Chapter Six - Mystery of the Church

This is the longest chapter in the book and, not surprisingly, it is but another venue for putting forth HWA’s false gospel of the "Government of God" and being ruled through the law. This government¹ is to be administered by those who are called now and are presently a part of the church. The unspoken implication is obvious: Become a member of "the church," and you, too, can be one of the top rulers in this government. Refuse this calling, and you will have your part in the Great Tribulation and probably end up in the lake of fire.

Without coming right out and saying it, HWA plays into people’s desire to be someone special. He dangles a carrot under the nose, convincing people that God is calling them now to be a part of His "government." "God is not calling the bulk of mankind now, therefore it is a special honor to be called now." The human ego finds it difficult to refuse this special offer, seeing as it is a rare event (a pearl of great price), by its very nature. Any suspicion an individual might have regarding HWA and his teaching is overcome by the person’s desire to benefit from what he teaches. How can he be deceiving people when he is just trying to help them get into God’s Kingdom? The one reading HWA’s literature believes he/she is being careful and checking out what he says, but by not being well versed in the Scriptures, it is easy to be misled, despite one’s attempts to the contrary. People want to believe God is calling them, and subconsciously do not want to risk losing out on this opportunity. It’s hard to turn down God.

Chapter 6 is highly convoluted. So much is thrown at the reader now, that it becomes difficult to keep up with it all. The average person is not going to check up on every little detail; they will usually say to themselves that what they don’t understand now they will deal with later. But once convinced HWA is right, these issues are put on the back burner... the way back burner. The initiate believes the answers will come later when they better understand.

It is going to be difficult to deal with every issue as they are brought up by HWA in this chapter. To do so would require a book twice as large as the one being critiqued. It is therefore necessary to leave some minor issues unaddressed in order to focus on the more flagrant abuses of Scripture. All too often, the adherents of HWA will also focus on the relatively minor issues that are critiqued, and believing they have found the critic in error on some minor point, feel justified to ignore the greater issues. Such is the mindset, as I have been there and done that when reading material critical of HWA myself in the past.

On page 198, HWA claims the true gospel (his gospel) has not been preached "to the world" since about A.D. 50 until 1953, when he began preaching his gospel worldwide via radio and TV.

This would have to mean that the apostles who lived beyond A.D. 50 "dropped the ball" and quit preaching the gospel, as well as those who were taught the gospel by the apostles. Does his claim sound reasonable?

What we need to do here is compare HWA’s gospel with what we find written in the N.T. Scriptures.

In trying to decipher what HWA claims is a false gospel he says this on page 200:

Few may realize it, but Jesus made no attempt to gain converts or to invite people to "give their hearts to him" or to "accept him as their personal savior."

Can we afford to "reject" Jesus as personal savior? What we see here is typical of HWA’s methodology. He tries to define what others believe and teach in order to serve his own purpose while knocking down the straw-man arguments he creates.

Apparently HWA never read Matthew the 11^th chapter, where Jesus was talking to a multitude of people (verse 7) and declares in verses 28-30:

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

Or how about this?

"In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, ‘If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.’ (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)" (John 7:37-39)

Then there is the matter of what the apostles preached to the masses after the resurrection. All the reader need do is read the narratives where they preach the gospel, and see whether they speak of believing Jesus is the Savior, or whether they preached the kingdom of God being the government of God. References are made to the kingdom of God, but not in specifics. The focus is always concerning the king of the kingdom.

Those within HWA’s group were taught to reject the "give your heart to the Lord" concept. The human heart was defined as being "desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9) and why then would Jesus want it? What is really important here is the understanding that the human heart is desperately wicked, and as such people need to come to the realization that there is absolutely nothing the individual can do to change it. Only God can give us a new heart.

Ezekiel 11:19: "And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:"

HWA taught people must keep the law; prove their dedication through "performancy," as he worded it. It is man trying to change his "heart" through his own efforts. The lesson that is supposed to be learned by the example of Israel, was that they were given the law, and were never able to live up to it. HWA tried to convince people that with God’s Spirit; with a changed heart, people would then be able to keep this law as God intended. But the problem was never one of the law; it was always a problem with the heart—a heart of unbelief; a heart full of sin.

If it were about the law and keeping the law, enabled by God’s Spirit, then let the one with God’s Spirit who keeps the law perfectly come forward and make himself or herself known.

The problem is sin, not the law that helps define sin, or make sin utterly sinful.

Romans 5:13: "(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law."

Romans 5:20: "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:"

On the contrary, he "called out"—drafted—twelve disciples. (p. 200)

This follows immediately after the quote above where he says Jesus "made no attempt to gain converts." HWA claims the disciples were "drafted" by Jesus. One who is drafted has no choice in the matter. In like manner HWA infers that those who are reading what he has written are being drafted. You don’t have a say in the matter. If you reject your draft call, you are AWOL from God and will suffer the consequences of your rejection of Him.

Those recovering from their involvement within the WCG and its offshoots usually have a desire to understand how it was they were duped into joining his group. There are resources on this website to help people understand how this process occurred. To sum it up simply, they were exposed to some of the slickest advertising and persuasion techniques known. Who doesn’t want to live forever? Who doesn’t want to feel important? Who wouldn’t want to believe they are being specially called by God at a time they are led to believe the vast majority of mankind is not? Who would want to refuse such a special honor and incur the wrath of God for rejecting such a calling?

These twelve were students being taught by Jesus the true gospel of the kingdom of God. (p. 200)

The twelve were called to learn from Jesus, and be witnesses to the things that transpired concerning Jesus’ life, death and resurrection. When Jesus preached the gospel of the kingdom of God to the masses, He did so in parables in order to obscure the meaning.² Even Jesus’ disciples did not understand the parables, couched in the terminology of the kingdom of God. By sticking with that which obscured the gospel, HWA was able to manipulate it into the kingdom of God being the government of God, with the law an integral part of that government.

If this is indeed the true gospel, then where are the examples in Scripture stating it as such? They are not there. We are led to believe the writers of the New Testament events and epistles neglected somehow to mention the "true" gospel. "It is "hid" from those who are lost..."

At this point in the book, HWA again recaps his main points in order to drum them into the head of the reader.

1. God is Creator and Supreme Ruler.
   
   

2. Lucifer was placed on earth’s throne to administer the government of God.
   
   

3. God’s government is based upon God’s law.
   
   

4. Lucifer rebelled against this law.
   
   

5. Adam was created to replace Satan.
   
   

6. Adam rebelled against this law.
   
   

7. Satan still rules today.
   
   

8. Jesus Christ was to conquer and replace Satan on earth’s throne.
   
   

9. Jesus Christ conquered Satan, but has not replaced him yet.
   
   

10. Jesus came to ransom mankind, kidnapped by Satan.

Nowhere in Scripture do we find Lucifer was put here to administer the "government" of God. The earth is referred to as God's (Exodus 9:29; Psalm 24:1), and the demon’s first habitation.

