living Church of God believe that all 66 books of the Bible are inspired and profitable for doctrine (II Timothy 3:16). Because we also believe that we are not allowed to add or subtract from the Bible (see Revelation 22:18-19), we cannot follow the teachings of Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther—who changed or diminished the importance of at least 18 books of the Bible(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Esther, Job, Ecclesiastes, Jonah, Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation)–further documentation is in the article Sola Scriptura or Prima Luther? What Did Martin Luther Really Believe About the Bible? 

Three articles of related interest may include:

Sola Scriptura or Prima Luther? What Did Martin Luther Really Believe About the Bible? Though he is known for his public sola Scriptura teaching, did Martin Luther’s writings about the Bible suggest he felt that prima Luther was his ultimate authority? Do you really want to know the truth?  Statements from him changing and/or discounting 18 books of the Bible are included.
The Similarities and Dissimilarities between Martin Luther and Herbert W. Armstrong This article clearly shows some of the doctrinal differences between in the two. At this time of doctrinal variety and a tendency by many to accept certain aspects of Protestantism, the article should help clarify why the Living Church of God is NOT Protestant. Do you really know what the Protestant Reformer Martin Luther taught and should you follow his doctrinal example?
Hope of Salvation: How the Living Church of God differ from most Protestants How the Living Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants, is perhaps the question I am asked most by those without a Church of God background.

COGwriter

Today is called “Valentine’s Day” by many throughout the world.  Should Christians observe it?

Christianity Today, each year, endorses its observance as it promotes the sale of various Valentine’s Day gifts.  Hence apparently they feel that Valentine’s Day is appropriate for professors of Christ.

But is it Christian?

The old World Book Encyclopedia (Valentine’s Day. Volume 19. 1966, pp.205-206) states,

…the customs of the day have nothing to do with the lives of the saints. They probably come from an ancient Roman festival called Lupercalia which took place every February 15. The festival honored Juno, the Roman goddess of women and marriage, and Pan, the god of nature…The Romans celebrated their feast of Lupercalia as a lovers’ festival for young people. Young men and women chose partners for the festival by drawing names from a box…After the spread of Christianity, churchmen tried to give Christian meaning to the pagan festival. In 496, Pope Gelasius changed the Lupercalia festival of February 15 to Saint Valentine’s Day February 14. But the sentimental meaning of the old festival has remained to the present time. Historians disagree about the identity of St. Valentine”. Furthermore it also states, “LUPERCALIA…was celebrated on February 15 in honor of Faunus, a rural Italian god. Faunus was later identified with Pan, the god of herds and fertility…Priests…ran around striking all the women the met (Lupercalia. Volume 12. 1966, p.456).

The pagan being named Cupid (a supposed son of the pagan goddess Venus) was also involved. According to pagan mythology, anyone being hit by Cupid’s arrow falls in love with the first person he/she sees. One source was bold enough to state,

The church replaced elements of various love-gods (Juno Februata, Eros, Cupid, Kama, Priapus) with St. Valentine, an imaginary Christian. A number of contradictory biographies were created for him…By taking over some of the features of the Pagan gods and goddesses, St. Valentine became the patron saint of lovers…St. Valentine’s Day can be traced back to Lupercalia, the Roman “festival of sexual license” (ST. VALENTINE AND VALENTINE’S DAY, http://www.religioustolerance.org/valentine1.htm, February 6, 2004).

Notice what the Roman Catholics teach,

The roots of St. Valentine’s Day lie in the ancient Roman festival of Lupercalia, which was celebrated on Feb. 15. For 800 years the Romans had dedicated this day to the god Lupercus. On Lupercalia, a young man would draw the name of a young woman in a lottery and would then keep the woman as a sexual companion for the year (The Origins of St. Valentine’s Day. http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/ValentinesDay/, January 31, 2004).

It is of interest to note that the same Catholic source states,

The Catholic Church no longer officially honors St. Valentine, but the holiday has both Roman and Catholic roots.

Does Valentine’s Day sound like a holy festival of love or a pagan holiday of lust?

And if it does have pagan origins and is tied to paganism, should Christians observe it?

Notice what the God of the Bible teaches:

29 When the LORD your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, 30 take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ 31 “You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. 32 Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it (Deuteronomy 12:29-32).

2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. 3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe (Jeremiah 10:2-3, KJV).

