Church of God News

COGwriter

Gold has been over USD$1200 per ounce for much of the past several months.  This is primarily because many feel that the US dollar has problems as well as the US economy.

Because the USA was starting to not have enough gold to back its dollar, way back in 1961, the Plain Truth reported:

Germany, Japan have the largest surpluses of GOLD and DOLLARS…Rich Uncle {Sam} has the greatest deficit in governmental history and a GREATER DEBT than all the REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED!…

Vast foreign aid programs drain the U.S. Treasury…American spending to supply services and to support our troops in foreign countries and military installations around the world amounts to…dollars flowing out of the frightened U.S. Treasury. All of these factors, combined with heavy taxes, gigantic public and private debt, and no gold backing for our own currency if foreign investors demanded gold for their dollars, adds up to the staggering revelation that the U.S., richest nation in the world, is bordering on bankruptcy! (Hill DJ. What the US Gold Crisis Means to You. Plain Truth. February 1961, p. 9).

France did finally cash in dollars for gold and this caused a crisis in the USA.

The US answer was to go off the gold standard completely in 1971. About the same time it made a deal with Saudi Arabia to price oil in dollars. So, while this prevented “foreigners” from being able to redeem US dollars for something from the USA treasury, instead it meant that dollars could be used to by oil. As other (mostly smaller) oil producers followed Saudi Arabia’s lead, this has served to support the US dollar for several decades.

Back in 1971, the Plain Truth mentioned gold and that a currency coming out of Europe would replace the USA dollar:

FOR 40 YEARS, (1931 to 1971) the American dollar reigned supreme in world trade and finance. From 1945 to 1958, the dollar was considered better than gold to most developing economies…

On August 15, 1971, President Nixon revealed his new economic plan. One part of the strategy was to cut loose the dollar from gold, in effect letting it “float” in foreign transactions until natural market pressure would decide its best value…

The European Common Currency appears to be the most likely successor to the dollar in this long line of monetary dynasties. Europe is the only continent with sufficient gold backing…

… and What About Gold?

The gold standard is not sacred. It is only about 100 years old in the history of man, a product of evolution as much as any social institution. But in a world of sovereign powers, there must be some standard to finance international trade and domestic currency. Gold has the confidence of more people than any other standard, especially in Europe. (Alexander G. America faces “The Dollar Crisis”. Plain Truth magazine, October 1971, pp. 3-4)

Other articles from the old WCG also predicted that the Europeans would end up with their own European currency and that it would be expected to replace the dollar.

All of this has been happening.  As the USA continues to increase its debt, the value of the dollar will ultimately drop even more.  This does not mean that gold will not drop in value (it goes up and down all the time).  But unless there is national repentance across the USA, the USA dollar will ultimately be worth less than the cotton it is printed on.  Gold, on the other hand, seems to be prophesied to retain value past that time (cf. Daniel 11:43; Revelation 18).

For additional information, check out the following article:

The Plain Truth About Gold in Prophecy. How Should a Christian View Gold? What do economists and the Bible teach about gold? Gold and silver may drop in value. Inflation/deflation? What do Christians need to know about gold?

“Sunday Church”, Naxos Greece

COGwriter

Author and former WCG/UCG member Steven Collins now attends a church on Sunday according to a post he made yesterday:

I am a member of Church at the Gate, an independent Evangelical Church in Sioux Falls, SD…I attend church on Sunday to hear excellent sermons by the pastor, Steve Hickey…

It should be noted that Steve Collins still believes in the seventh-day Sabbath.  But apparently believes he is getting sermons that he wants from a Sunday church.

He has his own ideas.  I wish he would spend more time understanding what the Bible and real COG leaders teach.

Those interested in biblical and historical documentation that the Sabbath refuters are in error, should check out the following articles:

Sunday and Christianity Was Sunday observed by the apostolic and true post-apostolic Christians? Who clearly endorsed Sunday?
Another Look at the Didache, Ignatius, and the Sabbath Did Ignatius write against the Sabbath and for Sunday? What about the Didache? What does the actual Greek reveal?
Is Revelation 1:10 talking about Sunday or the Day of the Lord? Most Protestant scholars say Sunday is the Lord’s Day, but is that what the Bible teaches?
The Sabbath in the Early Church and Abroad Was the seventh-day (Saturday) Sabbath observed by the apostolic and post-apostolic Church?
Polycarp of Smyrna: The Heretic Fighter Polycarp was the successor of the Apostle John and a major leader in Asia Minor. Do you know much about what he taught?
Justin Martyr: Saint, Heretic, or Apostate? Justin is considered one of the first Christian theologians and scholars. But did he support a Gnostic version of Christianity? Do you know what he taught about souls going to heaven upon death? This article shows from his own writings, what Justin really taught.
The Dramatic Story of Chinese Sabbathkeepers This reformatted Good News article from 1955 discusses Sabbath-keeping in China in the 1800s.
Is God Unreasonable? Some have suggested that if God requires Sabbath-keeping He is unreasonable. Is that true?
Is There “An Annual Worship Calendar” In the Bible? This paper provides a biblical and historical critique of several articles, including one by the Tkach 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.

Samuele Bacchiocchi

COGwriter

There are many who on the internet mislead people with their attacks against the seventh-day Sabbath.

The following is from a highly flawed, yet search-engine popular, website on a page which attacks the writings of the late SDA scholar Samuele Bacchiocchi:

Christians never kept the Sabbath from the apostolic age (33 AD) through the time of Constantine (325AD). Source: www.bible.ca

The above page also make the following false claim:

We Speak truth in LOVE Source: www.bible.ca

Really?

The truth is that all real scholars realize that Christians kept the Sabbath for centuries.  But first, let’s look at the Bible.  Acts 13:42-44 shows what the Apostle Paul did,

…the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. Now when the congregation had broken up, many of the Jews and devout proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God. On the next Sabbath almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God.

Also Acts 18:4 states,

And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded both Jews and Greeks.

Now, some may argue that does not prove he ever kept it.  But that is a false argument.  Notice what Paul himself claimed:

Men and brethren, though I have done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans (Acts 28:17).

If Paul was not keeping the Sabbath, he could not have made that claim.  Furthermore, it was the probably the Apostle Paul who wrote the following in the Book of Hebrews:

Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said, “So I declared on oath in my anger, ‘They shall never enter my rest.'” And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “And on the seventh day God rested from all his work.” And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.” It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience…There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience (Hebrews 4:3-6,9-11, NIV).

This clearly shows that the command to keep the seventh day Sabbath is in the New Testament. It also shows that only those who will not observe it because of their disobedience argue otherwise. And that is why Paul observed it. Even Origen understood some of what Paul wrote above as he wrote:

But what is the feast of the Sabbath except that which the apostle speaks, “There remaineth therefore a Sabbatism,” that is, the observance of the Sabbath, by the people of God…let us see how the Sabbath ought to be observed by a Christian. On the Sabbath-day all worldly labors ought to be abstained from…give yourselves up to spiritual exercises, repairing to church, attending to sacred reading and instruction…this is the observance of the Christian Sabbath (Translated from Origen’s Opera 2, Paris, 1733, Andrews J.N. in History of the Sabbath, 3rd editon, 1887. Reprint Teach Services, Brushton (NY), 1998, pp. 324-325).

