|
Chapter
Seven - Mystery of the
Kingdom of God
In chapter 7, HWA wastes no time in stating the Kingdom of God is a
mystery, misunderstood and unknown not only to biblical scholars, but
to all the world. This repetitious claim now sounds like a broken record.
Then comes an astounding statement to this reader: This "mystery" is
associated with another mystery "of the gospel of Jesus Christ."
Actually that mystery is connected with its associated mystery, the
gospel of Jesus Christ. Why do the churches disagree on what actually is "the gospel of Jesus
Christ"? During the first twenty or thirty years after the founding of the
Church in A.D.31 a violent controversy arose over the very question of
what is "the gospel of Jesus Christ." (p.293)
Churches do not generally disagree on what the gospel is. They
generally disagree on other things such as doctrines.
What sets up a red flag here though is HWA's usage of the term "violent
controversy" which he has used before in this book, and also in his "Which
Day is the Christian Sabbath" booklet. [Read
my critique of this booklet.] The reason it raises a red flag is
because it is a big fat lie, and whenever HWA tells a lie, he tends to
make it a whopper. People are more apt to believe a big lie than a little
one, so HWA embellishes his lies.
This period of time HWA quotes is within the time period when much of
the New Testament writings occurred. There is no evidence of any "violent
controversy." There were essentially two major conflicts extant:
Gnosticism and Judaizers (the latter were trying to enjoin the law on Gentile
converts). Those who insisted Gentiles should be made to keep the law were
dealt with at the counsel in Jerusalem recorded in Acts chapter 15. Only
by claiming there was this "violent controversy" is HWA able to revive
this apostate belief; arguably the first heresy of the early church.
There ensued a hundred years in which all history of the New Testament
Church was destroyed. It has been called "the lost century of Church
history." When the curtain lifted, about the middle of the second century,
there appeared an entirely different type of church calling itself
Christian, but in the main preaching its own gospel ABOUT Christ, not the
gospel OF Christ. (p.293)
More lies. "All" church history was not lost. There are writings from
those who knew the apostles personally during this time. But in order to
make his case for legalism, HWA must first get rid of the evidence that
contradicts his teachings that could be found during this time frame. He
sweeps the footprints off the beach as it were, so that he can reconstruct
history to suit his needs. [Be sure and read the article on this site,
Faith Once Delivered (Proof Herbert Armstrong Lied About the "Lost" Church
Century!)]
Like all religious "cult" leaders, he must diminish Christ in some way so
as to make something of greater importance in the minds of his followers.
In HWA's case, it is a matter of diminishing Christ in order to magnify
the law. Jesus is then presented to us as the "messenger of the gospel," and
that the gospel is not about Him, it is all about the law in the guise of
the Kingdom of God being the government of God, ruled through this law of
God.
Jesus was a Messenger sent from God with a message, and that message
was THE KINGDOM OF GOD. (p.294)
I mentioned earlier in a previous chapter critique that Jesus did use
the terminology of the Kingdom of God, and with it spoke in parables for
the purpose of disguising the gospel. The fullness of the gospel was
preached by the apostles. No where do we read that the "Kingdom of God" is
the emphasis of the gospel. No where do we read that the gospel is about
the government of God administered through the law. It is a total
fabrication of HWA in order to gain a following after himself and to use
the administration of the law to collect tithes from people's wages,
contrary to the law! But those who believed HWA regarding the Kingdom of
God were not likely to examine the rest of Scripture critically and
pick up on these discrepancies.
Some denominations proclaim a "gospel of grace", some what they call a
"gospel of salvation"; most a gospel about Christ; some a social gospel;
some the "Science of Mind" or "Religious Science."
Not One Is Right! (p.294-295)
The apostle Paul refers to the gospel as being related to grace in Acts
20:24:
"But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto
myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which
I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of
God."
If "Not one is right" then HWA is declaring here that the apostle Paul
is wrong!
HWA then lumps the "gospel of Grace" and the "Gospel about Christ" with
"Science of the Mind" and "Religious Science" in order to make a guilt by
association in regards to the gospel being about Christ. It is an
intellectually dishonest ploy, worthy of a false prophet.
He is the King of the future Kingdom of God, and the Bible in Daniel 7
and other places uses the terms king and Kingdom interchangeably, that is,
the king is, or represents, the Kingdom he rules. (pp.294-295)
Here we witness HWA's use of cognitive dissonance that actually causes
the reader to rely on his teachings while abandoning critical thinking.
HWA hammers over and over that the gospel is not about Christ, but about
the Kingdom. Then he throws in this little tidbit. The terms king and the
Kingdom are interchangeable! Critical thinking would have us realize that
the gospel then IS about Jesus Christ! But knowing this does not suit
HWA's purpose. He has to sell his readers and listeners on the
"government" of this Kingdom, ruled through law.
The truth is not merely surprising—it is shocking—staggering! It is a
Great Mystery! Yet it is truly GOOD NEWS—the most glorious GOOD NEWS ever
to enter human consciousness! (p.295)
It's stupendous! It's colossal! Like a true salesman, he builds up the
excitement and anticipation in the reader. He must make the reader want
this; desire this above all else; get the listener or reader prepared so
that he will gladly part with his money to acquire this pearl of great
price.
It is necessary to believe that GOSPEL to be saved! And how can you
believe it, unless you know what it is? And for 1,900 years, the world did
not know. That gospel was suppressed and replaced by man's gospel about
Christ. (p.295)
If it is a matter of being a "man's" gospel about Christ, then Peter
and Paul were guilty of preaching a man's gospel. Examine Acts chapters 9
and 10 for starters. I might also point out a famous quote of the apostle
Paul:
1 Corinthians 2:2: "For I determined not to know any thing among you,
save Jesus Christ, and him crucified."