…abstain from things offered to idols (Acts 15:29, NKJV).

But because most who profess Christianity do not heed these warnings, they are disobeying God’s instructions. 

Look at some of what the Muslims say about Valentine’s Day,

Celebrating the Valentine Day is not permissible because: Firstly, it is an innovated holiday that has no basis in the Sharee`ah…Christians were aware of the Pagan roots of Valentine’s Day. The way the Christians adopted St. Valentine’s Day should be a lesson for Muslims. In fact, the failure to fully separate Valentine’s Day from its pagan roots explains why Islamic scholars and a number of Muslims avoid adopting traditions of non-Muslims, even though they could possibly be Islamicized…We should avoid anything associated with pagan immoral practices – We do not need to honour or celebrate the death of a Christian “saint” – Islam does not encourage flirting or suggestions of romantic relationships before marriage – Love between families, friends and married people does not need to be celebrated on a day with such un-Islamic origins (Ruling on Celebrating Valentine’s Day. http://www.contactpakistan.com/news/news144.htm, January 31, 2004).

In other words, Valentine’s Day causes the name of Christ (through the term ‘Christianity’) to be blasphemed among the Gentiles (Romans 2:24; Isaiah 52:5)!

Even the Muslims can see that the hypocrisy in this.

Does this pagan holiday really help get the true gospel out?

No, it does not.

And that is the point.  And that is why real Christians do not observe it.

So no, to answer the original question, Christians should not observe the pagan holiday renamed Valentine’s Day.

Articles of possibly related interest may include:

Valentine’s Day: Its Real Origins Christianity Today suggests that Valentine’s Day is good for Christians to observe. Is this true?
Is There “An Annual Worship Calendar” In the Bible? This paper provides a biblical and historical critique of several articles, including one by WCG which states that this should be a local decision. What do the Holy Days mean? Also you can click here for the calendar of Holy Days.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

  Pope Benedict XVI 

COGwriter

COGaIC’s David Hulme wrote the following for its Vision magazine:

In his recent book, Jesus of Nazareth, Pope Benedict XVI sets out to distill the understanding he has come to after a lifelong theological study of Christianity’s central figure. Stressing that he writes in his own name as Joseph Ratzinger, he leaves the door open for the Roman curia to distance itself from any alternative views he may advance. He writes, “This book is . . . my personal search ‘for the face of the Lord.’”

What, then, does the pope see as Jesus’ primary purpose in speaking about the kingdom of God, which was so central to His message? He writes that Jesus “is quite simply proclaiming God, and proclaiming him to be the living God, who is able to act concretely in the world and in history and is even now so acting. He is telling us: ‘God exists’ and ‘God really is God,’ which means that he holds in his hands the threads of the world.”

It is a strange definition of the gospel message, which Jesus said pertained to God’s kingdom coming to the earth. Yet Ratzinger insists, “What is meant is not an imminent or yet to be established ‘kingdom,’ but God’s actual sovereignty over the world, which is becoming an event in history in a new way.” Such language takes us away from any anticipation of God’s rule over fractious humanity and away from the consistent message of the Bible.

When asked by Peter what reward the 12 disciples might expect for their loyalty, Jesus pointed to the time of future messianic renewal. He said, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28, English Standard Version). The term “new world” is translated from the Greek palingenesia, which literally means “rebirth,” “renewal” or “regeneration.” This future aspect of the kingdom, mentioned by Jesus and recognized by leading language scholars, is the major dimension that the pope misses.

I would add that while a cardinal, the current Pope Benedict XVI also wrote and/or approved the following two statements:

676The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism… (Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 194).

“…both Chiliasm [the teaching of the Millennium] and Montanism were declared heretical and were excluded from the universal church; for they both denied this vision [the “Christ is the end of the ages” vision] and awaited still another period of more definitive salvation to follow after the age of Christ” (Ratzinger J. The Theology of History in St. Bonaventure as cited in Birch, pp. 515-516; note the comments within [] were from the Catholic writer Birch).

Sadly, the writings of the head of the Roman Church demonstrates that he does not understand Christ’s message.  Even more sadly, there are many, many doctrines that the Church of Rome has changed.

