Herbert W. Armstrong addressed
whether Christians are to keep the Law or not by insisting Christians
were not free to sin, and that sin is the transgression of the Law. (I John 3:4) This concept was so hammered into the membership of the
Worldwide
Church of God (and today Philadelphia Church
of God and similar
offshoots) that it is doubtful anyone does not
have this Scripture memorized.
In addressing the "Sin
Question," HWA never asked the question, are Christians free from
sin? The question was sidestepped, and a rationale was given in its
stead. It was rationalized that sin was disobedience, grace was not
unconditional, and therefore Christians should not sin—sin being
defined by I John 3:4.
Freedom from sin, and being
dead to sin were concepts conveniently ignored and spun away. One who
"sinned" was declared resurrected to sin, in so many words. "Freedom from sin? You
mean free to sin! How ludicrous! How ridiculous! Shall we sin so that
grace may abound?"
The topic, and the Scriptures
associated with the idea, were never given a hearing. The lessons of
Scripture were buried under accusations and knee-jerk rationale.
HWA rationalized away the
concept by declaring Christians would be "free to murder
without consequence"... so much for
addressing the idea based upon Scriptural evidence instead of blind
rationale.
When this accusation is taken
out to its logical conclusion, he would have us ask, "Would a
Christian, in possession of God’s Holy Spirit, go about committing
murder all the time with abandon? If we are going to accept
rationalization and accusations to form our belief system, deception
and false Christianity is guaranteed.
Shall we examine what the
Scriptures say on the subject, and abandon false rationalizations and
accusations? (all bolding
is ESN's for emphasis)
Romans 6:2: "God forbid.
How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"
When one is dead to
something, he is no longer held by its power and control. Those
influenced by HWA were taught to ignore the first part of the passage
and focus in on the latter. One could not live therein, ergo one is
not permitted to sin; another rationalization. Paul is talking about
living in sin where one’s daily life revolved around selfish human
endeavor—a lifestyle where one did not occasionally sin, but
practiced sin as the daily lifestyle. The verses immediately following
I John 3:4 point this out.
In chapter 7 of Romans, Paul
uses the analogy of marriage and the marriage covenant to explain how,
if one’s mate has died, he or she is free to marry another and not
be guilty of adultery.
This example is followed
immediately by the declaration that Christians are dead to the Law.
They are no longer bound to it; they are no longer controlled by it or
answerable to it. Why? How? Paul explains, but those who bought into
HWA’s rationale were blinded to the answer.
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."
Christians are dead to the Law
and to sin so that they can now be joined—be bound to Christ.
Without dying to the Law; without being dead to sin, it is impossible
to be bound to Christ.
One bound to Christ brings
forth fruit unto God; Spiritual fruit—the fruit of the Spirit. The
Law can only arouse sin and sin brings forth death.
Romans 7:10: "And the
commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death."
Romans 7:5: "For when we
were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did
work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death."
Those indoctrinated into
Armstrong theology would insist on bringing up I John 3:4, claiming
sin is the transgression of the Law, with the rationale we cannot
possibly be free from sin. How can we be condemned justly by God for
sin, then turn around and claim we are no longer subject to sin and
the Law?
Romans 3:19: "Now we
know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are
under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may
become guilty before God."
It was necessary to establish
that no one, with or without the Law, could attain to the perfection
of God. All had to know they were guilty before God, unable to attain
that which God requires.
HWA claimed having God’s
Spirit enabled the Christian to keep the Law. What the Law served to
demonstrate was that no one in the flesh could please him. If one
believes what HWA taught in this regard, then why didn’t those
within the "true church" who believed themselves to be the
"True Christians" keep the Law perfectly? They could not and
did not.
The answer is that now
Christians are Sons of God and joint heirs with Christ. Christians
have passed from death to life. They are a new creation, no longer
subject to those things that were prior.
I John 3:4 makes the
declaration sin is lawlessness (anomia). One could debate the meaning
of anomia, seeing as it is usually translated as "iniquity," which is
much more than just lawlessness. When this scripture is quoted, though,
by HWA and those who follow in his steps, the next verse, as well as
the entire context, is ignored. Verse 5:
"And ye know that he
was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin."
The declaration of sin being
lawlessness was used to imply Christians were still required to keep
the Law in order to avoid sinning. This conclusion is assumption.