If the true gospel is the message of the Kingdom, where is the
declaration by the apostles in the New Testament writings? Whenever the
Kingdom of God is mentioned, it is never dwelled upon; it is never given
specifics.
Acts 28:23: "And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to
him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the Kingdom of
God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and
out of the prophets, from morning till evening."
Acts 28:31: "Preaching the Kingdom of God, and teaching those things
which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man
forbidding him."
Followers of HWA would insist these are examples of Paul preaching the
Kingdom of God, blinding themselves to what is really written here.
Expounding and testifying the Kingdom of God had to do with persuading
people "about" Jesus, and not "about" the Kingdom where Jesus is merely a
messenger. The emphasis is on Jesus, and not the Kingdom.
In the next paragraph, HWA cites how Jesus preached the Kingdom of God;
how he had his disciples and the seventy preach the Kingdom of God, and
how he "taught" them about the Kingdom of God in Acts 1:3. HWA then
totally ignores and rejects all Scripture after that point concerning what
the apostles taught and preached.
Jesus instructed them to remain in Jerusalem until Pentecost. What
happened then? The Holy Spirit made His debut. And what is the function of
the Holy Spirit? To guide them into all truth.
John 15:26: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you
from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the
Father, he shall testify of me:"
John 14:26: "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father
will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things
to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."
The apostle Paul preached THE KINGDOM OF GOD (Acts 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,
31). And God Almighty, through Paul, pronounced a double curse on man or
angel that would DARE preach any other gospel! (Gal. 1:8-9). (p.296)
Let's examine these Scriptures where Paul preached the Kingdom of God
and see if they relate to the Kingdom of God being the government of God
ruled by the law.
Acts 19:8: "And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the
space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the
Kingdom of God."
And what exactly were these "things"? Verse 10: "And this continued by
the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the
word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks."
Acts 20:25: "And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have
gone preaching the Kingdom of God, shall see my face no more."
Acts 28:23: "And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to
him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the Kingdom of
God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and
out of the prophets, from morning till evening."
Notice that the details given here about the Kingdom of God revolve
around persuading the people about Jesus from the writings of the Old
Testament, and this is what was discussed "from morning till evening" and
not an elaboration on the Kingdom in and of itself.
Verse 31: "Preaching the Kingdom of God, and teaching those things
which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man
forbidding him."
Again preaching the Kingdom of God is in relation to those things
concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, and not the Kingdom of God being the
government of God ruled through the law.
HWA constantly tries to shift the focus off of Jesus Christ and on to
an extrapolation of the Kingdom of God and what that means to him.
Galatians 1:8-9: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him
be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any
other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
Does HWA bother to examine what this other gospel is, or does he just
quote this Scripture, and infer the false gospel is a gospel "about" the
person Jesus? What does the context of Galatians bring out concerning this
false gospel?
Galatians 1:16: "To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among
the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:"
Paul preached Jesus among the "heathen." If preaching about Jesus is
the false gospel, why is Paul preaching about Christ?
Verse 23: "But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in
times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed."
Is this preaching of "the faith" faith in the Kingdom of God or faith
in Jesus Christ?
Galatians 2:3-5: "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek,
was compelled to be circumcised: And that because of false brethren
unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we
have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: To whom we
gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the
gospel might continue with you."
Paul begins to expose this false gospel. It has to do with false
brethren who spy out Christian liberty. These false brethren desire to
bring Christians into bondage with a false gospel. Part of this false
gospel had to do with compelling Gentiles (Greeks) to be circumcised.
Where do we find the requirement of circumcision? In the Old Covenant. Is
the Old Covenant ever described as bondage? Yes. It is found in Galatians
4:22-5:1, just a few chapters hence:
"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid,
the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after
the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an
allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai,
which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in
Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with
her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of
us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break
forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more
children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was,
are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh
persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son:
for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the
freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of
the free. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free,
and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."
Could the false gospel be related to teaching people they have to keep
the law; the Old Covenant? Let's continue in Galatians:
Galatians 2:11-14: "But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him
to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came
from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he
withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the
circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch
that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I
saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I
said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the
manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the
Gentiles to live as do the Jews?"
Peter was not acting in accord with the gospel. How? Because he
followed the dictate of the law not to associate with Gentiles. Peter was
"keeping the law" and in doing so, was not following the truth of the
gospel.
Galatians 2:18-19: "For if I build again the things which I destroyed,
I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law,
that I might live unto God."
What did Paul "destroy" that could be built again? The law and its
influence.
Galatians 3:1-3: "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye
should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been
evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you,
Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of
faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made
perfect by the flesh?"
This false gospel that was being taught by those who wanted to spy out
Christian liberty and bring Christians under bondage were teaching the
law. Paul calls these Galatians foolish, for they began with the spirit
and faith, and that was sufficient. Then came those who taught the law;
which law dealt with the flesh. They were convinced by these false
teachers of their false gospel that attempted to add the law to the
gospel, believing it was necessary for achieving "perfection."
Galatians 3:5: "He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and
worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the
hearing of faith?"
Faith and the law are contrasted here by Paul, and continues to be.
It should be obvious (but is not to those who believed HWA) that the
false gospel that this double curse of Paul is in relation to is to those
who insisted people keep the law. For those who believe HWA, it is a hard,
bitter pill to swallow, for it seemed so right to keep the law. The
arguments put forth in favor of the law by HWA were so convincing. No
wonder Jesus states that, if it were possible, even the elect would be
deceived. The deception; the false gospel would be that good—that
convincing. Just try to convince a follower of HWA they are not required
to keep the law and that doing so and teaching others to do so is a false
gospel.
The good news of THE KINGDOM OF GOD is something you must understand,
and BELIEVE, in order to be saved! Jesus Christ said so! You had better be
finding out what it is! (p.296)
Pay close attention to the claim of HWA here: You must understand and
believe the Kingdom of God in order to be saved. It is not faith in Jesus
as the Christ; it is in understanding this gospel of the Kingdom of God.