Articles of related interest may include:

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God was the Emphasis of Jesus and the Early Church Did you know that? Do you even know what the gospel of the kingdom is all about. True religion should be based upon the true gospel.
Did The Early Church Teach Millenarianism and a 6000 Year Plan? Was a 6,000 year time allowed for humans to rule followed by a literal thousand year reign of Christ on Earth (often called the millennium) taught by the early Christians? Is this time near?
Which Is Faithful: The Roman Catholic Church or the Living Church of God? Do you know that both groups shared a lot of the earliest teachings? Do you know which church changed? Do you know which group is most faithful to the teachings of the apostolic church? Which group best represents true Christianity? This documented article answers those questions.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

 
Hiroshima After the Atomic Bomb Was Detonated

Will those who believe in a secret rapture be “left behind” for events like atomic devastation?  

COGwriter 

A few days ago, PCG’s Fred Dattalo posted the following:

Those who believe in the rapture are convinced that the most exhilarating experience of their lives could happen at any moment, without warning. They suppose that they, along with multitudes of people from all over the world, will suddenly disappear—be “translated”—to heaven when Christ returns invisibly and in secret to whisk away the church right before the world is plunged into the Great Tribulation that He foretold. Some include dead Christians brought back to life to be in this group. This momentous event, they believe, is only the first phase of Jesus Christ’s return…

The word rapture is not found anywhere in the Bible, yet God does reveal that there is a way to escape the Great Tribulation that’s coming soon…

But how and where will true Christians be protected? It’s not by way of a secret rapture to heaven!

The proof is found in chapter 12 of Revelation. To understand it, you need to realize that a “woman” is sometimes used as a symbol for a church (see 2 Corinthians 11:1-2 and Ephesians 5:23-32). In Revelation 12, the woman referred to is a symbol for God’s Church.

Notice how the true Church is protected from the coming Tribulation: “And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time [one year], and times [two years], and half a time [half a year—a total of 3½ years], from the face of the serpent [Satan]” (Revelation 12:14). So the Church is not taken to heaven but to a specific place in “the wilderness” here on Earth! “And the earth helped the woman …” (verse 16)…

A Final Warning

If you believe in the rapture, you are being deprived of the knowledge and understanding of how to escape the soon-coming Great Tribulation and the plagues of the Day of the Lord! If you think you can wait for the rapture to take you away, you will not have an opportunity to flee from the most horrendous suffering ever experienced on planet Earth—because the rapture will never come. Jesus warns that you will be caught suddenly and unexpectedly, like an animal entrapped by a snare (Luke 21:35). That is exactly what Satan wants to happen to you.

The devil knows that the true Church of God will be taken to a place of safety during the wrath to come, but he doesn’t want youto know this truth. That’s why the rapture teaching has been promulgated throughout protestantism. Millions of professing christians around the world have accepted this false doctrine. Is it possible that when Jesus returns, many of them will think that He’s an alien invader or “the antichrist” because the rapture will not have occurred?…

Christ condemns those who adhere to the doctrine of men rather than the truth of God. He said, “in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:7). How about you? Are you worshiping God in vain? Will you go on clinging to a false hope—blindly believing a tradition of men—or will you carefully prove the truth from your Bible? God expects you to prove all things (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Your very life is at stake.? 

And on these points he is correct (though those in his and other such groups themselves need to stop clinging to false hopes and be true Philadelphians and not Laodiceans–and should read the article Are the Laodiceans the Modern Sadducees and Pharisees?).

Furthermore, the Catholic/Orthodox world will also not understand what is happening.

The truth is that the Bible promises protection on the earth for the true Philadelphian remnant of the Church of God (which now is primarily composed of the faithful within the Living Church of God).

If rapture theorists would actually accept the teachings of the Bible over traditions of men, they would be able to understand this.  If they will not, they will be deceived and will themselves be “left behind” to witness atomic destruction.

Articles of related interest may include:

There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians. Why it May Be Petra This article discusses a biblical ‘place of safety’ and includes quotes from the Bible and Herbert W. Armstrong on this subject–thus, there is a biblically supported alternative to the rapture theory.
Is There A Secret Rapture for the Church? When and Where is the Church Protected? What does the Bible really teach? Who really is left behind?
Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? What is prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples? When do the 1335 days, 1290 days, and 1260 days (the time, times, and half a time) of Daniel 12 begin?  When will there be a nuclear attack against the US, UK, and Canada?
Do Certain Catholic Prophecies About Antichrist Warn Against Jesus? Will the final “Anti-Christ” be Jewish, insist on Saturday, be opposed to the trinity, and bring in the millennium? Catholic writings indicate this, but what does the Bible show?
End of Mayan Calendar 2012 There is a Mayan calendar prediction for change in 2012. 2012 changes were also centuries ago predicted by the Hopi Native Americans and the Hindu Indians (who were not even on the same continent). Do these Mayan/Hindu/Hopi prophecies have any value? Why might Satan have inspired this date?

