Posted on 10/26/2009 9:22:24 PM PDT by DouglasKC
I had already reviewed the link prior to my previous post. Your link confirmed my "interesting" language. It splintered off when the WWCOG returned to orthodox Christian theology - the alleged shift to "nonbiblical" practices. As such, it has maintained the same set of beliefs that identified it to be non-Christian. Since you do not deny its close association to the WWCOG under Armstrong, do you hold to Armstong's cultic doctrines and false prophecies?
Although many did consider Wordwide Church of God to be "cultic", United Church of God is not the same organization, doesn't have the same administrative structure, and doesn't have the same leadership.
One of the keys that identifies a cult is not necessarily its organizational structure, but its theology as well. Theologically, UCG in its adherence to Armstongism places In continuing to place the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong above that of the bible, it does carry with it a cultic following of his teachings.
Spiritual discernment should be used for ALL religious teaching and should be verified that it matches up with scripture. Since you have no response to the article am I to assume you agree?
That would be an incorrect assumption. Peal back the layers and your gospel is not much different than what is touted by mormonism. In fact, there are some very close associations - progression to godhood being just another one. Jesus' use of the phrase "gospel of the kingdom" (and parallel derivatives) Jesus was presenting himself as King so that Israel could receive her promise. So that when Jesus said "believe the gospel" He was telling Israel believe the good news that Messiah is here. Jesus' ultimate gospel is presented in John 3:16 - providing the sacrifice to reconcile man to God, providing eternal life.
It was a vision of a future reality...
Mat 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is risen from the dead."
Are you making the case that ALL of orthodox Christianity is bible based?
As such, it has maintained the same set of beliefs that identified it to be non-Christian.
I would say that some of the beliefs challenge non-traditional Christianity. But these beliefs are closer to the Christianity practiced by the first disciples of Christ.
Since you do not deny its close association to the WWCOG under Armstrong, do you hold to Armstong's cultic doctrines and false prophecies?
You would have to define "cultic doctrines" since I have no idea what you're referring to.
Since I was never a member of Worldwide Church of God I have no stake in what Herbert Armstong was or was not. But I don't think he considered himself a prophet.
One of the keys that identifies a cult is not necessarily its organizational structure, but its theology as well.
By that definition EVERY religion is cultic because there's not one universal religion.
Theologically, UCG in its adherence to Armstongism places In continuing to place the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong above that of the bible, it does carry with it a cultic following of his teachings.
Can you show me one doctrine of the Church of God that isn't in agreement with the bible?
That would be an incorrect assumption. Peal back the layers and your gospel is not much different than what is touted by mormonism. In fact, there are some very close associations - progression to godhood being just another one. Jesus' use of the phrase "gospel of the kingdom" (and parallel derivatives) Jesus was presenting himself as King so that Israel could receive her promise. So that when Jesus said "believe the gospel" He was telling Israel believe the good news that Messiah is here. Jesus' ultimate gospel is presented in John 3:16 - providing the sacrifice to reconcile man to God, providing eternal life.
That's a lot of words and theory with a reference to exactly one bible scripture to back it up.
Good question. Did he teach from the New Testament King James version?
Not if the scripture is taken in context with itself. In the case of MT 17:9 'vision' is horama, and you choose the second definition rather than the first which reads :"that which is seen, spectacle" Thayers lexicon specifically identifies Mt 17:9 as a type verse for that definition.
This is supported by the parallels in Mark and Luke:
LK 9:36* And when the voice was past, Jesus was found alone. And they kept it close, and told no man in those days any of those things which they had seen (horao). horao - to see with the eyes, which is in the perfect tense, and describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. It is also Active, meaning subject are participants doing the action, opposite of a dream/vision in which they are not active.
Mr 9:9* And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen (eido), till the Son of man were risen from the dead. Edio - 1) to see 1a) to perceive with the eyes 1b) to perceive by any of the senses
These three verses all tell a different story and interpretation. It was not a vision of a future reality, but the very present here and now physical vision of the apostles involved.
I'm not sure what translation you used here, but the most accurate translations say:
King James: Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Literal interpretation (Greenes') Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would have fought that I might not be delivered up to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from here.
The word translated "now" is the greek "nun"...Thayer's Lexicon defines it as "at this time, the present, now".
So he's saying "....at the present time my kingdom is not of this world."
The concept is that the Jews expected a conquering messiah, a king to crush Rome. Pilate was trying to find out if this was true...if he was the man. Christ was telling him "I'm a king, but I'm not here to have a physical kingdom...yet."