HWA will now begin to make his case for the gospel being the Kingdom and
not faith in Christ. The Scriptures that show it is faith in Jesus Christ
that results in our salvation are plain enough that I will not quote them
here. This is easily verified to anyone who wishes to do so.
Also note that HWA does not cite any scriptural references for this
most important announcement! He is writing about people's salvation, and
says "Jesus Christ said so," yet doesn't tell us where! How odd!
Because they rejected Christ's gospel 1,900 years ago, the world had to
supplant something else in its place. They had to invent a counterfeit! So
we have heard the Kingdom of God spoken of as merely a pretty platitude—a
nice sentiment in human hearts—reducing it to an ethereal, unreal
NOTHING! (p.296)
Again, HWA has set up a red-herring, insisting on defining the opposing
viewpoint, making an accusation in the process.
I would like to point out that Paul in three passages of his letters
claims love fulfills the law, and James does so once.
HWA claimed that saying love fulfills the law was "but a Protestant way to
ignore the law." Like many other topics, HWA would play it both ways,
creating more cognitive dissonance. To HWA, love fulfilling the law is
seen as a pretty platitude also, having some ethereal non-application.
Then he would say that the first four commandments demonstrated "love
toward God" and the last six, "love toward fellow man." In any event, to
him, the way to properly fulfill the law was to keep the law, abide by the
law; live by the law. In essence, love was not enough by itself; one had
to demonstrate love through keeping the law.
Those who live
by the law will die by the law, as the law could only condemn. Paul called
it, "The ministration of death" in 2 Corinthians 3:7.
The prophet Daniel, who lived 600 years before Christ, knew that the
Kingdom of God was a real Kingdom—a government ruling over literal PEOPLE
on the earth. (p.297)
HWA begins the slow build up to his gospel. He carefully sets the stage
here by claiming Daniel knew about the Kingdom of God being a government.
HWA just makes a small step here; nearly imperceptible. It is an easy step
to go from Kingdom of God to government of God—it seems like a natural
progression. But does Daniel relate that there is a government of God to
be set up, administered through the Old Covenant law? No. Nowhere in the
Book of Daniel does Daniel elaborate on the Kingdom of God being a
government.
The whole purpose of the DREAM was to reveal GOD'S GOVERNMENT—the fact
that God RULES—the truth of THE KINGDOM OF GOD—the very thing that is
the one and only true GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST! And, secondly, to
reveal—preserved in writing for us TODAY—what is to happen "in the
latter days"—actually within the next two decades—THIS LAST HALF OF
THE
TWENTIETH CENTURY! (p.298)
If the whole purpose of this dream was to reveal God's government, then
Daniel's interpretation would have reflected that. But it is not so
specific, even in this minor regard.
What is really interesting here is HWA's "prophesy." This event: God's
Kingdom being set up on earth, occurring in the "last half of the twentieth
century."
Deuteronomy 18:22: "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if
the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD
hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt
not be afraid of him."
One should not believe him either.
This is THE TRUE GOSPEL! It is the very gospel Christ preached! It is
intended for you and me TODAY! It is vital that you UNDERSTAND! (p.298)
The reader needs to realize that the Jews of Jesus' time, including the
religious leaders, understood God was going to set up a Kingdom: God's
Kingdom. Did this impart salvation to them? No.
Do you suppose they would have condemned Christ and killed him for
preaching thus? No. They knew about the Kingdom of God. They, however,
rejected the King. Those who accept the King will be in this Kingdom.
Those who reject Him will not be in His Kingdom. Knowing there is to be
such a Kingdom does not result in salvation. Accepting the King does.
Matthew 21:42: "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the
Scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the
head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our
eyes?"
What did a stone represent in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar that HWA is
writing about here? The government of God? That is HWA's interpretation.
Page 300:
Notice! This is speaking of KINGDOMS. It is referring to Kingdoms that bear rule over the people on earth. It is speaking of
GOVERNMENTS!
This is right after HWA declared on page 299:
This, then, is GOD'S interpretation. It is decidedly not
Herbert W. Armstrong's interpretation.
It is Jesus Christ who takes over the Kingdoms of this world. It is
Jesus Christ who rules; who governs, and not law. He is the government. He
is the King.
Isaiah 9:6: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince
of Peace."
No doubt followers of HWA will still try to claim Jesus will rule
through the law not unlike how Israel was supposed to be ruled by God.
This overlooks, though, the prophesies concerning the New Covenant with the
children of Israel, which will not be like the covenant made with them
when they left Egypt. See Jeremiah chapter 31. A law, the law of Christ,
will be put in their hearts. They will not be ruled through a law written
in stone.
Now here we have described FOUR universal would empires—the only four
that ever existed! (p.301) [speaking of the Kingdoms described by the
image in Daniel]
What's the United States of America? Chopped liver? The U.S.A. is the
greatest, most powerful "Kingdom" that has ever existed, making the
Kingdoms of the past pale in comparison.
She [the false great church] posed as the Church of God—which
Scripture says (Eph. 5:23; Rev. 19:7; Matt. 25:1-10; etc.) is the
affianced "bride" of CHRIST, to be spiritually MARRIED to him at his
Second COMING. (p.302)
Ephesians 5:23: "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ
is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body."
Does this passage say the church (Christians) are "affianced" to
Christ? No.
Revelation 19:7: "Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for
the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready."
Trying to use Scriptures in Revelation to prove a belief is dangerous,
seeing as most of the language used in this book is allegorical;
figurative. For instance, in Rev. 21, the bride of Christ is the new
Jerusalem. In any event, the marriage of the Lamb here in Revelation
already refers to the other as already being a wife, and not just
affianced.