Children playing in Tobago 

COGwriter 

The February edition of CG7’s Now What magazine has a link related to an article on abortion called “Get the Facts”

It states:

Get the Facts

What abortion is really all about. by Denise Irvine

If you are faced with an unplanned pregnancy, be sure to get the facts in order to make an informed decision. It’s hard to think clearly when you’re feeling stressed or anxious, and it’s hard to imagine the impact this one decision will have on your future. Before you decide about your unborn child, understand that the right to choose includes the right to know.

For example, did you know that the moment an egg is fertilized by a sperm, every detail of the baby’s development (sex, hair and eye color, height, etc.) is already determined? Did you know that the twenty-first day after conception the baby’s heart begins to beat, and at six weeks old, brain waves can be detected? Did you know that by the ninth week, internal organs are functioning and that by the thirteenth week, the baby can move vigorously and make a tight fist?…

Millions of women have had abortions. Some claim no regrets; however, many face a startling awareness years later when they become pregnant for a planned child. They wish they had seen an ultrasound or had been told about the remarkable abilities of their unborn baby before making that decision.

Of course abortion in murder and is wrong.  Although it allowed it in the past, even the Roman Catholic Church has been against it the past couple of centuries.

An article of related interest may be:

Abortion, the Bible, and a Woman’s Right to Choose Do you know what the Bible teaches on this?  What has the true Church always taught?  What about the other church?

Tomorrow’s World Presenter Richard Ames with a Telly Award

COGwriter

LCG reported the following in Church services yesterday from a letter that its presiding evangelist (RC Meredith) sent to the ministry a few days earlier:

Many of you may have heard that we put on a special “trial” broadcast of Tomorrow’s World on the Black Entertainment Network this past Sunday. It turned out very well considering that our program was aired at 2:30 am Eastern Time. A total of 549 phone calls came in, for an overall cost per response under $12. This is very good, and I am considering the possibility of going on BET regularly if we can afford it. Since the BET reaches 84 million households it is reaching a huge number of Americans—mostly from a different demographic reached by most of our stations. So it should be very beneficial if we are able to go on this station. I would like to receive any suggestions any of you have, and I hope you will all join me in praying fervently that God will give us some more extra special offerings to make this possible! I feel that if Mr. Armstrong were alive he would probably want to go through this really big “door” in order to reach more of God’s people with the message of the Kingdom of God. 

So please pray about this matter!

Additionally, it was announced that Christo Botha, LCG’s South Africa office manager, wrote:

During the past 15 months, we received 1,035 new and 599 repeat TV responses from the TW telecast on the Community Service Network (CSN) here in South Africa. That represents an average of 22 new and 13 follow-up TV responses per program. The cost per response for all responses is $19.09 and $30.14 per new response.

LCG is trying to get the message of the gospel to the kingdom to the world as a witness.  And television is certainly one way that has proven effectiveness.

Several articles of related interest may include:

There are Many COGs: Why Support the Living Church of God?This is an article for those who wish to easily sort out the different COGs. It really should be a MUST READ for current and former WCG members or any interested in supporting the faithful church. It also explains a lot of what the COGs are all about.
Should the Church Still Try to Place its Top Priority on Proclaiming the Gospel or Did Herbert W. Armstrong Change that Priority for the Work? Some say the Church should mainly feed the flock now as that is what Herbert W. Armstrong reportedly said. Is that what he said? Is that what the Bible says? What did Paul and Herbert W. Armstrong expect from evangelists?
The Gospel of the Kingdom of God was the Emphasis of Jesus and the Early Church Did you know that? Do you even know what the gospel of the kingdom is all about. True religion should be based upon the true gospel.
Getting the Gospel Out is More than a Local Job Discusses Biblical rationale for doing an international, and not just a local, work.
How Much Did You Cost? Some have complained that the total costs spent to proclaim the gospel as a witness is too high since it does not (in their opinion) result in enough conversions. Is that how God sees it?