Point three is an assumption necessary for building the theology of legalism. Again, there is no evidence to support the claim that Lucifer rebelled against God’s law. He rebelled against God; he attempted to overthrow God. (Isaiah 14:13-14)

According to HWA, God creates a vastly inferior and naïve being known as Adam to replace a crafty evil being who can pluck Adam like a grape. Adam rejects the "government" and "way" of God, and loses out on this opportunity to replace Satan. Jesus comes in the flesh and resists Satan. He fulfills those prophesies concerning His life, death, and resurrection, but for some unexplained reason, does not replace Satan, even though "qualified" now. A logical question would be, what qualified Lucifer to head the earth in the first place then? Jesus demonstrates His love for his creation by dying for those who will believe that through Him one has eternal life (I John 5:13). His church has been redeemed (I Peter 1:18), but not necessarily in the manner implied by HWA.

HWA then asks, "Now, why the Church?" (p. 201), then sidesteps the question, and brings up the seven annual festivals, claiming they were ordained forever. He says they picture God’s plan of redemption. But do they really?

Passover points to Jesus and His sacrifice for all mankind.

Unleavened bread points to the sincerity and truth found in Jesus.

The Day of Pentecost points to the Holy Spirit baptizing believers into the body of Christ.

The Feast of Trumpets heralds Jesus return to the earth.

The Day of Atonement; Jesus’ reconciliation of mankind to himself.

The Feast of Tabernacles; the paradise of Jesus ruling over the earth.

The Last Great Day³; Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit to be given to those that thirst, come to Him and believe on Him.

One notices that HWA doesn't consider Firstfruits (Leviticus 23:9-14) as the third feast day since he tells us the day of Pentecost was "originally called Feast of Firstfruits."⁴  Where in the Bible does it say Pentecost was "originally" called Feast of Firstfruits? More than picturing God’s plan of redemption, these feast days all point to one person, Jesus, the Savior of mankind. Remember that HWA was fond of saying Jesus was merely the "messenger of the gospel" and that the gospel was not about Jesus. HWA could not have been more wrong. All the law and prophets pointed to him. All the sacrifices, even the Sabbaths, pointed to Him. He is the reality and all these things were the shadows of that reality. 

John 5:39: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

The facts of the Church’s origin and its purpose are revealed in that book of mystery—the Holy Bible. To make clear that mystery may well require more pages in this book than any other subject. (p. 203)

Which would take longer to "prove," a false teaching or a true one? Truth tends to be simple and easy to understand. If one is trying to explain a teaching that is not true, it is going to take a lot more effort!

On page 208, HWA begins to build up slowly to his theology concerning the church by stating innocently enough through a paraphrase of Jesus as saying, "I will call out of Satan’s world disciples, to grow into the altogether new and different world, which will be God’s kingdom." This is extrapolated from Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock⁵ I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Is this what this passage says? No. Do the followers of HWA take him to task for this misrepresentation of Scripture? No. Why? Because his followers bought into his claim that he has been given special revelations from God, hence his interpretations are true.

Almost no one has understood that the gospel could not be proclaimed to the world, nor could God’s called congregation of people have the Holy Spirit UNTIL Jesus  a)  had qualified by overcoming Satan, and  b)  had been glorified after ascension to heaven (John 7:37-39). (pp. 208-209)

John 7:37-39 makes no mention of Jesus overcoming Satan or qualifying to rule the world: "In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

Prior to Jesus coming to the world in the flesh, the prophets were given God’s Spirit. (II Peter 1:21) So these conditions of HWA are artificial and unbiblical. For instance, Scripture says Christians have overcome the wicked one (Satan). (I John 2:13-14) This would mean that every Christian has qualified to "rule the earth," if we buy into HWA’s reasoning.

Does HWA really answer the logical question here though? Why could the gospel not be preached "to the world" prior to his ascension? Ancient Israel had the gospel preached to them, and Jesus preached the gospel from the beginning of his ministry.  

Matthew 11:5: "The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them." 

Hebrews 4:2: "For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it."

As far as the rest of the world, it is but an assumption that the gospel could not be preached or known to the Gentile nations.

At the outset of this chapter we are primarily concerned with four basic questions that constitute a mystery that needs to be revealed with understanding:

1. Who and what is Christ? Why did he appear on earth?
   
   

2. What is and why was the Church brought into existence?
   
   

3. What is the gospel the Church is commissioned to proclaim?
   
   

4. What is the history of the Church? Why is Christianity so different today than at its inception in the first century? (p. 206)

The mystery of the Church now gets broken down into 4 "sub-mysteries." (Actually, 8, but who’s counting?)

So this we know. Whatever the Church is, it belongs to GOD and its name is the CHURCH OF GOD. Jesus Christ is its founder, and he its living HEAD. (p. 208)

There is a bit of backward thinking going on here. For instance, suppose the church of God were called in Scripture, the Church of the Eternal. Would HWA have called His organization, "Worldwide Church of the Eternal" or something else? It should also be pointed out that HWA defines the church as the "ekklesia," the "called out" of God, but then insists that this ecclesia is his group, and no other group is the ekklesia. One is not an "ekklesia" unless a part of the group. It is double-talk. If one were to critically evaluate these concepts, they are incompatible. Jesus the Christ places those who believe the gospel within his "church," because they now possess the Holy Spirit. They are positionally along side of Jesus. They collectively are the bride of Christ. The organization they happen to attend, or not attend, is irrelevant to this context. What we really see here is the creation of more cognitive dissonance that tends to make one abandon critical thinking when you might expect critical thinking would be triggered instead.

HWA also makes the point that the church is called "Church of God" twelve times in Scripture, as though to set this up as proof that "his church" is the same Church of God. What is overlooked are those Scriptures that state something else:

Colossians 1:24: "Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:"

The church is the body of Christ; Christ’s body; Christ’s church.

Romans 12:5: "So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another."

1 Corinthians 12:27: "Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular."

And actually, his gospel—the message sent by him from God—was the good news of the kingdom of God. And the kingdom of God, as we shall see, is to be the restoration of the government of God over the earth and the ousting of Satan from that throne. (p. 209)

As pointed out before, if this indeed is the gospel, we should find it espoused by the apostles in their writings and in the book of Acts. Good luck. What we find being preached by the apostles is not a gospel of the kingdom being the government of God administered through the law, but rather about Jesus and faith in Him, to which HWA declared no one was going to be saved by just believing in Jesus.

HWA says "we shall see" that this is the gospel. It has yet to be "proven," but he has stated it over and over that this is the gospel, and he will continue to do so without showing any solid Biblical evidence.

Next, what nearly all "Christians," including theologians, did not realize: Jesus was born to become a KING! (p. 209)

Why would HWA want people to believe Jesus was born to become a king instead of having been born a king? Because he wants to make the case that Jesus first had to qualify, even as he insists we have to qualify to become born sons of God. The language he uses here is worthy of a false prophet for all its subtlety and deceit.

As he hung on the cross, helpless, a soldier stabbed him with a spear, he screamed in pain (Matt. 27:50, Moffatt) and then died. He did this because you and I have transgressed the law of God. (pp. 212-213)

Matthew 27:50 does not say Jesus was stabbed with a spear and screamed in pain as a result. It says "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost" which means he dismissed His spirit. Luke 23:46 also says, "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, 'Father, into thy hands I commend my sprit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost [spirit]." 

Jesus was stabbed with a spear after his death, where water and blood came forth, proving He was indeed dead.

Neither did Jesus suffer death because of people having specifically transgressed the law. Sin was in the world before the law. (Romans 5:13) Jesus was paying that penalty of sin for all mankind, including those not under the law.

HWA tried to make the case that this law of God is eternal and has existed from the beginning. It’s not possible, despite what rationale is used to declare otherwise.

