Mystery of the Ages
(a 2nd critical review)

By William Hohmann

Chapter Six - Mystery of the Church (Pt. 2 of 2)

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 40th 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 ABOUT Christ, merely preaching the acceptance of Christ as Savior. As apostasy from Christ's truth gained momentum, much of the Church was turning to a different and counterfeit gospel, proclaiming Christ as Savior, but omitting entirely that sin is the transgression of God's spiritual law, and the good news of the kingdom of God, removal of Satan, and restoration of the government of God over the earth and the final opening of salvation to all of humanity, who, when judged, would repent, believe and receive eternal life as sons of God—as actual God beings. (pp. 278-279)

I hope the reader has not forgotten that HWA has yet to produce evidence as to this being the true gospel. He now discredits any gospel that relates to Jesus personally, though, and claims this was a "violent" controversy.

HWA then continues to cite II Corinthians 11:3 and those who would preach "another Christ." If the true gospel is not about Christ, then how can a false gospel be about preaching another Christ?

Then we turn next to Galatians 1:6-7. Paul wrote: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you [you had to be called to become a member of the Church—no one can come to Christ, except those that are called] into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ." The gospel of Christ was the message about the coming kingdom of God. They were already turning to a different gospel. (p. 279)

This gospel that people were turning from was a gospel concerning the grace of Christ. If one could but read the rest of the narrative of Galatians one would see that this false gospel had to do with law. Law and grace are opposite and incompatible.

John 1:17: "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

Romans 4:16: "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,"

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

Romans 6:14: "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace."

Galatians 2:21: "I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain."

Galatians 5:4: "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

HWA would argue that Christians are not justified by law, but then insists one had to keep the law in order to maintain one’s justification. It is circular reasoning based upon his insistence one had to keep the law to avoid sinning.

The gospel of Christ was being diluted as false ministers with their teaching, heavily influenced by the beliefs of Babylon and Persia, steadily infiltrated the congregations. (pp. 281-282)

Paul brings out in Galatians that the apostle Peter was not acting in accordance with the gospel. Paul also had to deal with Jewish members who were going behind his back, insisting Gentile converts be circumcised and keep the law. Why does HWA insist the infiltration came from "pagan" influences, and not Judaism? Because HWA was doing the same thing the Judaizers were doing, trying to bring Gentiles under the bondage of the law; attempting to add the law to the gospel of grace through Jesus Christ.

From here in the book, HWA talks about the churches in Asia Minor that are addressed in the book of Revelation. From these churches, HWA creates the idea that seven church eras13 are being discussed, and conveniently identifies his church with the Philadelphia church; the one with few problems in comparison to the others. Those who hold to similar beliefs, but are not a part of HWA’s "church" are assigned as either being Sardis; the church era preceding his, or Laodicea; following his.14

It was essentially the Babylonian Mystery religion, now being called Christian, accepting the doctrine of grace but turning it into license. In other words, it was the old pagan Babylonian Mystery religion wearing a new cloak: "Christianity." (p. 284)

Does this church known today as the Roman Catholic Church truly take the "doctrine" of grace and turn it into license? If anything, this church has created its own brand of legalism not unlike that of Judaism. HWA took grace and tried to marry it to law.

In about A.D. 365 the Catholic Council of Laodicea wrote in one of its most famous canons: "Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather, honouring the Lord's Day. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ." (p. 284)

HWA left out a few words.15 This says: "CHRISTIANS must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ." (Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Vol. XIV, p. 184)

HWA uses this to prove there were Christians keeping the law, including the Sabbath. He sees it as justification for his beliefs and teachings concerning the law, seeing as those who were doing so were being declared anathema from Christ. But what we really see here is the pot calling the kettle black. Both sides of this supposed debate had abandoned faith and grace for forms of law.

From here, HWA attempts to produce a brief history of the "true" church coming down through time to the present.16 It is nothing more than a construct, and many religious cults have done the same thing; trying to prove they are the direct descendants of the true church down through time. For HWA, this lineage is traced through those who popped up now and then keeping the Sabbath. The Sabbath becomes the defining point of true Christianity, and not faith; not grace.

A new spiritual vitality was infused into it. The time had come for Jesus' prophecy of Matthew 24:14 to be fulfilled—"this gospel of the kingdom shall be [proclaimed] in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." (p.289)

HWA is talking about his church, beginning in 1934. There is an interesting problem with his declaration.

Romans 1:8: "First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world."

Romans 10:18: "But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world."

Colossians 1:5-6: "For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:"

The gospel, according to Paul, was preached to the world then.