The 17th century historian William Cave reported that the early Christians, both Jews and those in Asia Minor, kept the Sabbath. Notice his report:

…the Sabbath or Saturday (for so the word sabbatum is constantly used in the writings of the fathers, when speaking of it as it relates to Christians) was held by them in great veneration, and especially in the Eastern parts honoured with all the public solemnities of religion. For which we are to know, that the gospel in those parts mainly prevailing amongst the Jews, they being generally the first converts to the Christian faith, they still retained a mighty reverence for the Mosaic institutions, and especially for the sabbath, as that which had been appointed by God himself, (as the memorial of his rest from the week of creation,) settled by their great master Moses, and celebrated by their ancestors for so many ages, as the solemn day of their public worship, and were therefore very loth that it should be wholly antiquated and laid aside. For this reason it seemed good to the prudence of those times, (as in others of the Jewish rites, so in this,) to indulge the humour of that people, and to keep the sabbath as a day for religious offices. Hence they usually had most parts of the divine service performed upon that day; they met together for public prayers, for reading the scriptures, celebration of the sacraments, and such like duties. This is plain, not only from some passages in Ignatius and Clemens’s Constitutions, but from writers of more unquestionable credit and authority. Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, tells us, that they assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Judaism, but only to worship Jesus Christ, the Lord of the sabbath (Cave William, D.D. Primitive Christianity: or the Religion of the Ancient Christians in the First Ages of the Gospel. 1840 edition revised by H. Cary. Oxford, London, pp. 84-85).

While I disagree that Jewish converts were allowed to keep the Sabbath to “humour” them as Dr. Cave wrote (since nearly all the original Christians were Jews, all the original Christians did keep the Sabbath–Sunday was a later development), he at least does realize that early Jewish converts and those in Asia Minor (“Eastern parts”) kept the Saturday Sabbath.

According to an old, but probably modified in the 4th century document, Polycarp of the second century kept the Sabbath:

I will give the narration in order, thus coming down to the history of the blessed Polycarp…

And on the sabbath, when prayer had been made long time on bended knee, he, as was his custom, got up to read; and every eye was fixed upon him…

And on the following sabbath he said; ‘Hear ye my exhortation, beloved children of God. I adjured you when the bishops were present, and now again I exhort you all to walk decorously and worthily in the way of the Lord, knowing that, when I was in the ministry of the presbyters, I applied so great diligence according to my power, and shall do this the more now when the greatest peril awaits me if I am negligent. For after the fear of the judgment, it were shameful to abate and relax anything having regard to men, and not rather to build up higher the zeal which has reached thus far. It pertaineth to you therefore to hold back from all unruliness, both men and women; and let no one imagine that I exact punishment from offenders not from conscientiousness but from human pride. For it has happened that some of those who were put into offices, when they ought all the more, as one might say, to strain every nerve in the race, just then relax their efforts, forgetting that, the greater honour a man appeareth to receive, the greater the loyalty which he ought to pay towards the Master, and to remember the words of the Lord how He himself said, On whom I conferred the more, from him let them demand the more abundantly in return; and the parable of those who had the talents committed to them, and the blessing pronounced upon the servant that watches, and the reproof of those who refused to come to the marriage feast, and the condemnation of him whose garment was not befitting the marriage festivity, and the entering in of the wise virgins, the saying Watch ye, and again Be ye ready, Let not your hearts be weighed down, the new commandment concerning love one towards another, His advent suddenly manifest as of rapid lightning, the great judgment by fire, the eternal life, His immortal kingdom. And all things whatsoever being taught of God ye know, when ye search the inspired Scriptures, engrave with the pen of the Holy Spirit on your hearts, that the commandments may abide in you indelible.’

Thus speaking in this way from time to time, and being persistent in his teaching, he edified and saved both himself and his hearers. (Pionius, Life of Polycarp (1889) from J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 3.2, pp.488-506)

Thus, Polycarp regularly kept the Sabbath and preached on it.

Even the Protestant scholars Roberts and Donaldson admitted that John’s practices could be considered supportive of the idea that the Sabbatarians were correct. They mentioned the following in a dispute about Passover which John kept,

…on the fourteenth day of the moon…The long survival of St. John among Jewish Christians led them to prolong this usage, no doubt, as sanctioned by his example…Those who in our own times have revived the observance of the Jewish Sabbath, show us how much may be said on their side, and elucidate the tenacity of the Easterns in resisting the abolition of the Mosaic ordinance as to the Paschal, although they agreed to keep it “not with the old leaven.” (Introduction to Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus. By Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Excerpted from The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, editors); American Edition copyright © 1885. Copyright © 2001 Peter Kirby).

Roberts and Donaldson immediately continued with,

Our author belonged to a family in which he was the eighth Christian bishop; and he presided over the church of Ephesus, in which the traditions of St. John were yet fresh in men’s minds at the date of his birth. He had doubtless known Polycarp, and Irenaeus also. He seems to have presided over a synod of Asiatic bishops (A.D. 196) which came together to consider this matter of the Paschal feast. It is surely noteworthy that nobody doubted that it was kept by a Christian and Apostolic ordinance. So St. Paul argues from its Christian observance, in his rebuke of the Corinthians. They were keeping it “unleavened” ceremonially, and he urges a spiritual unleavening as more important. The Christian hallowing of Pentecost connects with the Paschal argument. The Christian Sabbath hinges on these points (Ibid).

The “author” they are referring to is Polycrates, who claimed to continue what most Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox would consider to be Jewish practices. The points they are referring to is that if the Passover should be kept on the exact day and John did that as Polycrates wrote, then the Sabbath should also be kept on the exact day, the seventh day.  ( I should probably add that Justin Martyr is often cited as proof that the Sabbath was done away, but Justin was clearly a heretic–this is clearly demonstrated in the article Justin Martyr: Saint, Heretic, or Apostate?).

Historians also recognize that the Sabbath was kept in Jerusalem until after Hadrian had that city taken over in 135 A.D.  The historian E. Gibbon reported the following (bolding mine):

The first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were all circumcised Jews; and the congregation over which they presided united the law of Moses with the doctrine of Christ…

The Nazarenes retired from the ruins of Jerusalem to the little town of Pella beyond the Jordan, where that ancient church languished above sixty years in solitude and obscurity. They still enjoyed the comfort of making frequent and devout visits to the Holy City, and the hope of being one day restored to those seats which both nature and religion taught them to love as well as to revere. But at length, under the reign of Hadrian, the desperate fanaticism of the Jews filled up the measure of their calamities; and the Romans, exasperated by their repeated rebellions, exercised the rights of victory with unusual rigour. The emperor founded, under the name of Alia Capitolina, a new city on Mount Sion, to which he gave the privileges of a colony; and denouncing the severest penalties against any of the Jewish people who should dare to approach its precincts, he fixed a vigilant garrison of a Roman cohort to enforce the execution of his orders. The Nazarenes had only one way left to escape the common proscription, and the force of truth was on this occasion assisted by the influence of temporal advantages.

They elected Marcus for their bishop, a prelate of the race of the Gentiles, and most probably a native either of Italy or of some of the Latin provinces. At his persuasion the most considerable part of the congregation renounced the Mosaic law, in the practice of which they had persevered above a century. By this sacrifice of their habits and prejudices they purchased a free admission into the colony of Hadrian.