Pantheon of Rome: A Symbol of Unity Among Religious Error

COGwriter

On February 7, 2008, Ronald Weinland of  CGPFK announced the following in a posted letter:

We are now feverishly trying to simply plan for the burst of activity that is coming our way over the next couple of months. We are there! As it was mentioned in this past Sabbath’s sermon, the final countdown has begun, as the 1335 days before the actual day Jesus Christ returns began on February 2, 2008…

Just over the last couple of months, the numbers of those God has brought to the Church has more than doubled our size. All indications are that over the next few weeks it will double again. Yet this is not about numbers, but it is about what God is doing at this end-time, and in a few months such numbers will be minor in comparison to those who God begins to call on a far greater scale worldwide…

As I have repeatedly told readers of this page, the Great Tribulation will not begin this year (please see article Great Tribulation Will Not Begin in 2008) and thus Jesus will not return in 2011 as Ronald Weinland is teaching (he later clarified and specified that Jesus would return on September 29, 2011–but Ronald Weinland is incorrect for many reasons).

The 1335 days did not start on February 2, 2008.  Several events, such as the stopping of the organized efforts of proclaiming the gospel (which happens at the beginning of the 1335 days), have not occurred (information on that is included in the article Who is the King of the North?).  Nor will the 1290 days begin on March 18, 2008 as his pronouncement indicates, nor will the 1260 days begin on April 17, 2008 as his pronouncement also indicates (stay tuned as I intend to explain why he missed those dates once they come to pass).

Thus when people realize all of this, his membership will most likely plummet by June 2008–unless they misinterpret some news events as the beginning of the tribulation.

Several articles of related interest may include:

Concerns About Ronald Weinland’s Church of God-Preparing for the Kingdom of God Ronald Weinland falsely claims to be one of the two witnesses God is raising up and that the end will come in 2008. Is he a false prophet? He has at least one other view that suggests that he is not part of the COG.
Why Be Concerned About False and Heretical Leaders? There have been many false leaders–here is some of why you should be concerned about them.
Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? What is prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples?  What happens at the beginning of the 1335 days?
Is There A Future King of the South? Some no longer believe there needs to be. Might Egypt, Islam, Iran, Arabs, or Ethiopia be involved? What does the Bible say? Does there not need to be a King of the South before the tribulation begins?

This morning, CGOM-UK’s James McBride sent out an email containing the following:

MiniStudy 57 

                          Is Anything ‘Unclean’?
‘I [the apostle Peter] have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean’ (Acts 10:14)…

 Peter’s comment sounds reasonable for a first century Jew. Indeed would anyone disagree? Only in most extreme circumstances –  or in a celebrity game-show – would we eat some of the vilest species on the planet.  Yet virtually anything that moves is eaten somewhere. So why would the Creator set aside some creatures as unfit to eat? Are ‘unclean foods’ merely an obsolete religious ritual? Did Jesus transmute unclean to become clean?

…..The background to this topic is the instruction God provides in regard to food suitable for consumption – or not: ‘…The LORD told Moses and Aaron to say to the community of Israel: You may eat any animal that has divided hoofs and chews the cud. But you must not eat animals such as camels, rock badgers, and rabbits that chew the cud but don’t have divided hoofs. And you must not eat pigs… ‘ (Leviticus 11:1-4 CEV). He continues to identify other ‘clean and unclean’ creatures, and to give sound environmental and hygiene advice in their handling…

….. It’s well known that the ‘unclean’ animals were generally considered unwholesome. This is especially true of the pig, the very digestive system of which is totally unsuited for adequate processing of its food intake. It is designed as a scavenger, and is prone to worm infestation among other drawbacks

…..Today there is widespread disregard for this divine guidance – either through misunderstanding of the concept or simply because it is considered to be ‘Jewish’ (ie ‘Old Testament stuff’) – now obsolete since it is claimed that ‘Jesus nailed it to the cross’. Should we ignore the difference between clean and unclean?