Christ took away our sins—all of them.1
1 John 3:5: "And ye know
that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no
sin."
John 1:29: "The next day
John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world."
Hebrews 9:26: "For then
must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now
once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin
by the sacrifice of himself."
These truths were obscured by
HWA and others by claiming Christians are not yet born of God, hence
not truly or completely Sons of God, and salvation not a sure thing.
These claims are absolutely necessary in order to foster fear in those
whom HWA desired to rule and control. Without the threat of sin
and its consequences, HWA could not control people through the fear of
sin. Without the rule of law, interpreted by him and how he claimed it
applied to Christians, he could have no power over people and their
money.
One false teaching requires
many more false teachings in order to cover a false teaching. When you
disprove a falsehood, like dominoes, they begin to topple.
All these false teachings are
produced without Scriptural backing. They are based upon false
rationalization and accusation.
Scripture says Christians are
no longer under the Law. Without Scriptural support of any kind, HWA
insisted, "to be under the Law was to be under the death penalty
of the Law, which Jesus paid. Therefore, Christians are no longer
under the death penalty, but still required to keep the Law.
Christians are not free to sin." It is pure rationalization.
If this were true, then every
example where the phrase or a similar phrase is used, it would make
sense in the context of being under the penalty of the Law (the death
penalty) and not what the Scripture plainly says, Christians are not
under the Law.
One need only examine those
Scriptures that use the phrase "under the law" and see if
the context support HWA’s claim or not. It doesn’t take long to
see they do not. One such Scripture alone disproves the claim:
Galatians 4:4: "But when
the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a
woman, made under the law,"
This would mean here that
Jesus was under the penalty of the Law. According to HWA, the only way
one could be under the penalty of the Law was to transgress the Law.
Did Jesus sin?
Galatians 4:21: "Tell
me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?"
It would be incredible to
assign the idea that to be under the Law was to be under its penalty
with this passage. It would mean people were desiring to be under the
death penalty. Not very likely.
So what happens when a
Christian "sins"? Are they brought back under condemnation?
Must Jesus be sacrificed again and again?
Romans 8:1: "There is
therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who
walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
Romans 4:5-8: "But to
him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the
ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also
describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth
righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities
are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom
the Lord will not impute sin."
Jesus came to take away the
sin of the world; the sins of believers. (John 1:29; II Corinthians
5:21; Hebrews 9:26; 1 John 1:7; 1 John 3:5; Romans 8:3.)
If Christians were still held
to the Law, then there should be plenty of examples in New Testament
Scripture, along with other examples of non-Christians being held to
the Law. So then an interesting question to ponder would be... what do
these Scriptures have to say about why people are judged and condemned
now and at Christ’s return?
John 3:18: "He that
believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is
condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the
only begotten Son of God."
John 5:24: "Verily,
verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him
that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into
condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."
1 Corinthians 11:32: "But
when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not
be condemned with the world."
John 3:36: "He that
believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not
the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
Sin, as HWA was fond of
pointing out, was "lawlessness; transgressing the Law." If
Christians were not dead to the Law and dead to sin, we might well
conclude Christians were to "avoid sin" by keeping the Law.
Christians are warned in
scripture to be wary of those who would try to bring Christians under
the Law, by whatever means.
Galatians 5:1: "Stand
fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and
be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."
The bondage mentioned here is
explained in the verses leading up to this. This bondage is defined as
the old covenant Law.
Transgressing the Law is not
what will condemn the world of sin. Rejection of Jesus as the Christ
in whom ONLY we have our salvation results in condemnation.
Christians have transcended
this condemnation through faith, having the righteousness of Christ
imputed to them as a result. They are no longer under the death
penalty. They are dead to sin and the Law.
1 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."
Our victory is over death,
sin, and the Law.
By William Hohmann
(former WCG member and graduate of Ambassador College)
September 23, 2004
Also read William Hohmann's critical review of Mystery of the Ages
Note by ESN: This article is
not to imply that sin (or the old nature) has been completely eradicated in the life of the
believer.
Footnote:
1
Christ took away the "practice of sin" in Christian's lives.
Since He was our sin offering He is able to remove the guilt of sin
and to provide the power to to deliver us from the habit of sinning.
(Excerpted from Vol. 5, p. 789,
J. Vernon
McGee)
My Position in Christ
(accepted and secure forever)
Back to Questioning HWA's
Doctrines