Jesus’ gospel was not only good news—it was an announcement or good news proclamation of the coming kingdom of God. What a tragedy that a "traditional Christianity" has forsaken and lost that vital and glorious gospel message and substituted their own gospel about the person of Christ. (p. 213)

Down through the centuries many Christians have believed that Jesus is to return and set up His kingdom. What Christian has not read and repeated the sample prayer that states, "Thy kingdom come?"

Allow me to rephrase the statement of HWA above from the another perspective:

What a tragedy that men come along, agreeing that Jesus is indeed the Christ, then lead men away from Christ to another gospel; a gospel in which there is no salvation. No one is going to be saved through believing God is going to set up a government of God on earth. Salvation comes through Christ Jesus. Salvation comes through faith in Him, and not faith in a kingdom or government. Salvation is through the King of this kingdom, and no one enters by any other way save through Jesus the Christ.

HWA goes on to make his case for the gospel being the government of God, with those called out now qualifying for positions within that government. And how do these people qualify? Through keeping the law. It’s a nice, neat package deal, and up front it sounds all so logical and flawless. I would remind the reader of the words of Jesus Himself wherein He said that if it were possible, even the elect would be deceived. (Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22) The false gospel(s) would be that good and that convincing.

But it isn’t all about government. It’s about family. Christians are the bride of Christ and not the subjects of Christ. The "covenant" Christians today are a part of is a marriage covenant, and not a governmental-contractural covenant, such as the old covenant. Christians are "bound" to Christ; not "bound" to the law and Christ.

Romans 7:4: "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."

HWA would argue that to do away with the law in this case is to do away with sin, thereby allowing people to do whatever they wish with impunity. Anarchy would result. People would be killing one another with abandon. But let’s put this thought into its proper perspective and take the thought out to its logical conclusion.

We are talking about those whom God has given the Holy Spirit. They are now led by His Spirit, and not their own lusts and desires. So are we to conclude, as HWA insists, that Christians would now go about creating mayhem? But this is the implication HWA would have us believe. Christians, with the very Spirit of God within them, are going to run amuck without the law. They cannot be trusted to live and act without the restraints of the law. Their faith and love for God and fellow man count as nothing in this scenario. Under this scenario, love does not fulfill the law. (Romans 13:10)

Following this, HWA insists the Holy Spirit has been withheld from mankind since the sin of Adam. Then he declares that the prophets and the Church being given God’s Spirit is an "exception."

There are no "exceptions" when it comes to the truth. If one believes they have found an exception, what they have really found is something that disproves the belief.

Now because HWA perceives that God is "no respecter of persons" when it comes to salvation (p.215), he concludes God is not calling people at this time "merely" for salvation. But what does Scripture say?

Romans 9:13-15: "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."

Continuing:

Romans 9:18-24: "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?"

Satan has blinded the minds of the unbelieving world and the professing traditional "Christianity" to this fact" (II Cor. 4:4) (p. 216)

This "fact" being those called now are to be trained under persecution in order to aid Christ in the conversion of all mankind later. It sounds so noble. But what, exactly, does II Cor. 4:4 say?

"In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."

Believe not what? That God is going to set up a government ruled through law, or a gospel of Christ? And who is Christ? The image of God. And what shines on them? The knowledge of a government ruled through law, or Christ?

HWA then finishes the thought by once again discrediting Christians and their scholarly theologians as to the "purposes for which Jesus Christ came."

He begins anew, making claims without backing them up.

Jesus did not come to save Satan’s world while Satan sits on the throne deceiving them. (p. 216)

What is the undeclared implication? Jesus cannot call people now? He can only call a chosen few? Didn’t Jesus overcome Satan? Didn’t Jesus say he overcame the world? 

Following this, HWA again reiterates what he insists is what is the unfolding of the plan of God. I will refrain from reiterating his reiteration.

But first, it was imperative that he QUALIFY to replace Satan and set up the KINGDOM OF GOD, by overcoming the devil. (p. 217)

I have lost count of how many times HWA has declared this. I’ll ask this question for the reader to muse over. Did HWA read Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf? Yes, he did. [Read: HWA studied Hitler's book Mein Kampf] What did Hitler teach? Repeat a lie often enough, and people will begin to believe it.

The reader might question why HWA constantly hammers on this theme that Jesus had to qualify to replace Satan. To put it simply, he uses every venue he can think of to justify law keeping. Jesus had to "qualify," and therefore we have to "qualify," and this qualifying does not end until the day one dies. It’s all work and no rest in Christ.

On page 220, HWA uses the analogy of a wealthy person paying a large debt for a friend so that his friend does not end up in prison. He correctly points out that the friend is freed from the debt and its penalty. But HWA does not follow this analogy when it comes to Christ paying the debt for mankind. He insists people are still obligated to continue to pay the debt themselves by keeping the law, thereby placing themselves back in debt to that law, which would require Christ to pay the debt again and again.

Before Jesus (the "WORD"), now the Son of God, could found his CHURCH, those called out of the world into that CHURCH must be freed from the supreme DEATH PENALTY, so that they might inherit ETERNAL LIFE!

Notice the subtle declaration, "might" inherit eternal life. Why "might?" Those who are of the ekklesia are promised eternal life. Can God lie? Is HWA here misrepresenting God? Absolutely.

John 10:27-28: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

1 John 2:25: "And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life."

1 John 5:11: "And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son."

1 John 5:13: "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."

Qualifying for rulership and eternal life, along with Jesus qualifying by overcoming Satan, etc. is a major theme in this chapter. For instance, HWA references Jesus qualifying to replace Satan eight times in this chapter, and that people qualify to rule with Christ six times. One interesting statement of qualifying is that he claims Jesus had to even qualify to become our Savior!

It should be reiterated that Christians do not qualify or overcome by keeping the law. Christians overcome through Christ by faith.

1 John 5:4: "For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith."

The surname Peter had for centuries been a surname or TITLE, designating a religious LEADER, HEAD or HEADQUARTERS. Peter was the first or chief apostle. (p. 221)

No proof is offered for this conclusion that the name Peter stood for these things. But HWA is trying now to establish in the reader’s mind that God works through one man, or one head man. If this were true, then Jesus would not have called twelve to be apostles.

The assumption that Peter was the head or chief apostle is refuted in Acts 15 where the events of the conference show James to be of equal or more influence than Peter.

These Jewish rulers and their chief priests completely MISunderstood Jesus’ gospel message. They knew he proclaimed a government that would take over and rule ALL NATIONS of the earth. What they MISunderstood was the TIME and NATURE of that kingdom of God. (p. 223)

Seeing as Jesus talked to them in parables, couched in the terminology of the kingdom of God, no wonder they misunderstood. They had certain expectations of the Messiah, and this Jesus did not fit the bill. They wanted a government all right, where the Romans would be overthrown and Israel to be pre-eminent among the nations. They "embraced" the kingdom and rejected the king, even as HWA embraces the kingdom, insisting it’s all about government and rulership, but then diminishes the king, whom he calls merely the "messenger of the gospel" and that the gospel is not about the king.

Traditional Christianity has really never understood this basic reason for Pharisaical opposition and persecution of Jesus. (p. 223)

That which "traditional Christianity" understands is rejected out-of-hand by HWA. The Pharisees were big on the law, and thought their salvation was in keeping it, and not faith in Jesus without the law. The law became their god, thus they rejected Jesus.