When the name and honours of the church of Jerusalem had been restored to Mount Sion, the crimes of heresy and schism were imputed to the obscure remnant of the Nazarenes which refused to accompany their Latin bishop. They still preserved their former habitation of Pella, spread themselves into the villages adjacent to Damascus, and formed an inconsiderable church in the city of Bercea, or, as it is now called, of Aleppo, in Syria.  (Gibbon E. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume I, Chapter XV, Section I. ca. 1776-1788)

In other words, until 135 A.D. the Sabbath was kept by Christians in Jerusalem as it was part of what is commonly called “the Mosaic law”.  After Hadrian took over, many compromised and stopped keeping the Sabbath, while the faithful fled elsewhere and kept with the traditions that they learned from the Bible and the apostles.  The “Nazarene Christians” kept the Sabbath and this was recorded as still occurring centuries after the above incident by Catholic writers such as Epiphanius and Jerome.

Thus, to claim that no one kept the Sabbath after 33 A.D.  Is not speaking the truth in love–it is the spreading of lies and falsehoods.

Ignatius’ Writing?

However, the claim that probably needs the most refutation is the false claim that early second century writings did away with the Sabbath.  This is also false. Here is is what the Greek states from Ignatius’ Letter to the Magnesians:

Εί ούν οί έν παλαιοîς πράγμασιν άναστραφέντες είς καινότητα έλπίδος ήλθον, μηκέτι σαββατίζοντες, άλλά κατά κυριακήν ζώντες, έν ή καί ή ζωή ήμών άνέτειλεν δι’ αύτού καί τού θανάτου αύτού, <öν> τινες άρνούνται, δι’ ού μυστηρίου έλάβομεν τò πιστεύειν, καί διά τούτο ύπομένομεν, ïνα εύρεθώμεν μαθηταί ‘Iησού Χριστού τού μόνου διδασκάλου ήμών·

The above has been intentionally mistranslated by many.  I will not cite the mistranslation here, but for them and additional proof they are in error, please check out the article The Didache, Ignatius, and the Sabbath.

Here is a translation consistent with the Greek:

8.1 Be not seduced by strange doctrines nor by antiquated fables, which are profitless.
8.2 For if even unto this day we live according to the manner of Judaic concepts, we admit that we have not received grace: for the godly prophets lived after Christ Jesus. For this cause also they were persecuted, being inspired by His grace to the end that they which are disobedient might be fully persuaded that there is one God who manifested Himself through Jesus Christ His Son, who is His Word that proceeded from silence, who in all things was well-pleasing unto Him that sent Him.
9.1 If then those who had walked in ancient practices attained unto newness of hope, no longer {Judaically} keeping sabbath contrariwise according to the Lord’s way of life, on which our life also arose through Him and through His death which some men deny – a mystery whereby we attained unto belief, and for this cause we endure patiently, that we may be found disciples of Jesus Christ our only teacher –
9.2 if this be so, how shall we be able to live apart from Him? Seeing that even the prophets, being His disciples, were expecting Him as their teacher through the Spirit. And for this cause He whom they rightly awaited, when He came, raised them from the dead.

Notice what the Tkach WCG/GCI currently teaches about this passage on its website in an article written by its Michael Morrison:

Ignatius praised some who were “no longer observing the Sabbath.” Clearly, Ignatius did not observe the Sabbath. (Morrison M. Sabbath and Sunday in Early Christianity Part 2: Early Second Century and Justin Martyr. 1999)

Many amateur websites cite mistranslations of the same passage of Ignatius as proof that the Sabbath was done away by the beginning of the second century.  However, Michael Morrison, while making many errors, is not quite that foolish as he continued with the following:

It is debated, however, whom he is praising. In the previous section, he was talking about the Old Testament prophets, but it does not seem likely that he would accuse them of abandoning the Sabbath, even though some patristic writers cited the prophets’ criticisms of Sabbath-keeping (e.g., Isa 1:13). More likely, he is praising Jewish Christians who had given up the Sabbath — “those who were brought up in the ancient order of things.” This does not mean that all Jewish Christians had abandoned the Sabbath, but some had, and Ignatius was praising them to the Magnesian Christians. The lack of extensive argumentation indicates that the Magnesians, like Ignatius, did not observe the Sabbath, but that Judaizers existed who advocated the Sabbath. Furthermore, Ignatius praised some people for “living in the observance of the Lord’s Day.” The meaning here is debated, since “day” is not in the Greek, and a textual variant exists. Space does not permit a detailed discussion, but Ignatius’ attitude toward the Sabbath makes it likely that he was observing a different day, in a different way.

Notice the Michael Morrison realizes that the word “day” is not in the text and that there are other ways to view this passage.  Also note that he only claims that it was “likely” Ignatius was keeping a different day–that is false.  It is true that Ignatius kept the Sabbath in a different way than the Pharisees and that is basically what the passage in question indicates.

The reality is that a true understanding of the Greek shows that Ignatius was not doing away with the Sabbath.  Michael Morrison’s assertion that Ignatius did not keep the Sabbath is in error as that contradicts information in his other writings.

Sabbath-keeping in Asia Minor was publicly still going on to at least 364 A.D. or else the Eastern Church would not have convened a Council in Laodicea to excommunicate any who rested on the seventh day. Notice what the Council of Laodicea declared in English and Latin,

CANON XXIX. CHRISTIANS must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ (THE COMPLETE CANONS OF THE SYNOD OF LAODICEA IN PHRYGIA PACATIANA).

Quod non oportet Christianos Judaizere et otiare in Sabbato, sed operari in eodem die. Preferentes autem in veneratione Dominicum diem si vacare voluerint, ut Christiani hoc faciat ; quod si reperti fuerint Judaizare Anathema sin a Christo (Cited in Andrews, p. 362).

But although that Council tried to abolish the Sabbath, sabbath-keeping continued among the faithful. Around 404 A.D. Jerome noted,

…the believing Jews do well in observing the precepts of the law, i.e….keeping the Jewish Sabbath…there exists a sect among… the synagogues of the East, which is called the sect of the Minei, and is even now condemned by the Pharisees. The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ the Son of God, born of , the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the one in whom we believe”—yet, Jerome considered them to be part of “a most pestilential heresy” (Jerome. Translated by J.G. Cunningham, M.A. From Jerome to Augustine (A.D. 404); LETTER 75 (AUGUSTINE) OR 112 (JEROME). Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 1. Edited by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D. American Edition, 1887. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

In the fifth century, the historian Socrates noted:

For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this. The Egyptians in the neighborhood of Alexandria, and the inhabitants of Thebais, hold their religious assemblies on the sabbath, but do not participate of the mysteries in the manner usual among Christians in general (Socrates Scholasticus. Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter XXII. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 2. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. American Edition, 1890. Online Edition Copyright © 2005 by K. Knight).

The plain truth is that early Christians kept the seventh-day Sabbath.