Matthew 25:1-10: "Then shall the Kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten
virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish
took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took oil in
their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried, they all
slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the
bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. Then all those virgins arose,
and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of
your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not
so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that
sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom
came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the
door was shut."
Just as it is theologically irresponsible to try and prove a belief
with the writings of Revelation, so also from the parables. This does not
prove that Christians are considered now only affianced.
Notice also that HWA, in citing these references, includes "etc." as to
infer there are more proof texts, but he is not going to bother to cite
them, as though this truth were self-evident.
Allow me to supply some of the "etc." Scriptures:
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."
Does this say Christians are "married" to Christ at His return, or
presently? Do Christians produce fruit unto God now, or later?
Why does HWA not cite this passage? Because it says two things he does
not want people to know or understand. 1. Christians are dead to the law,
so that, 2. they can be married to Christ... now.
1 Corinthians 6:17: "But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit."
2 Corinthians 11:2: "For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I
have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste
virgin to Christ."
In the next several paragraphs, HWA hammers into the heads of his
readers that a Kingdom and a government are the same: interchangeable.
Once this concept is established, he will move forward to the next step in
his false gospel.
Why do the churches of this world never mention any of these
Scriptures? Millions have attended churches all their lives and never
heard any of these Scriptures about Christ becoming a king or about the
coming Kingdom of God. (p.304)
HWA, with boring regularity, continues to bring up false accusations
against other churches. Does the reader really believe the bulk of other
churches never ever mentioned Christ was born to be King of Kings?
He ascended to the Throne of God. Headquarters of the Government of the
Universe (Acts 1:9-11; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; Rev. 3:21). (p.305)
Acts 1:9-11: "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he
was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they
looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by
them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye
gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into
heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."
Anything here declaring heaven is headquarters of the government of the
universe? No.
Hebrews 1:3: "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express
image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power,
when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the
Majesty on high;"
Hebrews 8:1: "Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We
have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of
the Majesty in the heavens;"
Still no mention of "headquarters of the government of the universe."
(Please note how HWA capitalized the words in his declaration above, as
though it is all an established title.)
Hebrews 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins
for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;"
Revelation 3:21: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in
my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his
throne."
I would like to remind the reader of what HWA claimed earlier in this
book, and was fond of saying: "The Bible interprets itself... it is not
Herbert Armstrong's interpretation." Yet here we see HWA "interpreting" by
drawing conclusions from Scriptures that do not support his assumptions.
He is the "nobleman" of the parable, who went to the Throne of God—the
"far country"—to be coronated as King of kings over all nations, and then
to return to earth (Luke 19:12-27). (p.305)
The referenced Scripture does not say Jesus was coronated, then
returned. And again, HWA is trying to prove something through a parable.
Jesus was born a king. There was never a time He was not the King.
Matthew 2:2: "Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we
have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him."
Matthew 21:5: "Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto
thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass."
Mark 15:2: "And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he
answering said unto him, Thou sayest it."
John 1:49: "Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the
Son of God; thou art the King of Israel."
Why would HWA desire to have his readers believe Jesus was to later be
made a king? Could it be part of the plot to diminish Jesus so as to make
Him, while He was walking the earth, just the "mere" messenger of the
gospel? In all religious cults that claim to be Christian, Jesus as the
Christ, the Messiah, is diminished in some fashion. In the case of HWA, the
Kingdom/government ruled through law becomes more important than Jesus
Christ. HWA has already declared salvation is dependent upon understanding
and knowing his gospel of the Kingdom. I would also point out that he also
declared that the church's function is to bring about salvation also:
The function of the Church is not merely to convert the "firstfruits"—not merely to bring about salvation to those specially called out of the
world and into the Church, but to prepare and train them for these
positions of leadership in the Kingdom when salvation will be opened to
all the living. (p.332)
In all of this, HWA has made not only his gospel a co-savior with
Christ, but his church as well. However, there is only one God; one
Savior, and He is a jealous God who will not tolerate anyone or anything
else being "beside" Him. HWA is guilty of setting up not one, but two
false gods.
Again, he is in heaven until the "times of restitution of all things"
(Acts 3:19-21). Restitution means restoring to a former state or
condition. In this case, the restoring of God's government on earth, and
thus, the restoring of world peace, and utopian conditions. (p.305)
Everything is seen in the context of the "government of God." Do we
find in Genesis an account of Adam and Eve transgressing the government of
God, or disobeying God personally? And what exactly was their sin, and
what does it mean in this context to restore all things? Was not their sin
an act of faithlessness? Could it be that it is faith that shall be
restored? Faith and trust in Him? I would think that another chapter to
this book should be entitled, "The Mystery of Faith" for HWA never touches
on the subject except superficially, if at all, and yet who wouldn't agree
faith is of utmost importance?
And what really is HWA inferring here? That somehow, God lost control
of His "government" and law because Adam sinned? What of Satan's sin?
Would that sin not also qualify for usurping the "government of God"? So
poor God lost control over His creation, and it has taken Him now nearly
6000 years to correct the situation.
At its very climax when delay would result in blasting all life from
off this planet, Jesus Christ will return. This time he is coming as
divine God. (p.305)
One of the teachings of HWA was that Jesus was not "God" when He came
the first time.1
According to HWA, Jesus "could have sinned" and not
"qualified" as Savior, as though Jesus had the Adamic nature.
What a demonstration of the divine power with which the glorified
Christ will rule all nations. Rebellion against God's law and God's rule
must, and speedily will be put down. (p.308)
Can you realize that every unhappiness, every evil that has come to
humanity, has been the result of transgressing God's law? (p.308)
This is part of the progression of HWA's to foster his false gospel.