John 5:39: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Even the Pharisees understood the Scriptures that said one was to love God with their whole being and their neighbor as themselves, but they hated Jesus. Those who were the most fervent in keeping the law were the worst transgressors of it.

Nicodemus said, "Rabbi, we know [we Pharisees know] that thou art a teacher come from God."

The Pharisees KNEW JESUS WAS THE MESSIAH! They were familiar with Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6-7, Isaiah 53. The Pharisees KNEW Jesus was the prophesied Messiah. (p. 224)

I Corinthians 2:7-8: "But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

HWA claims they knew Jesus was the Messiah, and the apostle Paul says they did not. Who were these princes who had Jesus crucified? The Pharisees; the religious leaders of the day. They refused to "know" Jesus was the Messiah. They rejected Jesus in favor of the law, which they administered with brutal intolerance.

Jesus answered immediately, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of god."

But Nicodemus did not understand this. He knew that being born was an actual BIRTH— parturition from the womb of the mother. Today’s theologians do not know even that! They deny a real second birth as a spirit being. They spiritualize away the real truth by assuming that merely saying that one accepts Christ as his Savior constitutes being born again. In this, Satan has deceived them and in turn they have deceived millions of others. (p. 224)

Romans 10:9-10: "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

This confession is what is important, and not an argument over semantics as to how one is to understand being "born again." Just as Nicodemus could not see past the physical, so it is with HWA. He insists the spiritual be exactly like the physical in this regard. If a Christian is referred to as a new creation, and the old man as having been crucified with Him (Romans 6:6), then there is a new birth; a new beginning with God’s Spirit indwelling the individual.

Galatians 2:20: "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."

On page 225, HWA continues this theme, and quotes the words of Jesus wherein he declares that that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. HWA insists on a literal understanding and interpretation here. One wonders then whether he would apply the same reasoning and rationale to the words of Jesus in John chapter 6 where Jesus refers to his body being food indeed and his blood being drink indeed.

It [the kingdom] is NOT composed of mortal flesh-and-blood persons who have "accepted Christ" and joined a church of their choice! Yet millions of church members are deceived about that today. (p. 226)

The pattern of disparaging others and their beliefs continues unabated as HWA makes emphatic statements in the hope people will believe him. The focus here is taken off of those who are in Christ, and the kingdom is again given center stage as though all things revolve around the kingdom and not the King. Here is a simple question based partly on HWA’s perspective. He teaches that Jesus will return and set up the kingdom. So, does Jesus resurrect people first, then set up this kingdom, or does He set up the kingdom, then resurrect people as spirit beings? Can the reader comprehend the distinction? Flesh and blood indeed cannot "inherit" the kingdom; be an integral part of it, yet the kingdom is to be set up on earth where flesh and blood people continue to exist. If Christ puts down all other rule, and the kingdoms of this earth become the kingdom of God, then whose subjects are these people who are flesh and blood? It’s not as black and white as HWA would have you believe.

In order for Christ to RESTORE God’s government over the earth, he would need with and under him a qualified and organized personnel of GOD BEINGS—all having rejected Satan’s false way and having proved their loyalty to the government and righteous ways of God! (p. 227)

As pointed out before, those in Christ are seen as having overcome Satan. There is no need to constantly "prove" their loyalty to God. There is no faith in this form.

What is of interest here though is the psychology behind a narcissist. One must always be proving themselves to this person, and their efforts are never sufficient. HWA was such a person.

Therefore, once again, let it be emphasized that the purpose of the Church is not merely to give salvation to those called into the Church, but to teach and train those predestined and called into the Church as instruments God shall use in bringing the world to salvation. (p. 228)

If this truly is the function of the Church (his church) then HWA did a miserable job of it. For over 50 years his gospel went out to the world, and now it has splintered and fragmented⁶ just as you would expect a work would that was built on sand. The reader must also understand that the "Church" or a "Church" cannot "give" salvation to anyone. A Church is not the venue for salvation, Christ is.

That is why in the New Testament, the Church is called the firstfruits of God’s salvation. (p. 228)

Please note that HWA gave no Scriptural source for this claim. Perhaps it is because no such statement exists?

Anyone who "joins the church of his choice" has not come into God’s true Church. One cannot just "join" the TRUE Church of God. One is first selected and drawn by God the Father through his Spirit, brought to a complete heartrending repentance, and changed in his total life-style, and has also not only believed in and accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior, but also has believed Christ. (p. 229)

First off, the distinction in meaning of what the "church" is becomes blurred, as the church Christ built, and continues to build, is not confined to a specific group run by a self-appointed apostle/prophet.

Second, HWA almost preaches the true gospel, but not quite. Close doesn’t count here. The gospel can be falsified by either addition or omission. HWA says one must also believe what Christ said and taught, and here is where HWA misrepresents Jesus the Christ. HWA has taught that which Jesus and the apostles did not teach, and what Jesus and the apostles taught, HWA does not teach. This is a common denominator of all false religious groups or cults. HWA reserved to himself the "interpretation" of Scripture, and anyone within the group who disagreed, no matter how sincerely, found themselves without the group. I have found it to be an effective method of getting people who believed HWA was right to realize he was wrong simply by asking them some questions based upon what Jesus said and taught along with the apostles. If you don’t know what Jesus and the apostles said and taught, you must conclude, if you are honest with yourself, that HWA was wrong in his theology.

So, once again, WHAT and WHY is the CHURCH? The Church is the called out (from the world) begotten children of God. It is the Body of Christ (I Cor. 12-27; Eph. 1:23). It is the spiritual organism that shall be the "Bride of Christ" —after its resurrection to immortality. then it shall be married to Christ! (p. 230)

That which is described in Scripture as the bride of Christ is the New Jerusalem that comes down from heaven: 

Revelation 21:2: "And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

Revelation 21:9-10: "...Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,"

HWA needs people to believe that the church does not become this bride of Christ until He returns. Scripture indeed describes (in the parables) a marriage feast, and again HWA insists the spiritual follow the pattern of the physical. So what are the implications if the church, or Christians were now "married" to Jesus Christ? The concept of proving one’s loyalty and being required to participate in a covenant opposite Jesus Christ falls to the ground dead, rotten and forgotten. A husband and wife are legally the same entity. The implications are enormous.

Romans 7:4: "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."

This is anathema to HWA’s theology. Christians are now married to Christ.⁷  Now they share in a marriage covenant, and not a covenant as a second party. They are now a party of the first part, Jesus Christ!

What, then, is the necessary prerequisite to receiving UNDERSTANDING? "A good understanding have all they that do his commandments" (Ps. 111:10). (p. 231)

But the Eternal began laying the actual foundation of that ultimate GOD FAMILY through the patriarch Abraham. Isaac, Jacob and Joseph formed part of that prefoundation. (p. 231)

Ever so subtly, HWA tries to build a foundation UNDER Jesus Christ. By doing this, he tries to strengthen his case for insisting people keep the law. But there is no "prefoundation."

1 Corinthians 3:11: "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."

Jesus Christ is the foundation, and not the patriarchs, and not the law.

Ephesians 2:20: "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone";

HWA would have you believe that the prophets are intrinsically tied to the law, but the law of the letter is never equated with this foundation of Christ.