Those interested in biblical and historical documentation that the Sabbath refuters are in error, should check out the following articles:

Another Look at the Didache, Ignatius, and the Sabbath Did Ignatius write against the Sabbath and for Sunday? What about the Didache? What does the actual Greek reveal?
Is Revelation 1:10 talking about Sunday or the Day of the Lord? Most Protestant scholars say Sunday is the Lord’s Day, but is that what the Bible teaches?
The Sabbath in the Early Church and Abroad Was the seventh-day (Saturday) Sabbath observed by the apostolic and post-apostolic Church?
Polycarp of Smyrna: The Heretic Fighter Polycarp was the successor of the Apostle John and a major leader in Asia Minor. Do you know much about what he taught?
Justin Martyr: Saint, Heretic, or Apostate? Justin is considered one of the first Christian theologians and scholars. But did he support a Gnostic version of Christianity? Do you know what he taught about souls going to heaven upon death? This article shows from his own writings, what Justin really taught.
The Dramatic Story of Chinese Sabbathkeepers This reformatted Good News article from 1955 discusses Sabbath-keeping in China in the 1800s.
Is God Unreasonable? Some have suggested that if God requires Sabbath-keeping He is unreasonable. Is that true?
Is There “An Annual Worship Calendar” In the Bible? This paper provides a biblical and historical critique of several articles, including one by the Tkach 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.

Bobby Fischer’s Grave

COGwriter

Bobby Fischer made the news:

19 Jun, 2010

Chess Master Bobby Fischer had a Filipino daughter?

The late American chess champion, Bobby Fischer, could have fathered a child to a Filipina lady years before he passed in 2008. A Filipina lady named Marilyn Young flew out to Iceland  with her 9-year-old daughter, Jinky Young, who she claims to be fathered by the late Bobby Fischer.

The remains of Fischer, will be exhumed for DNA testing to determine whether or not he is indeed the father of the 9 year old girl from the Philippines.

The reclusive chess master never left a will and his estate which is estimated to be worth $2 million is currently being contested by a Japanese chess official named Miyoko Watai who claims to be his former wife, two American nephews, the United States government who is seeking unpaid taxes from Fischer, and now Filipino lady Marilyn Young who claims Fischer is the father to her nine year old daughter Jinky…

Bobby Fischer died in Iceland at the age of 64.

Bobby Fischer, though probably not a real member, was once associated with the old Worldwide Church of God.  He failed to follow church teachings, especially after he ended his association.  His death and a little more information were covered here in an article titled Bobby Fischer Died.

COGwriter

The June-August 2010 edition of Together, Grace Communion International News (replaced the old Worldwide News) reported the following as its first item:

Conference Update – Schedule and Topics…

Interest in our international conference this July in Florida has been great, and our registration numbers continue to grow. This year’s theme is “GCI: Renewed in Christ.” Confirmed attendance now exceeds 900, and we have used over 90 percent of our room block at the conference hotel. We look forward to seeing all who can make it to our first denominational conference as Grace Communion International.

The registration fee for persons staying in the host hotel is $59, and is $109 for those staying elsewhere. The last day to register for the conference is Wednesday, June 23…

Each day includes a time of praise and worship.

The old Worldwide Church of God observed the biblical Feast of Tabernacles in the Fall of the year (like the Living Church of God still does).  The Tkach organization long ago decided that it needed a substitute.  And while the above states that this is its first “first denominational conference as Grace Communion International”, the reality is that it has held a variety of mini-conference, often in the Fall in the past (as both the Tkach WCG and GCI).

The GCI idea does have biblical precedent.  Look what Jeroboam decided when he was concerned that his people might go to Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Tabernacles:

26 And Jeroboam said in his heart, “Now the kingdom may return to the house of David: 27 If these people go up to offer sacrifices in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, then the heart of this people will turn back to their lord, Rehoboam king of Judah, and they will kill me and go back to Rehoboam king of Judah.”

28 Therefore the king asked advice, made two calves of gold, and said to the people, “It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem. Here are your gods, O Israel, which brought you up from the land of Egypt!” 29 And he set up one in Bethel, and the other he put in Dan. 30 Now this thing became a sin, for the people went to worship before the one as far as Dan. 31 He made shrines on the high places, and made priests from every class of people, who were not of the sons of Levi.

32 Jeroboam ordained a feast on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, like the feast that was in Judah, and offered sacrifices on the altar. So he did at Bethel, sacrificing to the calves that he had made. And at Bethel he installed the priests of the high places which he had made. 33 So he made offerings on the altar which he had made at Bethel on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, in the month which he had devised in his own heart. And he ordained a feast for the children of Israel, and offered sacrifices on the altar and burned incense.  (1 Kings 12:26-33)

So, while Jeroboam had some of the outward symbols of ancient biblical worship, his substitute was obviously a pagan, not biblical one.  The Tkach substitute is also not a biblical one.

Some articles of possibly related interest may include:

Is There “An Annual Worship Calendar” In the Bible? This paper provides a biblical and historical critique of several articles, including one by the Tkach 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 Feast of Tabernacles: A Time for Christians? Is this pilgrimage holy day still valid? Does it teach anything relevant for today’s Christians? What is the Last Great Day? What do these days teach?
LCG 2010 Feast of Tabernacles’ Information Here is information on many Feast of Tabernacles locations for this year.

Anne Catherine Emmerich was a Catholic Mystic

COGwriter

Many who are affiliated with some part of the Church of God seem to be unaware of the fact that the idea that Catholic prophecies may have end time relevance was taught decades ago.

There were two articles by David Jon Hill of the then Radio Church of God, which was renamed the Worldwide Church of God shortly thereafter (the old WCG fell into apostasy after the death of Herbert W. Armstrong, and various groups, with the Living Church of God being the most faithful, formed after his death to avoid the apostates).

Anyway, here is some of what the old Good News magazine taught in the 1960s:

Will you be deceived by Antichrist?…

The human instruments Satan the Devil is preparing to serve him are aware of what God’s Word says regarding the returning Christ and the Antichrist who is to oppose Him! They know enough prophecy to perform their abominable deeds with knowledge and vigor. They know, and have known historically, enough prophecy to prepare a perverted prophecy to deny the true prophetic warning broadcast by The WORLD TOMORROW!

Catholic Interest in Prophecy…

Satan knows God’s general Plan. He has been at work in the minds of evil and deluded men throughout the ages to lay the groundwork of the GREAT DELUSION !…

Catholic Definition of Antichrist

Here now, for the professed prophecies in the Catholic Church’s recently published book, Prophecy for Today:

“Towards the end of the world Antichrist will overthrow the Pope and usurp his See”! (“Prophecy” of Abbott “Merlin” Joachim, died 1202; see also Catholic Encyclopedia, article “Antichrist.”)

Because they will not admit the truth, the Church believes the Antichrist will be the one to unseat the pope, while every Bible prophecy commissions the true Christ with that job.

“Antichrist will fight a successful battle at Mageddo [Armageddon) in Palestine after which. . . he will hereafter become lord of the world’ (Ibid; Anna Catarina Emmerick, d. 1824). It is almost impossible to see how they could believe this! But there it is! And here is more! “The Kings will send armies to the Holy Land, but the Antichrist will slay them all”! (Ibid.; “Venerable Maria of Agreda.” d. 1665.) Compare this with Revelation 19:19.