First, he claimed Christ will return and set up a Kingdom. This Kingdom is
a government. This government is to set up the "law of God." In order to
overcome any possible resistance to this progression and declaration, he
makes the statement above: all evils are a result of transgressing God's
law. It sounds reasonable, but it is not true. This is important for him
to establish, yet he cites no Scriptures in support. For the most part at
this point in the book, he doesn't have to. If people have bought into
what he has written before this, by now they have unknowingly abandoned
their critical thinking skills. Never mind the fact that the law has not
existed since the beginning of humanity. HWA claimed it did, and gives
other rationalizations for this belief, and they have already been
addressed earlier in this critique. As stated earlier, in the HWA
theology, everything is perceived from the perspective of the law.
Everything else is excluded.
If no one ever had any other god before the true God; if all children
were reared to honor, respect and obey their parents, and all parents
reared their children in God's ways; if no one ever allowed the spirit of
murder to enter his heart, if there were no wars, no killing of humans by
humans; if all marriages were kept happy and there were no transgressions
of chastity before or after marriage; if all had so much concern for the
good and welfare of others that no one would steal—and we could throw
away all locks, keys and safes; if everyone told the truth—everyone's
word were good—everyone were honest; if no one ever coveted what was not
rightfully his, but had so much outgoing concern for the welfare of others
that he really believed it is more blessed to give than to receive—what a
happy world we would have! (p.308)
If all these things were so, there would be no need for the law!
1 Timothy 1:9-11: "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous
man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners,
for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers,
for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with
mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be
any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; According to the
glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust."
HWA implies that it is the law that defines what is righteousness as
well as what is sin. Without the law, in his view, people would do evil,
as though the law was responsible . Yet laws come about as a result of
people doing evil in the first place. For instance, if no one ever killed
another in anger, there would be no need to have a law making it a sin to
do so. HWA puts the cart before the horse in this regard.
But, further, God has set in motion physical laws that operate in our
bodies and minds, as well as the spiritual law. (p.309)
Stop and think carefully about what HWA has just
declared here. The "spiritual law" operates in our bodies just like the
physical laws (laws of physics). In other writings of HWA, he has made
this same declaration, equating the law as having control over us just as
the law of gravity. Also note that the law is now declared to be the
"spiritual law" and as usual, no references are given to attempt to
support this declaration.
No longer will Satan be able to broadcast through the air into the
spirit in man. No longer shall he be able to inject into unsuspecting
humans his satanic nature—which we have been misled into calling "human
nature." (p.310)
This ignores that the ultimate problem of mankind is not Satan, but
man's heritage2 , being of Adam.
Romans 5:14: "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over
them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who
is the figure of him that was to come."
1 Corinthians 15:22" "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all
be made alive."
Unless one is born from above; born of God, that one, born after the
pattern of Adam, will perish.
HWA taught obedience to the law, claiming that obedience to the law was
obedience to God. Jesus never referred to the law as "God's law,"
but rather, in conversation with the Jews of his time, referred to it as
"their" law (John 15:25; John 8:17; John 10:34), the "law of Moses" (Luke
24:44; John 7:23), or "your" law (John 8:17, John 10:34);
even stating it was Moses who gave them the law (John 7:19), never "God's
law."
Where people have been misled more than perhaps any other deception, is
in believing the law must be observed; must be kept. People were taught to
be servants of the law; slaves of the law, for, as Paul declared in the
above quote, you are the servant of the one you obey, and if you live to
obey the law, you are the servant of the law, and all the law could ever
do was condemn to death the one who broke it. No wonder Paul declared in
Romans 7:6 that Christians die to the law in order to be bound to Christ. A
Christian cannot serve two masters.
From the time of Christ's supernatural takeover, and Satan's
banishment, God's law and the word of the Eternal shall go forth from
Zion, spreading over the whole earth. (Isa. 2:3). (p. 311)
Isaiah 2:3: "And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up
to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will
teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall
go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem."
It is easy to misunderstand and misinterpret prophesies. The religious
Jews of Jesus' time felt no prophet could come out of Nazareth, and the
Messiah was to come out of Bethlehem. They didn't bother to think the
Messiah could move.
In Jeremiah 31:31, the New Covenant prophesied for when Christ has
returned and set up his Kingdom is described as not being like the old
covenant (law) but is a New Covenant, written on the heart and not written
on stone like the old one. But HWA doesn't bother to make the connection
between the two similar prophesies.
The 6,000 sentence God placed on Adam's world, of being cut
off from God, will be ended. (p. 311)
If there were such a "sentence" it was lifted by Christ after his
sacrifice; not 2000 years later.
What glory! A new day shall have dawned. Peace shall soon come. Men
shall turn from the way of "get" to the way of "give"—God's way of love.
(p. 311)
HWA tends to redefine everything in relation to God and the "truth."
HWA here defines God's way of love as being the way of give as contrasted
to the way of get. This is wrong, but it serves HWA's purpose of getting
people to give... to him.
This is not to say the way of love is not the way of give; that is just
a small part of the overall picture. The way of God is indeed love. As
Paul wrote, the only thing that matters is faith expressing itself through
love, and here we see the dimension missing from HWA's formula. Faith.
But with Christ's coming shall begin the process of re-education—of
opening deceived minds—of un-deceiving minds, and bringing them to a
voluntary repentance. (p.311)
Hebrews 8:11: "And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and
every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from
the least to the greatest."
What HWA cannot understand is that it is God who will change the hearts
of people, and not people changing their own hearts through some process
of Orwellian re-education. It is not completely a matter of "bringing them
to a voluntary repentance" but rather God "granting them repentance."
Acts 11:18: "When they heard these things, they held their peace, and
glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted
repentance unto life."
2 Timothy 2:25: "In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves;
if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the
truth;"
HWA taught that repentance was a process of self-flagellation, as it
were. One had to "work up" an attitude of "I'm bad" in order to please
God, as though it was some process of purging not unlike what was seen
under the Chinese communist regime in times past when one of their top
people were perceived to "slip" from the strait and narrow.