…..Unless your conscience dictates otherwise (Romans 14:23), eating an ‘unclean’ substance won’t affect your salvation, nor will observance of these physical laws save you. However, as they are instructions handed down to us from the Creator of these creatures surely they are worth consideration. God has a concern for mankind’s health.   JHVH covenanted: ‘…you will no longer suffer with the same horrible diseases that you sometimes had in Egypt. You will be healthy’ (Deuteronomy 7:15 CEV). To reap the benefits of the Covenant  Israel’s part was to follow the guidelines issued through Moses – including the food  laws. In the context of ‘clean and unclean’ the LORD said:  ‘…I brought you out of Egypt so that I could be your God. Now you must become holy [separate], because I am holy! (Leviticus 11:45 CEV). .

…..What about Peter (Acts 10:14)? Did he change his mind and tuck into a pork chop? Not likely. Interpreting the vision he says: ‘…God has shown me that he doesn’t think anyone is unclean or unfit’ (v.28 CEV). He needed to learn to abandon his racial exclusivism – not to change his diet

…..Did Jesus wave a magic wand over every unclean – and perhaps poisonous – animal, bird or fish to make them edible (Mark 7:17-19)? Jesus here confirms that what we eat won’t defile us spiritually. All that goes into the mouth passes through the digestive system and expelled without making us better or worse people – though it may cause illness. It’s what is generated in the human mind that defiles us (vv.20-23). Not here, not anywhere does Jesus change these fundamental food principles. The expression ‘…purging all meats’ (KJV) is foods in general – not just animal flesh. ‘Foods’ are those items of our diet that are ‘…sanctified [set apart] by the Word of God [the truth – v.3] and prayer’ (I Timothy 4:5). The only Bible texts that set apart certain natural products as food are Genesis 9:3, Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14             Ω
——————————————————————-
Comments By COGwriter

While I do not agree with everything that James McBride wrote on this, I would add here that “uncleanness” is specifically condemned for Christians in the New Testament (Colossians 3:5) and that perhaps showing a few more scriptures may be helpful for some.

Also notice what is written in 1 John 2:15-16,

Do not love the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world–the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life is not of the Father but is of the world.

Could not consuming unclean meats be considered a “lust of the flesh” that we Christians are to avoid? Notice what the Apostle Paul wrote:

Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lust of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie (Romans 1:24-25)

This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardening of their heart; who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But you have not so learned Christ (Ephesians 4:19-20).

Do you walk as the Gentiles walk? Gentiles eat unclean animals. Do you eat unclean meats?

Paul urges such who claim to be Christians to change and repent,

For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness (Romans 6:19)

I shall mourn for many who have sinned before and have not repented of their uncleanness, fornication, and lewdness which they have practiced (II Corinthians 12:21).

But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as fitting for saints” (Ephesians 5:3).

Paul also wrote,

Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Colossians 3:5).

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.”

Therefore

“Come out from among them
And be separate, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you” (2 Corinthians 6:16-17).

For I fear lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I wish, and that I shall be found by you such as you do not wish; lest there be contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, backbitings, whisperings, conceits, tumults; lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and I shall mourn for many who have sinned before and have not repented of the uncleanness, fornication, and lewdness which they have practiced (2 Corinthians 12:20-21).

There is a lot more to this matter of unclean meats that most who profess Christ realize.  To learn more about it (as well as how the professing mainstream “Christians” began to eat biblically prohibited meats), please see the article The New Testament Church and Unclean Meats (the article also contains a detailed listing of clean and unclean animals).

COGwriter

Yesterday a prominent Protestant theologian has admitted that at least two entrenched doctrines commonly held within the Protestant world are not biblical.

Notice what Time reported:

TIME – Feb 7, 2008

N.T. “Tom” Wright is one of the most formidable figures in the world of Christian thought.  As Bishop of Durham, he is the fourth most senior cleric in the Church of England and a major player in the strife-riven global Anglican Communion; as a much-read theologian and Biblical scholar he has taught at Cambridge and is a hero to conservative Christians worldwide for his 2003 book The Resurrection of the Son of God, which argued forcefully for a literal interpretation of that event.

It therefore comes as a something of a shock that Wright doesn’t believe in heaven — at least, not in the way that millions of Christians understand the term.

In his new book, Surprised by Hope(HarperOne), Wright quotes a children’s book by California first lady Maria Shriver called What’s Heaven, which describes it as “a beautiful place where you can sit on soft clouds and talk… If you’re good throughout your life, then you get to go [there]… When your life is finished here on earth, God sends angels down to take you heaven to be with him.” That, says Wright is a good example of “what not to say.” The Biblical truth, he continues, “is very, very different.”