To the end of this chapter, HWA claims to be the Elijah who would come and restore all things; those things being the true gospel not preached for 1900 years, along with knowledge of the Sabbath and holy days, etc. He uses the theory of church ages to prove this conclusion.

It should be pointed out that the Elijah to come was to turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to the fathers. This HWA did not do, rather the opposite occurred under HWA’s rule.

By William Hohmann (former WCG member; Ambassador College graduate, 1976, B.A., theology)
Exit & Support Network™
January 2005

Next to MOA Chapter Seven

Footnotes for Chapter Six:

1 See: Why do members emphasize the government of God? from our Q&A (also applies to why HWA/WCG emphasized the same).

2 Certain Bible scholars have stated that Jesus resorted to parables toward the end of His ministry because his enemies rejected His teaching. Notice: "The reason that Jesus resorted to parables from this point [Mark 4:10-12] to the end of His ministry is arresting. His enemies rejected His teachings, and the multitudes had become indifferent to spiritual truths. They were actively interested in His miracles but not in the spiritual application. He now resorts to the use of parables to enlist their interest. The antagonistic attitude of His enemies and the lethargy, indifference and incomprehension of the multitudes necessitated a change to the use of parables so that those who hungered and thirsted after righteousness would be filled and those who wanted spiritual truth could have their eyes opened." (Thru the Bible With J. Vernon McGee, Vol. 4, Mark 4:10-12, p. 176).

3 HWA came up with the "Last Great Day" by putting together the words: "...on the eighth day" from Leviticus 23:36,39, and "the last day" plus "great day of the feast" from John 7:37. However, most Christian Bible commentaries do not consider any feast day named "the Last Great Day."

4 While Pentecost was "related" to Firstfruits, they were each distinct days. Bible scholars include Feast of Firstfruits, along with Pentecost, as one of the feast days Israel observed. Firstfruits pictures the resurrection of Christ from the dead. "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept." "...Christ the firstfruits" (I Cor. 15:20, 23)

5 In this verse the word "rock" in the Greek is petra. The church is built upon the Rock, which is Christ. I Peter 2:4: "To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,"

6 There are hundreds of splinter groups from the WCG today.

7 Christians are also sons of God and adopted sons. "The meaning of first century Greek was one of placing for privileges, not relationship. Those who by faith have been born into the family of God through a second birth are also placed in a position ... entitling them to be heirs of God and joint-heirs with Jesus Christ." (Robert L. Sumner, Jesus Christ IS God! 1983, p. 251.)

8 Repetition is amply used by those whose goal is to control and exploit others. Be sure and read: How Mind Manipulation is Used For Influence and Control.Repetition is amply used by those whose goal is to control and exploit others. Be sure and read: How Mind Manipulation is Used For Influence and Control.

9 April 13, 2004 and April 17, 2004 letters to ESN tells about the changes in MOA that Gerald Flurry has made.

10 Herbert Armstrong stated in a November 24, 1967 Co-Worker letter that he had studied Communism in the 1930's and 1940's and he also made mention of the book, Witness by Whittaker Chambers. (Witness is an autobiographical memoir, written just after Chambers confessed to his earlier affiliation with the Communist Party and testified against his former friend and comrade, Alger Hiss.) For more info on this and to understand how HWA lured people, read: Communism; Fascism; Socialism; Totalitarianism; or Armstrongism from OIU 5, Pt. 3.

11 Likewise, those who leave Gerald Flurry's Philadelphia Church of God, are said to have a "government problem."

12 HWA correlated the Vine to his "true church." The Scriptures teach that the true Vine is Christ, whom we are identified with, not a certain church.

13 Gerald Flurry considers the Worldwide Church of God (founded by Herbert Armstrong) as now being the Laodocian church and his as the Philadelphia Church (or Philadelphia era).

14 Herman Hoeh, evangelist in Worldwide Church of God, was the one who began teaching the 7 church eras to members in 1958 (with WCG supposedly being the Philadelphia era).

15 Read: Did Herbert Armstrong Distort Historical Church Documents?

16 WCG's fabricated beginnings and false doctrines are detailed in chapter 9 and chapter 10 of Daughter of Babylon, The True History of the Worldwide Church of God by Bruce Renehan. (Note: Please be aware that this book is now posted on an agnostic/atheist site.)

Back to Questioning Herbert W. Armstrong (was he who he said he was?)

Mystery of the Ages (a 2nd critical review)

Chapter Six - Mystery of the Church (Pt. 2 of 2)

Mystery of the Ages
(a 2nd critical review)