But to continue. “Antichrist and his army will conquer Rome, kill the Pope and take the throne. . . The Jews will come from everywhere, and accept Antichrist as the Messiah.” (Ibid.; from a “prophecy” by Venerable Bartholomew Holthauser, d. 1658.)

Just one more quote to illustrate their satanic definition: “After the destruction of Rome, Antichrist will appear and exalt himself above pagan deities and the Trinity. . . Coming to Jerusalem, he will succeed through false preaching, miracles, gifts, terror, aided throughout by the devil. An evil spirit will come out of the air and descend upon his followers. He shall feign a resurrection from the dead, cause rain to fall. . . and perform other wonders, all through the power of the devil. . . . The Jews will welcome him.” (Ibid.; Richard Rolle of Hampole, d. 1349.)

Compare With Your Bible…

When these false “prophecies” are read from pulpits into the ears of gullible people and they begin to see God’s intervention come to pass, THEY WHOLE EARTH AND SEA OBEYS HIS WILL BELIEVE THE ONLY MEANING THEY HAVE EVER LEARNED ABOUT THESE SIGNS AND WONDERS, AND BE CONVINCED THAT THE GLORIOUS CHRIST RETURNING IN TRIUMPH IS IN TRUTH THE ANTICHRIST!

A more modern prophetess of the Catholic Church has this to say about this time of preaching: “Whole nations will join the Church shortly before the reign of the Antichrist. These conversions will be amazing. Those who shall survive shall have to conduct themselves well. There shall be innumerable conversions of heretics, who will return to the bosom of the Church” (Prophecy For Today; from Anna Maria Taigi, d. 1837).

Listen to this satanic delusion: “Antichrist will be an iconoclast [against idols). Most of the world will adore him. He will teach that the Christian religion is false, confiscation of Christian property is legal, Saturday is to be observed instead of Sunday, and he will change the Ten Commandments [that is, restore them in their ORIGINAL FORM, including the declaration against idols). All his wonders could not be written in a book. They will be more wonderful than the Old and New Testaments! . . . he will read people’s minds, raise the dead, REWARD HIS FOLLOWERS AND PUNISH THE REST”! (Prophecy For Today; from Dionysius of Luxemberg, d. 1682.) AND, “. . . He will begin by affecting RESPECT FOR THE LAW OF MOSES’(’I bid.; from Frederick William Faber, d. 1863)…

Christ is the One who is AGAINST IDOLS! Christ is the One who will show how perverted this world’s “Christianity” has become-that it is a FALSE RELIGION! Christ is the Lord of the Old Testament whose day of worship is the seventh day, INSTEAD OF SUNDAY! CHRIST is the One who gave the Ten Commandments in their ORIGINAL FORM, and will restore them. CHRIST IS THE ONE WHO WILL RAISE THE DEAD AND REWARD HIS FOLLOWERS. . . HE IS GOD, AND THERE IS NONE LIKE HIM!

So we see here the diabolical plot hatched by this professed “Christian” leader. Here is the age-old attempt of Satan the Devil to arrogate to himself and to his deceived minions the OFFICE OF GOD; while he attributes the intervention of the True Christ in his returning glory to the PERSON AND ACTION OF ANTICHRIST. (Hill, David Jon. Will you be deceived by Antichrist? Good News magazine of the Radio Church of God, October 1964, pp. 9-12,18).

Notice that certain “Catholic prophecies” were believed at that time to misidentify Jesus as the final Antichrist and that a religion that attracts whole nations is prophesied.  I should point out, however, that some Catholic prophecies warn against the ecumenical religion that others seem to look forward to.  All who profess Christianity should realize that no matter what any “Catholic” prophecy may say, the Bible is clear that Jesus and NOT Antichrist wins the battle that is originally staged at Armageddon (cf. Revelation 16:13-16 and 19:17-21).

Also notice:

Christ or Antichrist?…

A recently published book reveals a startling Catholic interest in endtime prophecy. This book, together with tradition and the writings of some of the “early church Fathers,” brings to light an eye-opening preview of the false prophecies that are about to be preached!…

WHY?

Because of “that man of sin . . . who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he IS GOD, ..even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and LYING wonders, and with ALL DECEIVABLENESS.” THAT MAN WILL TELL THE WORLD THE BIGGEST LIE EVER TOLD!…

So we see here the diabolical plot…Here is the age-old attempt of Satan the Devil to arrogate to himself and to his deceived minions the OFFICE OF GOD; while he attributes the intervention of the True Christ in his returning glory to the PERSON AND ACTION OF ANTICHRIST! (Hill, David Jon. Christ or Antichrist? Good News magazine of the Radio Church of God, April 1961, pp.9,11).

The above shows that the old Radio Church of God understood that it was likely that followers of the end time ecumenical “Catholic” religion would likely rely on false prophesies and be opposed to Christ.  And that is some of what I am trying to do here as well.

Some have unfairly criticized me for bringing out these and other non-biblical prophecies.  But like the old Radio Church of God, my intent is to warn people that Satan has a plan to delude human kind and it includes “signs and lying wonders” (2 Thessalonians 2:9), which include false prophecies (cf. Matthew 7:15; 24:11,24).

Even the first “antipope” Hippolytus of the early third century seemed to have warned against the returning Jesus (his authorship of some the document quoted, On the End of the World, has been questioned).  Here is some of what the old Radio Church of God published:

Compare With Your Bible

Hippolytus is one of the “early church Fathers”…(Ante-Nicene Fathers; Hippolytus…)…

Hippolytus goes on to say: “. . . at that time the whole earth will bewail the life of anguish, and the sea and air in like manner will bewail it; and the sun, too, will wail; and the wild beasts, together with the fowls, will wail; mountains and hills, and the trees of the plain, will wail on account of the race of man, because all have turned aside from the Holy God, and obeyed the deceiver, and received the mark of that abominable one, the enemy of God, INSTEAD OF THE QUICKENING CROSS OF THE SAVIOR” (Ibid.; section XXXIII)….

God’s clear revelation shows that the time when the families of all the earth are going to bewail for anguish is the time of Christ’s return…(Rev. 18:11-15)…

Remarkable Prophecy

Here is another false prophecy from Hippolytus.

“And by reason of the SCARCITY OF FOOD, all will go to him and worship him; and he will put his mark on their right hand and on their forehead, that no one may put the sign of the honorable cross upon his forehead with his right hand; but his hand is bound” (Ibid., section XXVIII).

Now turn to the book of Zechariah in your Bible…(Zech. 14:16-19). The Eternal God, at His return, is going to cause the nations of this earth to recognize Him as Ruler and to worship Him through the means of controlling the weather, causing drought and famine-SCARCITY OF FOOD-until ALL NATIONS COME UP TO KEEP THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES! (Hill, David Jon. Will you be deceived by Antichrist? Good News magazine of the Radio Church of God, October 1964, pp. 10-11).

The writings of Hippolytus seem to be implying that those who wore the mark of the cross on their forehead or hands will not be allowed to do that after Jesus comes. It may be that he through his confusion he is actually indicating that one mark of the beast may have to do with crosses on their “hand or on their foreheads” (Revelation 13:16).  While the day of the week is a mark/sign of the beast, it may not be the only mark.

Many are being told through false prophecies to oppose the return of Jesus, as well as to support powers that Jesus will destroy.