Furthermore, here are a couple of additional statements from the interview:

Wright:… I’ve often heard people say, “I’m going to heaven soon, and I won’t need this stupid body there, thank goodness.’ That’s a very damaging distortion, all the more so for being unintentional.

TIME: How so? It seems like a typical sentiment.

Wright: There are several important respects in which it’s unsupported by the New Testament. First, the timing… St. Paul is very clear that Jesus Christ has been raised from the dead already, but that nobody else has yet. Secondly, our physical state. The New Testament says that when Christ does return, the dead will experience a whole new life: not just our soul, but our bodies. And finally, the location. At no point do the resurrection narratives in the four Gospels say, “Jesus has been raised, therefore we are all going to heaven.” It says that Christ is coming here, to join together the heavens and the Earth in an act of new creation.

TIME: Is there anything more in the Bible about the period between death and the resurrection of the dead?

Wright: … Paul writes that …it will be like being asleep. The Wisdom of Solomon, a Jewish text from about the same time as Jesus, says “the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God,” and that seems like a poetic way to put the Christian understanding, as well.

TIME: But it’s not where the real action is, so to speak?

Wright: No. Our culture is very interested in life after death, but the New Testament is much more interested in what I’ve called the life after life after death — in the ultimate resurrection into the new heavens and the new Earth… (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1710844,00.html) 

While I do not agree with all of Wright’s theology, it is refreshing when a prominent Protestant admits that doctrines held be groups like the Living Church of God, such as what has commonly been denounced by Protestant critics as “soul sleep”, is in fact biblically correct.

Of course, real “Christians” never actually believed in going to heaven and historically always taught the resurrection. 

Even the heretic Justin Martyr (who most Catholics, Orthodox, and even Protestants consider was a saint wrote:

“For I choose to follow not men or men’s doctrines, but God and the doctrines [delivered] by Him. For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit this [truth], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians” (Justin. Dialogue with Trypho. Chapter 80).

Several articles of related interest may include:

What Did Early Christians Understand About the Resurrection? Is there more than one future resurrection?
Did Early Christians Believe that Humans Possessed Immortality? What does John 3:16, and other writings, tell us?
Hope of Salvation: How the Living Church of God differ from most Protestants How the Living Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants, is perhaps the question I am asked most by those without a Church of God background.
The Similarities and Dissimilarities between Martin Luther and Herbert W. Armstrong This article clearly shows some of the doctrinal differences between in the two. At this time of doctrinal variety and a tendency by many to accept certain aspects of Protestantism, the article should help clarify why the Living Church of God is NOT Protestant. Do you really know what the Protestant Reformer Martin Luther taught and should you follow his doctrinal example?
The Gospel of the Kingdom of God was the Emphasis of Jesus and the Early Church Did you know that? Do you even know what the gospel of the kingdom is all about. True religion should be based upon the true gospel.

COGwriter 

The February edition of UCG’s United News is now available electronically and has a couple of articles related to its Ambassador Bible Center (ABC).

The first is a lead article from its president, Clyde Killough, who reported:

We are pleased to announce that in September 2008, the Ambassador Bible Center will begin its 10th year of operation by expanding to a nine-month program that will match the standard university academic calendar.

As the current seven-month program has evolved over the years, it has become increasingly difficult to effectively accomplish our goals within that time frame.

The second one was a related news item:

Ina McLemore, a deaconess and 2007 ABC graduate, took on the job of home office receptionist the week of Jan. 22. Besides answering phones, this job involves work with mail processing and personal correspondence areas. She will also be handling the catering of meals for major meetings in the home office.

She replaces Wendy Lovelady, who will now be administrative assistant to Larry Salyer, Media and Communications Services operation manager.

The Media area is also hiring four ABC students part-time. Jim Springer and Devon McCaulley are working in the mailing area, and Michael Ball is assisting Clint Porter in the video area. Karen Claunch is working in the mail processing data entry area.

Hence, while it does not seem to gain ministers from its ABC program, UCG does seem to be using it to provide entry level employees.

UCG has indicated that it needs to have a more comprehensive program than its current ABC to train ministers (please see the news item United Church of God Announces Finances & Other Statistics).  Presumably, increasing the duration of ABC is one such step.