There are other resources on this website that cover
this in greater detail. In the meantime, rest assured HWA will continue to pound into the
minds of his followers and readers that the law, given only to Israel by
covenant, is the law that somehow applies to all men at all times in all
places, contrary to the law! No one can become a party to a covenant who
was not originally a party to it once it has been ratified (put in force).
Even HWA declared
this in his "Which Day is the Christian Sabbath" booklet, then went on to
include Christians into that covenant! [Read my
critique of the booklet]
Once a covenant is signed, sealed, or ratified—confirmed—it cannot
be added to (Gal. 3:15). Anything appearing beneath the signature is not
legally any part of the covenant. You read of the actual making of the Old
Covenant, and sealing it with blood, in Exodus 24:6-8. And notice (verse
8), it concludes with the words "the covenant, which the Lord hath made
with you." (Which Day is the Christian Sabbath) (p.319)
Seeing as people's critical thinking skills have been suppressed
through the indoctrination techniques and mind control techniques after
that, the faithful follower will never even think to question HWA was
wrong or could be wrong. The answers to problems must lie elsewhere, and
convenient scapegoats are easy to find.
Notice what God promised his people: "...if thou shalt hearken
diligently unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all
his commandments which I command thee this day...all these blessings shall
come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of
the Lord thy God. (p.319)
The assumption HWA wishes his followers and readers here to make is
that they are now God's promised people; not Israel. But God is addressing
ancient Israel. It is an assumption to believe this, or any of what God
directed toward Israel and required of them, applies to modern day
Christians. If it did, there would be plain Scriptures to support this
conclusion. The "truth" would be "plain" but instead we see
no such
evidence. All we see are assumptions and rationalizations—a dangerous
way to base one's beliefs on. What better way to fall into error? Yet HWA
did this time after time.
He follows by describing what would happen to Israel, and what will
happen, then makes a heading of how God will deal with other "nations"—and
this is important to see: God is talking about nations and not individuals,
regardless of nationality, later known as Christians.
Once the returning Christ conquers this earth, he will usher in an era
of total literacy, total education—and give the world one new, pure
language. This subject by itself needs a book to describe. The whole
literary processes of the whole earth changed. Today, all languages are
corrupt. They are literally filled with pagan, heathen
terms—superstition—misnomers—exceptions to rules—peculiar idioms.
God says: "For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that
they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one
consent" (Zeph. 3:9). (p.230)
It seems everything has to be defined as corrupt and defiled. HWA's
followers are conditioned to revile anything outside the group. If
language is defiled and corrupt, then so would be the thinking process of
those in the world! This is but part of the process of rejecting anything
or anyone outside the group that might produce evidence counter to their
now excepted beliefs.
Never again will any person become rich from investing in the labors
and creative ability of another person. No more stock markets, world
banks, financing centers, insurance companies, mortgage companies, loan
agencies, or time payments.
In God's abundant government people will buy only what they need, when
they can afford it, when they have the cash to pay for it. No more
interest. And no more taxes. (p.322)
Just before this declaration of HWA's, he stated that Jerusalem would
become the financial center of the earth! More cognitive dissonance.
Also, all these things are pictured in a negative light. Why? One must
think a bit to make the connections.
Before doing so, it should be pointed out that HWA became rich off the
"labors and creative abilities" of others by demanding tithes from their
incomes; their wages.
Why would, for instance, insurance companies be painted in such a
negative light? They serve a valuable service in that one could provide
for their family in the event of their untimely death. After all, only an
"infidel" doesn't take care of his own family. But insurance requires the
payment of a premium; money spent on an "intangible" that HWA sees as
better "spent" on him, therefore this negative regard for insurance
companies. To word this another way, HWA didn't mind
robbing widows and
orphans.
Time payments are useful for acquiring things you need but do not have
the funds for when you need them. But again, money is being spent by the
member or perspective member that might have gone to him.
Then taxes are cast in this evil light. The bane of mankind. No problem
though, for HWA has a "better" idea—tithing, and this is where he goes
next in this chapter that is dealing with the "gospel of the Kingdom"
where the burdens of the Old Covenant are required of Christians today,
and in the "World Tomorrow."
But the tithing system will be universal. (p.322)
No Scriptural references; nothing to back up this matter-of-fact
statement of his. Let the reader read on to see how HWA goes about
justifying this teaching without a "thus saith the Lord."
"Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we
robbed thee? [And God answers] In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with
a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the
tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and
prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the
windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be
room enough to receive it" (Mal. 3:8-10). That's a prophecy for now.
And what a blessing that will be. None of the financial burdens that
curse most peoples today. (pp. 322-333)
What's wrong with this picture? Several things.
1. This is addressed to Israel and not the whole world.
2. Tithes are based upon produce and livestock. One does not put money
in a "storehouse."
3. This prophecy is for now only because HWA declares it so. Again, he
offers no proof of his conclusions.
In short, under the New Covenant, which Christ is coming to usher in,
what we shall see on earth is happiness, peace, abundance and justice for
all. Did you ever read just what this New Covenant will consist of? Did
you suppose it will do away with God's laws? Exactly the opposite. "For
this is the covenant [that Christ is coming to establish, you'll read in
Hebrews 8:10]...I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in
their hearts...." (pp. 326-327)
Notice if you will that this New Covenant is ushered in at the return
of Christ; and not before. Also, HWA neglects to point out a few other
pertinent facts: This covenant is directed toward Israel and Judah, just
as the Old was, and this covenant is not to be like that previous covenant
(verse 9), ergo that previous law.
This New Covenant was already instituted by Christ, and began on that
day of Pentecost. God poured out His Spirit on those assembled in
Jerusalem at that time and place.
Hebrews 9:20: "Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath
enjoined unto you."
Not something to happen in the future; it happened then.