However, the CHURCH is the BEGOTTEN (not yet born) children of God. (p. 232)

When this "corruption" puts on "incorruption" it is not put forth as a birth, but a change in form. When a caterpillar becomes a butterfly, is it a birth? Does the butterfly come into being, or did a change take place? Likewise with those who are born of God. They are a new creation (II Corinthians 5:17). Later, they are raised with an imperishable body, not born.

This whole issue over begotten versus being born is for the purpose of instilling fear within the individual HWA has control over. If you are merely begotten, you stand the chance of being aborted; not coming to full term and losing out on salvation. It has already been pointed out that those who are Christ’s have eternal life now, guaranteed. This birth of the spiritual has already occurred. All that remains is a change of form.

Jesus Christ is described as being begotten by the Father in His human life, and Christians are referred to as being begotten through the gospel. So was Jesus born or was He some sort of embryonic Son?

Through the years from Abraham until Christ, God had called out of Satan’s world begotten and prepared PROPHETS, as the preliminary co-foundation of God’s CHURCH! Jesus himself is the main foundation. (p. 232)

Jesus is not the "main" foundation, and there is no preliminary co-foundation. There is only one foundation, and that foundation is Christ. (I Corinthians 3:11) Like other concepts of HWA’s that are unbiblical, he hammers on them until he is sure people believe him. He sets himself up as his own authority.

Following the above statement, HWA again tries to establish other foundations by claiming the apostles are a second co-foundation. Christ is being diluted and diminished in order to now bring the law to the foreground.

On page 234, HWA states that the Church is the firstfruits of Pentecost, "the very first portion of God’s spiritual harvest" then claims the exact opposite in saying those in the Church are not yet born of God! This is another example of generating cognitive dissonance in order to make the individual more reliant upon HWA. The individual awaits HWA to give him the understanding to cope with the cognitive dissonance, which will never happen. It will never be resolved.

Now before proceeding further, UNDERSTAND WHY only the minute FEW have so far been called to salvation—WHY the world as a whole has been CUT OFF from God—WHY the world has not been yet judged—WHY neither "saved" nor "lost"! (p. 234)

All this is based upon assumptions. No "thus saith the Lord" is produced as proof. Can we afford to base our beliefs on inference and speculation?

John 3:18: "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

Unless God calls and man answers through faith, man is lost. He is condemned already. He is still the offspring of Adam.

One does not receive the Holy Spirit until he has first of all repented. God grants repentance (Acts 11:18). The second condition to receiving the Holy Spirit is faith. That means not only believing in God and in Christ, but since Christ is the Word or Spokesman of the God family, it means believing what he says. (p. 238)

HWA begins this statement with contradiction and a falsehood. God does grant repentance, and repentance is a turning away from the former life and what it entailed. It is not repenting of sin per se, sin being defined as "breaking the law." Neither is this the first step. Belief / faith is the first step. An examination of the conversion of Cornelius and his household proves this. Cornelius believed what he was told concerning Jesus Christ. God granted unto him repentance unto life. Here is what Acts 11:18 says:

"When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life."

HWA does not elaborate on what this belief in Christ entails other than believing what he says. Jesus declared that it was through Him people have eternal life. HWA demonstrated his lack of faith by not believing Christ and concluded that people had to keep the law also in order to maintain their salvation status, or in other words, to "qualify" for salvation, it being an open issue for a Christian until death.

Nothing you can do can make up for past guilt. The blood of Christ has paid the price of past guilt. (p. 238)

What of present and future guilt? Do we then sacrifice Christ anew? No. Jesus’ sacrifice was complete and total. Those sanctified by Him are now a new creation, and these things that previously condemned us can no longer do so. Christians are dead to sin; sin no longer has power over a Christian (see Romans, chapter 6). This whole concept of being dead to sin and dead to the law is lost on HWA. His control over people would be lost if those who follow him were to understand this aspect of being a Christian.

The "salvation" in what is called traditional Christianity does not actually change one into a new and different person. (p. 238)

Salvation is a part of the Christian status. A Christian is one who has God’s Spirit, and those who have God’s Spirit are now saved. Again, it is HWA trying to chop it all up to his own advantage so as to control people.

From this point in the book, HWA reiterates again his theology he has repeated many times prior... Jesus and man qualifying by resisting and overcoming Satan. It is incessant repetition.⁸ 

The 37th chapter of Ezekiel reveals how those of ancient Israel will receive the Spirit of God, if willing, in the Great White Throne Judgment. (p. 239)

If the reader were to examine Ezekiel chapter 37, you would be hard pressed to conclude this happens in the Great White throne Judgment. Israel is returned to the land. They dwell there, and David is restored as king.

On page 242, HWA begins his explanation of church government being hierarchical, (just like the Catholic church). He informs us that all other church organizations are inspired by men and not God. He then repeats that there is but one church, which he now interprets as one church administration, with true Christians a part of this organization. The definition of ekklesia has long since been dropped.

Notice especially, there is only the ONE CHURCH. Not MANY churches. The CHURCH is not divided. There is only one Church. Not a parent church and many little daughter churches that have split off in disagreement. Divisions splintering OFF are NOT STILL IN THE CHURCH. It is the CHURCH that is to marry Christ in the resurrection at his coming—not disagreeing churches—not groups who have broken off! Not a parent church and apostate daughters. That will become more obvious as we continue. (p. 243)

This whole paragraph cannot possibly sit well with Gerald Flurry who broke away from the "church" HWA ruled, claiming that organization was the "one and only church of God." No matter, for Gerald Flurry now owns the copyright to this book, and he has already started altering it to suit his needs.⁹   

An apostle is "one sent forth" with Christ's gospel message, including the supervision of proclaiming that message to the world by means and persons other than himself. Also an apostle was given supervision over all the local congregations or churches (I Cor. 16:1). The apostle Paul had oversight over the churches of the Gentile world (II Cor. 11:28). (p. 244)

An apostle was one trained personally by Jesus Christ. False apostles are those who claim to be an apostle and who preach a false gospel; a gospel not preached by the true apostles, instructed by the very Christ. We have their teachings with us to this day. All too often, false apostles arise and through the misuse of Scripture, lead many astray.

The prophets set in the foundation of the Church are those of the Old Testament, whose writings were used to form a considerable part of New Testament and gospel teaching and functioning. No prophets are mentioned as having either administrative, executive or preaching functions in the New Testament Church. (pp. 244-245)

The words bolded above did not set well with Gerald Flurry who claims to be "That Prophet" and so he has since edited them. (Read: April 13, 2004 letter) It is somewhat reminiscent of the story that the history books in Russia were all loose-leaf binders.

Earlier, HWA claimed the gospel could not be proclaimed until Jesus met two conditions. Here now he claims the gospel teachings are located in the Old Testament, now incorporated into the new.

Notice how thoroughly organized [the church is]: "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God." Notice the Church is a FAMILY, even as GOD is a divine FAMILY—"the household of God." (p. 245)

HWA constantly repeated that the gospel is all about the "Government of God," and that government rules in "the church." What we need to ask here is if the concept of the church being ruled by the "Government of God" is consistent with this family concept.

Matthew 17:24-26: "And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free."

This tribute was a temple tax. If then those within the church are the children of God, they are not to be treated as those who are subjects of a civil power.

The 40^th chapter of Ezekiel, however, describes the building of a temple after the return of Christ. (p. 246)

There is nothing in this chapter to indicate this is a temple to be built after the return of Christ.