Jesus, Himself, warned about false prophets rising up (Mark 13:22-23).  Paul warned that Christians are not to be ignorant of Satan’s devices (2 Corinthians 2:11).

By exposing and highlighting prophecies that have misled many throughout the centuries, it is my (COGwriter) hope and prayer that people will compare the utterances of any “prophet” irrespective with any signs or wonders to what is written in the Bible.  I believe that all prophecies need to be understood in the light of biblical prophecy.

COGwriter

The above drawing is used by Trinitarians to explain the Trinity, even though it clearly violates laws of logic.  Today is known as “Trinity Sunday”.  This “holiday”, like many observed throughout the world, does not have a biblical basis, nor was it observed by the early church.

The Catholic Encyclopedia confirms this as it teaches:

The first Sunday after Pentecost, instituted to honour the Most Holy Trinity. In the early Church no special Office or day was assigned for the Holy Trinity. (Mershman, Francis. Trinity Sunday. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 15. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 26 May 2010 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15058a.htm>)

Furthermore, the Trinity itself was not an original teaching of the Greco-Roman churches either.  Yet many consider it to be a highly important doctrine to their faith.  The Catholic Encyclopedia claims:

The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion (The Blessed Trinity, 1912).

But was the trinity a central doctrine of the New Testament? Here is what one modern historian has written about it:

Like other doctrines that became central to the faith, however, belief in the Trinity was a historical development, not a “given” from the early years of the faith. A. The basic notion of the Trinity is that there are three persons in the Godhead: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These are all equally God and of the same substance, but despite the fact there are three persons, together, they compromise only one God, indivisible in nature. B. This doctrine does not appear to be a doctrine pronounced by the historical Jesus, Paul, or any other Christian writer during the first hundred years or so of Christianity. C. It cannot be found explicitly stated in the earliest Christian writings. The only passage of the New Testament that declares the doctrine (1 John 5:7-8) was not originally part of the text but was added by doctrinally astute scribes at a later date (it is not found in any Greek manuscripts until the 11th century) (Ehrman B. From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity, Part 2. The Teaching Company, Chantilly (VA), 2004, p. 43).

Regarding the New Testament, even a trinitarian scholar has admitted that the Bible promotes a binitarian view, and does not teach what is now considered to be the trinity:

The binitarian formulas are found in Rom. 8:11, 2 Cor. 4:14, Gal. 1:1, Eph. 1:20, 1 Tim 1:2, 1 Pet. 1:21, and 2 John 1:13…No doctrine of the Trinity in the Nicene sense is present in the New Testament…There is no doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense in the Apostolic Fathers…(Rusch W.G. The Trinitarian Controversy. Fortress Press, Phil., 1980, pp. 2-3).

The terms trinity, threeness, or trinitarian are not found in the Bible. The Protestant reformer Martin Luther himself taught:

It is indeed true that the name “Trinity” is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man. (Luther Martin. The Sermons of Martin Luther, Church Postil, 1522; III:406-421, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Cathecism of the Catholic Church admits the Church (not the Bible) had to come up with terms of “philosophical” (pagan/Greek) origin to explain it::

251 In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the Church had to develop its own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin: “substance,” “person,” or “hypostasis,” “relation” and so on (Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 74).

Earliest Trinitarian History

Pagan religions sometimes had a form of a trinity of deities. This dates at least from the time of ancient Babylon:

The ancient Babylonians recognised the doctrine of a trinity, or three persons in one god—as appears from a composite god with three heads forming part of their mythology, and the use of the equilateral triangle, also, as an emblem of such trinity in unity (Beck TD. The mystical woman and the cities of the nations: or, Papal Rome and her secular satellites. 1867. Original from Oxford University, Digitized Aug 15, 2006, pp. 22-23).

The Assyrians did as well:

On one cylinder of translucent green felspar, called amazon stone, winch I believe to have been the signet, or amulet, of Sennacherib himself, is engraved the king standing in an arched frame as on the rock tablets at Bavian, and at the Nahr-el-Kelb in Syria. He holds in one hand the sacrificial mace, and raises the other in the act of adoration before the winged figure in a circle, here represented as a triad with three heads…the triune god, the supreme deity of the Assyrians, and of the Persians, their successors, in the empire of the East. Of the information as to the religious system of the Assyrians… It is difficult to understand such a system of polytheism, unless we suppose that whilst there was but one supreme god, represented sometimes under a triune form (Layard AH. Discoveries in the ruins of Nineveh and Babylon: with travels in Armenia, Kurdistan and the desert : being the result of a second expedition undertaken for the trustees of the British Museum. Murray, 1853. Original from the Bavarian State Library, Digitized Oct 20, 2009, pp. 160, 637).

Sennacherib is mentioned in the Bible (2 Kings 18:13) and reigned from about 720 BC to about 683 BC. Furthermore, notice:

Mithra, who was originally subordinate to Ormuzd, and even reduced to the third place in the triad, subsequently rose practically to the first place, supplanting Ormuzd himself. Such a process, by which the mediating member of the trinity, as the special friend and savior of men, should become first and nearest in the thoughts, and affections, and hopes of men, and hence in time first in the divine order of the gods, is most natural, and we have already found it a marked feature of the historical evolution of most of the Ethnic trinities. Thus in the Babylonian triad Marduk, the mediating sun-god, usurps the place of Ea, his father. The same was true of Vishnu-Krishna in the Hindoo trinity, who, in his capacity of god- man and mediator, reduced Brahma to almost a shadow. So Mithraism pushed Ormuzd back into a place of inferiority, or rather he was quietly displaced and forgotten. The triad was practically reduced to unity in the Mithraic faith (Paine LL. The Ethnic Trinities and Their Relations to the Christian Trinity: A Chapter in the Comparative History of Religions. Kessinger Publishing, 1901 Original from the University of California, Digitized Nov 20, 2007, p. 84).

Mithraism entered the Roman Empire about a century before the crucifixion of Jesus and became influential among the emperors, including with Emperor Constantine (see also Do You Practice Mithraism?). According to Roman Catholic sources, the term trinity, in relation to the Godhead, did not come until the late second/early third century. Yet, the idea of the trinity was apparently voiced by the heretic Montanus and developed by a famous Gnostic heretic named Valentinus in the mid-2nd Century. One of the so-called Montanist Oracles, spoken by Montanus was:

“I am the Father and the Son and the Paraclete.” (Didymus, De trinitate iii. 41. 1.) (Assembled in P. de Labriolle, La crise montaniste (1913), 34-105, by Bates College, Lewston (Maine) http://abacus.bates.edu/Faculty/Philosophy%20and%20Religion/rel_241/texts/montanism.html 01/31/06).