Matthew 26:26-28: "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and
blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take,
eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to
them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new
testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."
God gave seven annual Festivals and Holy Days he commanded to be
observed. They contained great and important meaning. They pictured God's
master plan for working out his purpose for humanity. They were
established forever. Jesus observed them, setting us an example. The
apostles observed them (Acts 18:21; 20:6, 16; I Cor. 5:8; 16:8). The true,
original Church—including gentile converts—kept them. (pp. 327-328)
This should be getting old by now; but God commanded these Festivals to
be observed by Israel, and no one else.
They did not so much picture some master plan as much as they pointed
to Christ and His redemption of mankind.
They were not established forever, and HWA does not bother to "prove"
this.
That Jesus observed them is not a reason to conclude He was setting us
some example. He was Jewish, born under the law (Gal. 4:4) and was obligated to
observe them.
That the apostles would have kept them is also no proof that Gentile
Christians were to keep them. Gentile converts were envisioned as "grafted
in" to those who were of Israel and were in receipt of the promises made
to Abraham, justified by faith only.
From here, HWA goes into a discussion as to how the nations of the
world will be keeping the Feast of Tabernacles during the reign of Jesus
Christ. What is left unanswered and unaddressed is that they are not
required today. He makes the reader assume that, if they were required
before of Israel, and all other people had fallen into paganism, and if
all nations future are to keep them, they must be kept today. It is
another rationalization—another assumption. And as I have stated so many
times prior, assumptions and rationalizations are no way to go about
basing your beliefs.
Then he brings up another sophistic argument concerning the Holy Days,
commanded of Israel to keep, insisting that Christianity today "hates"
those days, and that this is a proof they are to be kept, through the
rationalization he uses. But Christianity does not "hate" the Holy Days.
They are, if anything, indifferent about them. They are seen for what they
are; days commanded of Israel, and no one else. To assume they are
required of all is to make a very large assumption.
In contrast to these Holy Days, HWA insists that the days kept by
Christianity are "pagan" days: Christmas, New Year's, Easter, and others,
claiming God hates these days. So, let's put on our critical thinking caps
and ask the logical question, "What makes these days "pagan"? Their
originations? Then wouldn't it make sense if people were observing
Christmas only if they were observing the birth of some pagan deity? But
the "rationalization" to brand it pagan was in relation to the time of
year (near the winter solstice) and the fact that there is no command to
observe the birth of Christ. In other words, if there is no command to
observe it, it is the same as a command to not keep it. Therefore, by this
rationalization, it is wrong to try and honor God and His Son by having
some observance that acknowledges the birth of the Savior of mankind;
arguably an important event! So what if we don't know the exact day? What
if we did? But then we get into other rationalizations made concerning
birthdays in general, in order to discredit an observation of the birth of
Jesus the Christ.
If we applied the teachings found in the writings of the apostles, we
would understand that we are not to judge others for their observance of a
"day" when we personally have a problem with it. We are not to force our
views or opinions on others over disputable matters. But the temptation is
too great for those self-righteous ones who feel they must tell others
what they can and can't do; what days to observe and not observe, building
their whole belief system one assumption upon another; one rationalization
upon another.
Yet HWA rationalizes that God does not accept this kind of "observance"
or "worship." To word this another way, God does not take into
consideration one's faith. Your faith is subordinated to things physical,
such as the observance of days. HWA here is removing people's faith and
replacing it with physical things, yet God declared those who worship Him
must do so in faith and in truth, and the truth here is that Jesus was
born and did die for sinners so that they could
have everlasting life. This truth and
faith are what are being done away with in true hypocritical fashion,
replacing faith and truth with the observance of the "proper" days which
were not commanded of Christians in the first place! Those that would seek
to deceive will do everything they can to ruin faith and get people's
focus and attention off of Christ and on to something else, in this case
the observance of Holy Days, insisting they are required of Christians.
Another critical thinking exercise then: What happens, according to
HWA, if one does not keep the Holy Days? What happens to one who does not
keep the Sabbath? HWA declares they are not Christians. They are the deceived. Their faith in Jesus as their Christ is counted as nothing;
faith is counted as nothing. Observance of days is what defines a
Christian to HWA. The Sabbath is the "sign" of a true Christian. Critical
thinking would have us ask, "can a false Christian keep the Sabbath?" If
so, then how can it possibly be the sign of a true Christian? If it were,
then all false Christians would be true Christians based upon their
observance of the Sabbath! You may try to rationalize around this,
claiming the false Christian doesn't really keep the Sabbath, but then I
would have to ask you, "do you always keep the Sabbath perfectly?" Then
what's the difference between you and the "false" Christian? Nothing.
Remember, the law required perfect obedience. If you are going to make the
law the yardstick whereby Christians are judged, then you condemn
yourself, and you have neglected faith.
HWA now reiterates the coming Kingdom and government of God. (p. 330)
Rarely does he mention it is Jesus who rules this Kingdom, and is King of
this Kingdom. The main focus is upon the Kingdom, and not the King. The
wording is "Kingdom of God" and not "Kingdom of Jesus Christ." Along with
this, HWA dangles the carrot out by saying that there will be converted
people ruling under God in this Kingdom. Who are these converted people?
Those who follow HWA. Those who "prove" their allegiance to God by keeping
the law; keeping the Holy Days; keeping the Sabbath. It is a religion of
works without faith.
Notice now the wording of HWA concerning this above:
The only hope of justice—of peace—of truth—of right solutions to
all this world's problems—is the coming in power and glory of Christ to
set up world government. Right government. The government of God! (p. 331)
What is the focus on? Jesus Christ, or this government? Which is more
important? Without the King, there is no Kingdom. Salvation is not a
result of believing in the Kingdom, but in Christ. Christ is the way, the
truth, and the life—not the Kingdom. Jesus is the resurrection; not the
Kingdom. The problems of mankind are not solved by the Kingdom and
government, but by Christ.