HWA continues to describe government in the church as being hierarchical, with all to be speaking the same thing (i.e., no dissent) and that God sets even the lay members within the church. The reader should ask themselves a question here: What form of rulership would a false apostle desire? A "dictatorship" that is the opposite of freedom. And those who would dare challenge or question him are easily dealt with by putting them out of "the church," where the rest of the members would shun them. If it is perceived that it is God who puts them in the church, then it is perceived as God putting them out.

In the example of the conference of Acts 15, it appears everyone was free to have a say in what was happening and in the decision process. Not so in the church led by HWA.

One wanted complete universal world dominion, and called itself "Catholic," which means "universal." What is the name of the Church Jesus founded? (p. 247)

A certain man decided to change the name of "his church" to "Worldwide." Does this not say the same thing?

At the bottom of page 247, HWA says the name of the church is in the name of the Father and is thus stated twelve times in the New Testament. He already covered this back on page 207. One of the reasons this chapter is so long is due to all the repetition in it. One wonders if it is intentional, or he forgot from one day to the next what he wrote.

But what about all the many organized churches labeled under the category "Christianity"—some with millions of members? They are all described in Revelation 17:5: "Mystery, Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth." (p. 249)

An individual’s faith is of no consequence to HWA here. If one is a member of one of these other churches, which includes all other churches, they are under Satan’s sway and control.

On page 251, HWA puts forth those things that these "deceived" churches do not know or teach. As he words it, they "run afoul on pivotal truths." What are these pivotal truths? The proper name of the church (remember the definition of ekklesia?), what the gospel is (in this case, the kingdom of God being "the government and law of God"), and government in the church is based upon his model; "they do not know what salvation is," and they do not understand God’s purpose or plan.

How much of the "plan of God" does one need to understand when affirming Jesus is the Son of God who lived, died, and was resurrected for our redemption? Are these truly "pivotal truths?" Are they essential for salvation?

One original Church, much persecuted and opposed, but still in existence, has these evidences proving it to be the original true Church. (p. 251)

Can one find in Scripture where these "pivotal truths" are evidence of the true church, or is this a case of trying to prove a church as true based upon their own criteria?

Continuing with the same paragraph:

And even this Church, until after the year of 1933, had lost many of these vital truths. At least 18 basic and essential truths have been restored to the true Church since that year. (p. 251)

If it is a matter of these "pivotal truths" being the proofs of the true Church, and these truths were lost to this particular Church prior to 1933, then how, using his own logic, can it be the true Church? It is all circular reasoning.

People naturally and normally think only of and about physical and material things. People do not realize it, but they have been CUT OFF from God! The human mind, unless and until it receives the Holy Spirit of GOD cannot think spiritually—cannot know spiritual knowledge— cannot understand human problems, troubles, evils or purposes of human existence. (pp. 251-252)

One could ask here then why HWA insisted on keeping the physical requirements of the law, that were commanded of a physically oriented people, Israel. What of the spirit of the law? It is ignored, for HWA was guilty of that which he accused others of.

Let it be clearly understood that the time has not yet come when God has opened the tree of life to Satan’s world. (p. 253)

By now it should be obvious that whenever HWA tries to make an emphatic statement, he does so because he knows he has no solid proof for his statement. He does this because he is trying to build a belief system for his followers built on shaky ground to begin with.

If Jesus is that tree of life, He has now made Himself available. The veil has been rent, and the way is clear to the Holy of Holies.

At the end of page 254, and through to page 255, HWA gives his interpretation on the Parable of the Pounds, and equates the "pound" as the Holy Spirit, and that through works, people increase or grow spiritually. Those who do nothing with it, have God’s Spirit taken away from them. They lose out on salvation. He then declares that the parable of the talents "emphasizes the same truth."

These are parables, put forth in order to obscure the meaning of which Jesus was talking about. As such, they can therefore easily be misinterpreted, even to one’s advantage.

The parable does not relate that this man lost out on salvation, it is inferred. What it does point out is that the man was motivated by fear and not love for his master, and he made in essence an accusation against his lord, and he was judged accordingly. The same exists in the talents parable. The true servants of Jesus Christ are motivated by love, and not fear. If anything, the one demonstrates he is a tare, and not wheat; a false Christian and not a true one.

To his disciples, called out of the world to a special commission, Jesus replied, "It is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given." Here is another example showing God is not now calling the world to understanding and salvation. (p. 254)

This ignores that things changed after the resurrection, and their commission to go into the world and teach.

In HWA’s dissertations of these parables, the church is substituted for the Christian. Christians are called out, not a church. By using this language, the individual is subconsciously led to believe that he or she is actually not complete without being a part of this physical body of HWA’s "true church." The individual surrenders individuality. He must become a part of the whole, and in the process he will lose his own identity in favor of the group identity. He will then become a pliable, unthinking, unquestioning minion within the group.

The CHURCH, as initially called in this life, is NOT YET capable of RULING the earth—of sitting with Christ in the THRONE where God originally placed Lucifer—of administering THE GOVERNMENT OF GOD. (p. 256)

Notice again the use of the word church where an individual is implied. He then goes on to claim the purpose of this calling is all about rulership and administering the government of God. No mention of salvation, which actually is given a back seat to rulership. In other words, salvation isn’t enough. We are to be judged as to whether we have qualified to rule, and if found lacking, both rulership and salvation are not achieved; they are lost.

It is not a matter of having "made it into the kingdom" upon being baptized, but a matter of spiritual growth and development in knowledge and in righteous character. (p. 356)

In other words, it is a matter of being compliant and obeying the rules in order to qualify to be a ruler yourself. This sounds more like communist Russia than the kingdom of God.¹⁰   

Following this, HWA makes an accusation that those who have left "God’s church" are dissidents, "resentful and bitter over God’s government."¹¹  No other possibilities are entertained.

HWA then goes on a diatribe against traditional Christianity, accusing them of perceiving of Jesus "only as Savior," and not as coming King to set up His government. It is a false accusation.

The connection between salvation and qualifying for rulership is again made:

They teach that one is already saved on "receiving" (GETTING) CHRIST!

I repeat, the individual whom God calls and adds to his Church is not, at initial conversion, remotely capable of being given POWER of rule over nations! (p. 257)

Notice the use of the word in parenthesis "GETTING." HWA taught that the way of God was the way of "give" and the way of carnal man was "get." So what do we conclude regarding those who believe they are saved when God gives them His Holy Spirit? They are practicing the way of get; they are doing this for selfish motives. They must then prove themselves and qualify for rulership through effort and work! They must prove to God they aren’t just in it for themselves.

The proof that those who receive God’s Spirit ARE saved has already been covered. The reader can do a simple word search of the Scriptures with "saved," "salvation," "eternal life," etc. in order to check the veracity of this.

He is called a "babe in Christ." He has, if repentant and really converted in this preliminary human state, actually received a portion of the Holy Spirit of God. (p. 257)

There is the big word, "if" above. "IF" repentant and "IF" converted at this point, and then he only receives a portion of God’s Spirit. The implications are many. There exists in the person’s mind the constant nagging doubt as to his conversion. And others, such as HWA, are seen as having much more of God’s Spirit than they do, so they better "keep their place."

Receiving a "portion" of God’s Spirit is like saying a woman can be half-pregnant.