This is one of the first references to a trinitarian view of the Godhead (the other earliest one was from the heretic Valentinus–it is unclear which was first). The paraclete is a term used to signify the Holy Spirit (it is from the Greek term parakletos). Eusebius records (Eusebius. Church History, Book V, Chapters 18-19) that church leaders in Asia Minor and Antioch, such as Apollonius of Ephesus, that Serapion of Antioch, Apollinaris of Hierapolis, and Thraseas of Eumenia opposed the Montantist heresies (Apollinaris of Hierapolis and Thraseas of Eumenia were Quartodecimans, and Apollonius likely was as well). However, Roman Bishops would not renounce the Montantist heresy until sometime in the third century, and that after Rome accepted certain Montanus beliefs (see Montanists in The Catholic Encyclopedia)! Here is what it is recorded that a one-time Catholic bishop named Marcellus of Ancyra wrote, around the middle of the fourth century, where certain aspects of trinitarianism came from–paganism:

Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God…These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him ‘On the Three Natures’.  For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato (Source: Logan A. Marcellus of Ancyra (Pseudo-Anthimus), ‘On the Holy Church’: Text, Translation and Commentary. Verses 8-9.  Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Volume 51, Pt. 1, April 2000, p.95 ).

Valentinus also wrote this in the heretical ‘Gospel of Truth’,

The Father uncovers his bosom, which is the Holy Spirit, revealing his secret. His secret is his Son! (Valentinus.  Gospel of Truth.  Verse 17.  English translation by Patterson Brown).

Hence Valentinus is the earliest known professing Christian writer to make clear trinitarian claims (though he, himself, did not come up with the term trinity). It also should be noted that Valentinus was denounced by Polycarp of Asia Minor, when Polycarp visited Rome as a heretic (Irenaeus. Adversus Haeres. Book III, Chapter 3, Verse 4) and is considered to have been a heretic by Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, most Protestants, and those in the Living Church of God. Additional Trinitarian History The position of the Roman Catholic Church is that the term ‘trinity’ (from the Latin trinitas) was developed 85 years after the last book of the Bible was written:

In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together…The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180…Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (“De pud.” c. xxi) (The Blessed Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight).

But the claim regarding Theophilus, who wrote in Greek, is not accurate as “trinity” (as trinitas) is a Latin, not a Greek word.  So, the first time it was used was by Tertullian (roughly 100 years after John finished penning the last book of the Bible).  And all should realize that Tertullian had left the Church of Rome near that time to follow Montanus, whose followers the Church of Rome condemned in the early third century. In the fourth century, debates on the Godhead got quite heated.  So much so, that the Roman Emperor Constantine decided to appoint himself a lay bishop (even though he had not been baptized at that stage) and convene what has been called the first “ecumenical council” in Nicea in the year 325. According to historical accounts, the attendees at this council were split into three factions:

1) Arians – Supporters of the position of Dr. Arius, about 10% of the attendees. 2) In-Between – Those who held a position between the Arians and Proto-Trinitarians, about 75% of the attendees. Eusebius was the main spokesperson for them. 3) The Proto-Trinitarians – Those who supported the views of Athanasius, about 15% of the attendees.

Notice that even within the Catholic/Orthodox Council, the majority of attending bishops did not hold to the trinitarian view before the Council. No matter what one may feel about the truthfulness of the trinity, how can any say that the acceptance of this doctrine is necessary for Christians as it was not the apparent belief of the majority of church leaders in the early fourth century? Although Eusebius led the biggest group at this Council, after an impassioned speech by Athanasius, Emperor Constantine arose. And since he was the Emperor (plus he was dressed as a golden “angel”), his standing was noticed by the bulk of the attendees who correctly interpreted the Emperor as now supporting Athanasius (Emperor Constantine has familiar with a trinitarian viewpoint as he had practiced Mithraism, which had a type of triad leading it, see Do You Practice Mithraism?). And because of Athanasius’ speech and the Emperor’s approval, the bulk of the attendees decided to come up with a statement that the Arians could not support. This solved the Emperor’s concern about unity of his version of Christianity, and pretty much drove the Arians out. But even some of the strongest supporters of Athanasius’ position, such as Marcion of Ancyra, actually did not believe in the trinity as now taught (that is why this paper used the term “Proto-Trinitarians” above). Also notice that the Emperor Constantine was heavily involved:

Although Constantine is usually remembered for the steps he took toward making Christianity the established religion of the Roman Empire, it would not be wrong to consider him the one who inaugurated the centuries of trinitarian orthodoxy.  It was he who proposed and perhaps even imposed the expression homoousis at the Council of Nicea in 325, and it was he who provided government aid to the orthodox and exerted government pressure against nonconformists. (Brown HOJ. Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), 1988, pp. 332-333).

Thus a pagan emperor, proposed and militarily imposed, a doctrine on his own. And this did not come from the Bible into the world’s largest churches, but from a pagan (Constantine still honored the pagan sun deities after his supposed conversion to Christianity and was not even baptized into the world’s church until his death bed–and even then he insisted upon being buried in a grave dedicated to a pagan deity). However, the trinity as now taught was not completely adopted until many decades after this 325 A.D. the Council of Nicea. It was not even the necessary position of the bishops of Rome or Constantinople in the middle of the fourth century. And at least one now claimed to be Pope (Liberius) was believed to have been Semi-Arian. Notice some of what The Catholic Encyclopedia teaches:

The second Formula of Sirmium (357) stated the doctrine of the Anomoeans, or extreme Arians. Against this the Semi-Arian bishops, assembled at Ancyra, the episcopal city of their leader Basilius, issued a counter formula, asserting that the Son is in all things like the Father, afterwards approved by the Third Synod of Sirmium (358). This formula, though silent on the term “homousios“, consecrated by the Council of Nicaea, was signed by a few orthodox bishops, and probably by Pope Liberius (Benigni, Umberto. “Council of Rimini.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 13. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 11 Jul. 2008 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13057b.htm>). Pneumatomachi…The majority of this sect were clearly orthodox on the Consubstantiality of the Son; they had sent a deputation from the Semi-Arian council of Lampsacus (364 A.D.) to Pope Liberius, who after some hesitation acknowledged the soundness of their faith (Arendzen, John. Pneumatomachi. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 12. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 11 Jul. 2008 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12174a.htm>) Semiarians and Semiarianism A name frequently given to the conservative majority in the East in the fourth century…showing that the very name of father implies a son of like substance…rejected the Divinity of the Holy Ghost…(Semiarians and Semiarianism.  The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 15. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 26 May 2010 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15058a.htm>)

So the scholars of the Church of Rome admit that the “conservative majority in the East” were not Trinitarians in the middle of the fourth century.  There were also many “Semi-Arians” in the West at this time as well of course.

Notice that the Orthodox bishop of Constantinople, Macedonius, in the fourth century held to some form of Semi-Arian view:

Towards the middle of the fourth century, Macedonius, Bishop of Constantinople, and, after him a number of Semi-Arians, while apparently admitting the Divinity of the Word, denied that of the Holy Ghost (Forget J. Transcribed by W.S. French, Jr. Holy Ghost. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. Copyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Thus, into the middle of the fourth century, the two major leaders of the Greco-Roman churches endorsed Semi-Arian, non-trinitarian positions.   There were also many leaders in other major Greco-Roman churches in the century who did not accept the trinity.  Here

Here is another important semi-Arian bishop according to The Catholic Encyclopedia:

St. Cyril of Jerusalem Bishop of Jerusalem and Doctor of the Church, born about 315; died probably 18 March, 386… He appeared at the Council of Seleucia in 359, in which the Semi-Arian party was triumphant… He belonged to the Semi-Arian, or Homoean party, and is content to declare that the Son is “in all things like the Father”. (Chapman, John. St. Cyril of Jerusalem. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 4. Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908. 3 Feb. 2010 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04595b.htm>)

The trinity was finally formally adopted at the Council of Constantinople in 381–though many in the Roman and Orthodox Church believed in versions of it prior to this.