This gospel of the Kingdom preached by HWA appears to be in line with
what we read in Scripture. But how far off does a gospel need to be in
order to be false? When the apostle Paul addresses the Galatians regarding
the gospel, he calls them foolish for being so easily influenced by a
false gospel; a gospel that is not about the "hearing of faith." They
became influenced by those who insisted on teaching the law. (Gal. 3:1-3)
In the soon-coming government of God, every official placed in
authority shall have been tried and tested, trained, experienced and
qualified, by God's qualifications. (p. 332)
But what of those ministers who claim to head the government of God on
earth today, through the church? How was HWA tried and tested, trained and
when did he acquire the experience to head "the" church? He claimed to
have personal revelation from God. This is an easy claim to make, and who
is going to prove you lied? In this, HWA was his own witness. He was not
tried and tested; he was not trained.
HWA then brings up Abraham and claims that Abraham was the only man on
earth of character who was meek and "submissive and obedient to God—to
God's laws..." (p. 333). This lie has been emphasized over and over by
HWA; everything is about God's law, being equated on par with God Himself.
The only way HWA and those who would follow him can make a case for
Abraham having had the law given to Israel, and having kept that law is to
use inference and assumption from one Scripture:
Genesis 26:5: "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge,
my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."
Notice God says "my laws" and not some other law, given
to Israel later.
On page 334, HWA quotes how Gentile believers are heirs according to
the promise in Abraham, yet HWA neglects to tell his readers about these
promises in that they are not based upon law or obedience to the law.
Romans 4:13-16: "For the promise, that he should be the heir of the
world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through
the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs,
faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. Therefore
it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be
sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that
also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,"
Three men—Peter, James and John, among the original twelve
disciples—were privileged to see the Kingdom of God in a vision (Matt.
17:9) (p. 336)
As mentioned before, everything is seen through the lens of the
Kingdom. In this transfiguration, Jesus is seen in a glorified state, in
the company of Moses and Elijah. There is no setting, such as a Kingdom.
What is important but overlooked by HWA is what was said from on high.
They hear a voice, from the Father, stating: "This is my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased; hear ye him." (Mt. 17:5) They were instructed to
hear Jesus; not Jesus AND Moses and Elijah. Yet HWA constantly insisted
Christians were to "hear" (heed) Moses and the law.
Actually, the gospel and religious development is merely spiritual
education. (p. 337)
The gospel is not to be so trivialized as HWA does here. The gospel is:
"...the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the
Jew first, and also to the Greek." (Romans 1:16)
It is not a matter of education, it is a matter of belief. It is a
matter of faith. One either examines the evidence and believes it, or they
do not.
HWA now goes into the realm of speculation as to which men of the Bible
will be performing which functions in the Kingdom. His favorite phrase
here is "It seems evident" which really means he is guessing. But his
guess is as good as anyone's, so why not proffer his? After all, who can
possibly prove him wrong?
Summary statements:
HWA claimed to reveal the "Mystery of the Ages." Indeed, in
Scripture
there are mysteries from the foundation of the world, but these mysteries
of HWA's are not the mysteries of Scripture revealed.
The mysteries of the Bible, such as the mystery of the Kingdom of God,
have entirely different revelations in Scripture than that of HWA's
interpretations. Everything is interpreted through the law. Grace and
faith were given little more than lip service.
Luke 8:10: "And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of
the Kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not
see, and hearing they might not understand."
HWA rejected the revelations of the Kingdom of God given from the book
of Acts forward. It is as though there was no death and resurrection of
Jesus Christ.
Romans 11:25: "For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of
this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness
in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come
in."
The law had a lot to do with the blindness that was Israel's. There was
a lesson to learn from the law; that no one could keep it perfectly—all
came under its condemnation who tried to live by it. To many, it became an
end in itself.
2 Corinthians 3:12-14: "Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great
plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face,
that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that
which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day
remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament;
which veil is done away in Christ."
Those hung up in the law cannot see that that which was abolished is
what Moses had with him when his face shown. Those hung up in the law
cannot see that this veil has to do with adhering to the Old Testament
law.
1 Corinthians 4:1: "Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of
Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God."
In the New Testament Scriptures, these mysteries are discussed and
alluded to. What is of interest is whether these mysteries of HWA are the
same mysteries that the true ministers of God are stewards of.
Ephesians 1:9: "Having made known unto us the mystery of his will,
according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:"
Ephesians 3:4" "Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in
the mystery of Christ)"
Ephesians 6:19: "And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I
may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,"
Ephesians 5:32: :This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ
and the church."
Ephesians 6:19: "And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I
may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,"
Colossians 1:26: "Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from
generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:"
Colossians 1:27: "To whom God would make known what is the riches of the
glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope
of glory:"
By
William Hohmann (former WCG member and graduate of Ambassador College)
Exit & Support Network™
April 2005
Be
sure and read Kelly Marshall's critical review of Mystery of the Ages
Footnotes
for Chapter Six:
1
See
Jesus' Two Natures, which
show He was both God and man.
2 This can
also be referred to as man's "fallen nature."
|
"And this is
life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and
Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." ~ John 17:3
|
Back
to Table of Contents
Questioning Herbert W. Armstrong
(was he who he said he was?)
My Position in Christ
Prayers
for Freedom From Spiritual Strongholds (very
effective in gaining liberation from many strongholds and oppressions due to
involvement in any harmful cult or occult practices; includes moral issues)
Articles
For Those Who Were Emotionally and Spiritually Abused
Outsider's Inside
Update Newsletters
How Do I Receive Eternal
Life?
Return
to top
No portion of this review may be used or reproduced in any manner
whatsoever without prior permission.
All rights reserved © Exit &
Support Network™
|
Home