But we need to grow spiritually before we are qualified to rule over cities and nations and teach those being converted. (p. 257)

In other words, we need to be properly indoctrinated to preach a gospel of law and government in order to convert people to this gospel, and not the gospel of Christ. Even one new in the faith can preach the true gospel.

On pages 257 through 261, HWA insists that spiritual birth is exactly like human gestation. The Christian is but a begotten and not yet born Son of God. The possibility of spontaneous abortion exists. As mentioned before, this concept is necessary in the HWA theology in order to keep the members off balance and constantly concerned with their salvation status. It provides a method of control over the member. Fear is generated in the individual, as he constantly is unsure over his spiritual condition. The new Christian is seen as having very little of God’s Spirit, and is a babe in Christ.

To help people see through this ruse, understand that the Sprit of God did not come upon the disciples of Jesus until after the ascension of Jesus on that particular day of Pentecost. Now Peter and the rest must "administer" the church, being babes in Christ, as it were. I can imagine the response being that God must have given them more of His Spirit. If God can give more of His Spirit to one or a small group, He can give it more abundantly to all also.

This observation no doubt would be lost on those who still hold to the teachings of HWA, so another simple observation posed as a question will show the falsehood of this line of reasoning: At what point is a Christian developed enough so that God will grant them eternal life? This is a question no follower of HWA can answer. One might cop-out and say only God knows, which implies God is capricious and arbitrary in this determination. There are plenty more rationales for getting around the obvious, but we will let it go at this for now.

A summary of this whole concept is given on page 263:

It is the function of the CHURCH —as the spiritual MOTHER of Christians in it—to develop holy, righteous and perfect godly CHARACTER in those God has called—those God has added to the Church.

This all sounds good up front, what with the church being there to nurture Christians through their spiritual growth. But what do you suppose happened to the eunuch
of great authority under Candace who returned to Ethiopia after being baptized by Philip? (Acts 8:27-39) He obviously shriveled up and spiritually died, seeing as there was no church to nurture him.

At Jacob's well in Samaria Jesus spoke to a woman about the Holy Spirit in terms of "living water."

The woman said to Jesus, "Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not."

Here was a direct request from an unconverted woman for salvation and the gift of the Holy Spirit. BUT JESUS ONLY TOLD HER OF HER SINS—OF WHAT SHE HAD TO REPENT OF! He did NOT say, "Come to me, just as you are, in your sins." (p. 264)

HWA was just making the case, again, that God is not out trying to save people in Satan’s world with a "come as you are" approach. He quotes this example of Jesus with the Samaritan woman as proof.

Do we see here in this example that this Samaritan woman understood she was asking for salvation? NO! She thought Jesus was talking about some literal water that if she drank it, she would never need to draw water from that well again.

John 4:14-15: "But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw."

Now then, was Jesus telling her about her sins; that she had to repent of them?

John 4:10: "Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water."

Either Jesus is a liar, or HWA is. Jesus didn’t offer salvation based upon her "requirement" to see her sins and repent of them, rather Jesus says this has to do with being a gift from God. He mentions she has had five husbands and that the one she is living with now is not her husband, not in order to point out her sins, but to serve as evidence as to who He really is, the Savior and Messiah. (John 4:26)

If the reader insists on HWA’s interpretation, He said nothing condemning or demanding regarding any sin of hers. He asked her to return with her husband, and when she says she has none, he tells her something that only the Christ could know.

A few verses later Jesus makes a statement that does not fare well with HWA’s take on the matter:

John 4:23: "But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him."

The time had come then, and not later; not when "Satan is removed, etc." that people are to be worshiping God in spirit and in truth. That time had not existed prior to that.

So, how did people of Israel worship God prior to this time? Through the law.

Luke 16:16: "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it."

Sin must first be repented of—turned from! It is much more than remorse for guilt. It is a matter of being sufficiently SORRY to TURN FROM the sin, overcome the sin. This reconciles one to God on faith in Christ. (p. 264)

Here we see one of the Great Lies of HWA plainly stated. Often, he is extremely subtle and careful in how he words deceptive teachings.

HWA would have you believe here that you have to overcome your sin via this worked-up repentance, and this reconciles you to God "on faith in Christ." And what is that supposed to mean?

First, we need to understand what reconciles us to God.

Romans 5:10: "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."

Reconciliation occurred by the death of Jesus, and not some worked-up repentance on our part.

Colossians 1:20-23: "And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister";

This all has to do with faith in the truth of the gospel, and not being shaken from that faith by those who would tell you that it is through your own efforts in overcoming your sin you are reconciled to God. God knows that you, on your own, cannot ever overcome your sins; your sinful nature. He gives us a way through the death of Jesus Christ; through faith in Him.

Next, HWA claims that the "church" has a dual function to perform: First, to preach the gospel of the kingdom (and we know what that means to HWA) and second, to feed the flock— the members of the church. He gives this second requirement mere lip service, and wastes no time in informing the reader that the role of these who are supposed to be "fed" are in turn to "fund" (i.e. feed) the ministry so that they can perform the first function. This merry-go-round never stops.

The individual lay member HAS HIS VITAL PART in proclaiming the GOOD NEWS (gospel) to the world. HOW? Not by going out and himself proclaiming Christ's message to the neighborhood or to the world. (p. 266)

Acts 8:4: "Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word."

These were the lay-members who did this. The apostles stayed in Jerusalem.

In some respects, the member is relieved that he or she does not have to "witness" to others. To word it another way, they have been conditioned to believe everyone on the outside is swayed by Satan, and ready to pounce on the one who would dare speak words of God. So the member is relieved and is told he fulfills his responsibility by funding HWA to do that through radio and television along with the publishing endeavors of "the church." The member is relieved of his Christian personal duty to truly be a light, and in so doing, could he be denying Christ? Not in his mind, for to him, he paid his tithes and fulfilled his responsibility. He has done his duty. He funded that which he could not do on his own, and was even told not to try.

Neither can the individual lay member develop and build within him God's holy, righteous and perfect CHARACTER without the operations of the apostles, evangelists, pastors and elders. (p. 267)

Care to find where this is related in scripture? Why would HWA make such a claim? It should be obvious. The member needs to be dependent upon the group and especially the leadership of the group.

The "loner"—the "individual Christian," who wants to climb up into the kingdom some other way than by CHRIST and HIS WAY through his CHURCH—is not being trained in CHRIST'S MANNER OF TRAINING, to rule and reign with Christ in his kingdom! (p. 270)

HWA now gives the church the status of God in regards to salvation. Salvation is not dependent upon Christ only in this scenario.

Only those so trained in the Church will be kings and priests in the kingdom of God.

The person who says "I will get my salvation alone, outside of the Church" is totally deceived. This is not the time when salvation is opened to those in Satan's world. (p.270)

Neither will God let one INTO his family at the resurrection who refused to be part of it now—in the CHURCH—in the spiritual "training season." (p. 271)

According to HWA, a Christian "outside of the church" is actually a non-Christian. He is a part of Satan’s world. This, too, is a common teaching in religious cults; existence is dependent upon the group. Leave the group, and you are doomed.

"I am the vine, ye are the branches." Those not joined with others of the branches, all joined to the main vine, were NO PART OF THE CHURCH,¹² and God the Father will cast them away as DEAD branches. (p. 271)

This quote is from John 15:5: "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing."