To insure that people would be forced into accepting the trinity, shortly after the 381 council, Emperor Theodosius’declared:

…let us believe in the one diety of the father, Son and Holy Spirit, in equal majesty and in a holy Trinity. We authorize the followers of this law to assume the title Catholic Christians; but as for the others, since in out judgment they are foolish madmen, we decree that the shall be branded with the ignominious name of heretics, and shall not presume to give their conventicles the name of churches. They will suffer in the first place the chastisement of divine condemnation an the second the punishment of out authority, in accordance with the will of heaven shall decide to inflict…(Theodosian Code XVI.1.2. Cited in Bettenson H, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, London: Oxford University Press, 1943, p. 31).

So the trinity need the force of Roman punishment against non-trinitarians.

Though adopted, even in 381 it was not exactly the same trinity teaching as now understood.  Notice the confirmation from a Protestant theologian:

The doctrine of the Trinity is fundamental for the Christian faith, even though the doctrine was not clearly formulated and generally accepted by an ecumenical council until the fourth century..The Council of Chalcedon, the decisions of which were reaffirmed at the Trullanum of 680-681, gave us the formulation of Christological doctrine we now call orthodox.  (Brown HOJ. Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), 1988, pp. 127,192-193,194).

A bishop of the Orthodox Church confirmed its late acceptance:

…the councils defined once and for all the Church’s teaching upon the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith — the Trinity and the Incarnation. All Christians agree in regarding these things as ‘mysteries’ which lie beyond human understanding and language…the first two, held in the fourth century…formulated the doctrine of the Trinity…The work of Nicea was taken up by the second Ecumenical Council, held in Constantinople in 381…While Athanasius emphasized the unity of God — Father and Son are one in essence (ousia) – the Cappadocians stressed God’s threeness: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (hypostasis) (Ware T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books, London, 1997, pp. 20-23).

Trinity Today and the “New” WCG/GCI

Despite the fact that up until late in the fourth century, most who professed Christ did not clearly hold to a Trinitarian view of the Christian Godhead, over time (and partially due to Imperial pressure), the Trinity became accepted by the majority of those who professed Christ.

In modern times, this has happened to groups such as the old Worldwide Church of God, which is now called Grace Communion International, and is based in Southern California (although any pressure would have come from the desire to confirm to majority Protestant positions as opposed to any governmental influence).

The old Worldwide Church of God held to a Semi-Arian (sometimes referred to as a binitarian) view of the Godhead.  After the death of Herbert W. Armstrong in 1986, the leadership that took over abandoned that church’s historical aversion to the Trinity. Those that disagreed with such changes to the historical Christian teachings left and many of the older leaders are now part of the Living Church of God.

Grace Communion International recently published the following:

Have you ever wondered why the doctrine of the Trinity is so important to Christian faith?

The fact that God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, three in one and one in three means that Jesus Christ and the Father are not separate Gods. And that means you don’t ever have to worry about what God thinks about you, how God feels about you, or what is going to happen to you when you die.  (Tkach J.  Trinity: More than a doctrine.  GCI Together, April-May 2010)

Some may find that to be a suitable explanation, while others will realize that since the original Christian church did not teach the Trinity, it could not have been an important doctrine.  But despite that, many will be observing Trinity Sunday.

Those interested in studying this doctrine in more detail, should consider looking at the following documented articles:

Binitarian View: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning Is binitarianism the correct position? What about unitarianism or trinitarianism?
Is The Father God? What is the view of the Bible? What was the view of the early church?
Jesus is God, But Was Made Man Was Jesus fully human and fully God or what?
Did Early Christians Think the Holy Spirit Was A Separate Person in a Trinity? Or did they have a different view?
Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity? Most act like this is so, but is it?
Was Unitarianism the Teaching of the Bible or Early Church? Many, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, claim it was, but was it?
Binitarianism: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning This is a shorter article than the Binitarian View article, but has a little more information on binitarianism.
Valentinus: The Gnostic Trinitarian Heretic He apparently was the first Christ-professing heretic to come up with the idea of three hypostases.

TRANSFORMED FROM TRUTH

COGwriter

Today, GCI (formerly called WCG) sent the following out from its leader, Joseph Tkach:

It won’t be long before election campaigning will get under way again for senate seats, governorships, and other elected offices, as well as for new laws and taxes. Viewpoints will vary widely and both sides one any given issue or candidate will try to bury its opponents in rhetoric, half-truths, innuendo and often blatant accusations.

What is a Christian to do on Election Day, when he or she wants to reflect Christ in every aspect of their lives? Christians and politics — it’s been thorny relationship throughout history. One thing we know: God does not have a “favorite” political party nor some “divinely chosen” candidate out there somewhere.

The truth is, none of the political parties or candidates is going to solve all the national, state or local problems they promise they’re going to solve. Nor are any of us voters going to solve them by voting for the perfect candidate, because there is no perfect candidate.

At election time, our job is simply to become as knowledgeable about the issues and candidates as we can and then vote as wisely as we can. And when it’s over, regardless of who wins, our job is to pray that the winners will promote peace, justice and freedom.

It’s such a blessing to have the right to vote. But it has little value unless we exercise it. The Bible teaches us to be responsible citizens, and in our democracies, part of being a responsible citizen is to exercise our right to vote. The right to vote goes hand in hand with freedom, as well as helps ensure another cherished right, our right to worship as we see fit.

So we vote as wisely and we can and hope for the best.

While the old WCG was opposed to voting, and faithful COGs like LCG remain opposed to voting in worldly elections, voting is another way that GCI is now like most of the world’s churches.

Two articles of possible interest may include:

Should a Christian Vote? This article gives some of the Biblical rationale on this subject. Would Jesus vote for president? Is voting in the Bible? This is a subject Christians need to understand.
There are Many COGs: Why Support the Living Church of God? This is an article for those who wish to more easily sort out the different COGs. It really should be a MUST READ for current and former WCG/GCI members or any interested in supporting the faithful church. It also explains a lot of what the COGs are all about.

Ambassador Auditorium (in center)

COGwriter

Ambassador Auditorium again made the news:

Pasadena Star News – April 2, 2010

PASADENA – …”I think they’ll have a major reaction” to the interior, said Roman Borek, the auditorium’s former long-time general manager, who will give a final round of guided tours from 9 a.m. to noon today at the auditorium, 131 S. St. John Ave.  http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_14810626

I met Roman Borek a few times and believe he gave my wife and I a tour of Ambassador Auditorium over 25 years years ago.  As I reported before, the Pasadena Symphony intends to move to Ambassador Auditorium (see Ambassador Auditorium to be Home of Pasadena Symphony).

Several articles of possibly related interest may include:

Who Was Herbert W. Armstrong? How is He Viewed Today? Includes quotes from the 1973 edition of The Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong and explains how he is and should be viewed today.
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.
The Temple and the Work This article discusses the two temples of the Old Testament and gives insight as to their possible relevance to the situation which has impacted the Church during this past decade or so.