HWA insists on inserting himself between Christ and the Christian. It is unfortunate that so many fall for this ruse; believing salvation has all these addendums.

In the book of Revelation, the TRUE Church is pictured in the 12th chapter as the persecuted "little flock," many martyred—put to death for their faith—having to FLEE for safety from persecution, torture and death. (p. 272)

No where in Revelation 12 is the church referred to as a "little flock." The little flock concept is important to HWA’s belief system, for he can’t afford the concept of a large flock. One might be tempted to believe the church is referred elsewhere as a little flock, but the church is never referred to as such. Those referred to as a little flock were the disciples of Christ.

HWA goes on to equate those who believe themselves born again with the Babylonian mystery religion. He never seems to pass on an opportunity to discredit any beliefs contrary to his own.

But doctrinally, remember what the Church is called to help restore—the kingdom, government and character of God. What was taken away? God's law, the foundation of his government and the very essence of God's character and divine life.

In other words, the pivotal point is the SIN question. Sin is the transgression of God's spiritual law (I John 3:4). (p. 273-4)

This is the issue that HWA claimed was the gospel, and that he was going to prove it... later. In the meantime, it gets repeated constantly. You would think that the proof would come first. 

This is perhaps an example of the most effective hook in HWA’s tackle box. First, I would like to point out that HWA claims the law was taken away. When? At what point prior to the coming of Jesus in the flesh did this happen? HWA insists the law has been in force since creation. Secondly, is sin truly the transgression of God’s "spiritual" law? HWA quotes I John 3:4 in order to prove this, and to one not well versed in Scripture, they can’t help but agree.

There are several things here to consider. The passage rendered, "sin is the transgression of the law" in italics is translated from the one Greek word, "anomia" usually translated iniquity or lawlessness. The hyper-literal translation of the word means, "against-law." (a- against nomia- law). It is interesting that in Hebrew, there are separate words for lawlessness and iniquity, but not in the Greek.

The apostle Paul points out that there was sin in the world prior to the law. When confronted with statements like this, HWA and his followers are quick to chop up the law and make distinctions that do not exist in Scripture. He isn’t the only one. A number of legalistic cults practice the same thing, claiming there are divisions in the law such as moral, civil, ceremonial, etc., and the unwitting follower doesn’t realize he has allowed these self-professed teachers of the law to not only interpret which laws are moral, for example, but dictate to him how they are to apply in their lives.

If one looks at I John 3:4 in the light of being rendered as sin being iniquity, it works much better in context. If one is having problems with this rendering, other scriptures concerning sin in relation to Christians need to be examined. Romans chapters six and seven relate that Christians are dead to sin and the law.

There are more resources available on this website that deal with the issue of the law and sin in relation to Christians.

The expression used by Protestants "nailing the law to his cross" can mean only one thing. This is Satan's teaching that by being nailed to the cross, Christ abolished the law, making it possible for humans to sin with impunity. (p. 274)

The irony of the statement above is that the detractors of Paul said essentially the same thing. "Well, let us sin so that grace may abound." (Romans 6:1) Paul stated that those who claimed such had a condemnation that was just: "And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just." (Romans 3:8)

The implication of HWA’s claim that Christians would be free to sin with impunity means that HWA believed Christians could not be trusted with the freedom found in Christ. He insults the Holy Spirit, seeing that the Holy Spirit is perceived as an insufficient guide in the Christian’s life. HWA also makes an accusation, and tries to pawn it off as a truth.  He is saying that if the law were done away, Christians who have God's Spirit would be going about committing adultery, murder, and other acts against the law, lumping Christians with the rest of mankind. He therefore insists the law; what he calls the spiritual law, and even eternal law, is binding on Christians. The law is actually raised to the level of being a savior besides Christ. HWA makes the same mistake as the religious leaders of Jesus' time. The law is elevated to the status of a god. Faith and grace become little more than ethereal concepts without substance. Without the law, Christians would be running amuck. Instead of using scriptural proof of what he claims, he resorts to accusations instead of proofs to make his case. Is this how a servant of God acts?

One last observation on this issue. It was sin that was man’s problem, and not the law. Law helped define and teach what was sin, but did not ultimately define sin. (see: Romans 5:13; Romans 5:20; Romans 7:7) What HWA refused to know is that it wasn’t so much the law that was "done away" with as it was sin in relation to Christians.

Romans 8:3: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:"

If sin is condemned, then what use is in the law; the letter of the law? The end result is that someone like HWA becomes powerless to control others if this is understood.

I Corinthians 15:55-57: "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."

What does a Christian have the victory over? Through the Lord Jesus Christ he has the victory over sin, death, and the law.

The very basic teaching, belief AND DOCTRINE OF God's true Church therefore is based on the righteousness of and obedience to the law of God. (p. 274)

This basic teaching; this basic doctrine, is missing in the doctrines listed in Hebrews chapter 6. If this were so basic, wouldn’t you think it would be mentioned?

As concerning the righteousness of the law:

Romans 3:21-22: "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe:"

The teachings of God's true Church are simply those of "living by every word" of the Holy Bible. (p. 274)

The false premise here is that every word of the Bible is applicable to all men of all time. So why did not the conference of Acts 15 conclude Gentiles be circumcised?

Today's customary gospel about Christ believes that simply "believing on Christ," which is professing Christ as personal Savior, means that one is already saved. Yet Mark 7:7-9 shows that many even go so far as to worship Christ, and all in vain because they do not obey God's commandments—especially the Sabbath—but follow the traditions of men by which Satan has deceived the whole world. (p.277)

Was Jesus talking in Mark, chapter 7, about false Christians, or the people of his day who had the law, and found all kinds of ways to circumvent it? Today, we find those who would circumvent grace and the gospel in favor of the law!

What is of interest in this passage though is how those of Jesus’ time circumvented the commandment that required one to honor their parents. Yet HWA taught that people had to abandon their parents in order to follow him and the "truth." Any support a parent was in need of was to be given to the "church" in the form of third tithe, which ended up being robbed by HWA to support himself and the ministry.

In John 8:30-44 the Jews who "believed on Christ" but who did not believe Christ or keep his commandments were called, by Jesus, the children of their father the devil. In I John 2:4 it shows that he who claims to know Christ as Savior, but does not keep his commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him. (p. 277)

In John 8:30-44 no reference is made to keeping Christ’s commandments.

Those who believed "on" Him, did they continue to do so? No.

John 8:31-32: "Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

The sleight of theological hand in I John 2:4 is the premise that Jesus’ commandments are the Ten Commandments, or the entire law. Jesus indeed had commandments for his followers, and nowhere are they presented as commandments of the law.

At the first the Church was almost wholly Jewish. The unconverted Jews fought to retain the physical rituals and animal sacrifices of the law of Moses. (p. 278)

At the first, the church was completely Jewish.

It is an interesting statement by HWA that it was the "unconverted" Jewish members who "fought to retain the physical rituals and animal sacrifices of the law." When Paul returned to Jerusalem for the last time, he was asked by the leaders of the church to take other men with him to the temple, and perform a purification ritual that would have ended with a sacrifice. (See Acts 21:24-26) The issue was never one of whether Jewish Christians were required to keep the law, but Gentile Christians, as addressed here in verse 25.

Soon a violent controversy arose over whether the gospel to be proclaimed was the gospel of Christ (which was Jesus' gospel or good news about the kingdom of God) or whether they should preach a gospel AB