I use the ESV, which I’ll take for accuracy over the KJV...
NASB has it: Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.”
Notice he does not say, “My kingdom is not of this time. If my kingdom were of this time...”
That is why the translators don’t use time (hence)...it can also refer to place, and Jesus is using place earlier in the sentence.
So Jesus was transfigured and glorified BEFORE he completed a perfect sinless life? Before he was crucified?
God called up the "ghost" of Moses and Elijah? He called up the dead?
Deu 18:10 There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer,
Deu 18:11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.
Deu 18:12 For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you.
It's an abomination to the Lord, Jesus Christ, to have someone try to call up the dead. So it's not likely that he himself would do it.
On the other hand a vision of a future kingdom where Moses and Elijah have been resurrected makes perfect sense in the context of the total scripture on the subject.
I would also advise you to look up all the usages of "homara" in new testament scripture. In nearly every verse, save one, it's translated as "vision". And it always refers to a supernatural event that while real, didn't didn't happen in objective reality.
I am making a case that there are fundamental beliefs shared by Christianity that identify it as being Christian. After armstrong's death, the wcg was re-directed to return to those orthodox (proper) beliefs and theology. Those core beliefs are supported by the Bible and are as such bible based.
But these beliefs are closer to the Christianity practiced by the first disciples of Christ.
You may have to leg wrestle the mormons for that claim. Fact of the matter is that what you 'claim' as being closer is not the truth but a doctrinal overlay created by armstrong.
You would have to define "cultic doctrines" since I have no idea what you're referring to.
A couple were cited already. I'll wait further to see if you address them.
Since I was never a member of Worldwide Church of God I have no stake in what Herbert Armstong was or was not. But I don't think he considered himself a prophet.
You posted an article by a ucg author and by your own link show that it split from the wog after armstrong's death because it refused to make the changes back to orthodoxy. If you are a member of the ucg, your roots are the wcg.
BTW, I've seen as many as 209 prophecies of armstrong that have been proven false by history. If he hadn't thought himself a prophet, why all the prophecies.
By that definition EVERY religion is cultic because there's not one universal religion.
Then I'd suggest you look at the definitions of a cult in contrast to orthodox Christianity, as armstrongism is defined as a cult derived from Christianity.
Can you show me one doctrine of the Church of God that isn't in agreement with the bible?
Progression to godhood - right from one of the little on line books at the ucg site. But it doesn't surprise me you overlooked that point. Perhaps anglo-israelism, or may be that 'god' is a family
That's a lot of words and theory with a reference to exactly one bible scripture to back it up.
However, in this case, one verse was more than enough.
The word translated "realm" in the NASB and "hence" in the King James is:
enteuthen
Thayer Definition:
1) from this place, hence
2) on the one side and on the other, on each side
Again, with the use of "nun", he's saying that at the present time his kingdom is not of this place, this world.
Another interesting theory using definition 2 would be that at the present time his kingdom isn't on each side....heaven and earth...just heaven.
Where does scripture list these fundamental beliefs?
After armstrong's death, the wcg was re-directed to return to those orthodox (proper) beliefs and theology. Those core beliefs are supported by the Bible and are as such bible based.
Can you name one?
You may have to leg wrestle the mormons for that claim. Fact of the matter is that what you 'claim' as being closer is not the truth but a doctrinal overlay created by armstrong.
So you say. I say that what I believe is based upon scripture and history.
You posted an article by a ucg author and by your own link show that it split from the wog after armstrong's death because it refused to make the changes back to orthodoxy. If you are a member of the ucg, your roots are the wcg.
My "roots" are in the Christian church of the 1st century. The Church of God exists independently of any organization. The doctrines of the Church of God have been adhered to and practiced by Christians throughout history, both in organizations and out.
The organization I fellowship with, United Church of God, is composed primarily of many who are part of the body Christ. However I'm certain that not everyone who fellowships with United is part of the body of Christ, just as I'm certain that not everyone who claims to be Christian is part of the body of Christ.
BTW, I've seen as many as 209 prophecies of armstrong that have been proven false by history. If he hadn't thought himself a prophet, why all the prophecies.
Beats me. I don't follow Herbert Armstrong and never did. He's dead. He was a great promoter of doctrines that have existed throughout history, but as far as I know he didn't come up with anything new.
Then I'd suggest you look at the definitions of a cult in contrast to orthodox Christianity, as armstrongism is defined as a cult derived from Christianity.
Well it's a good thing I'm not an Armstrongnite then. BTW, many messianic groups hold identical or similar doctrines, to UCG...are they Armstrongites too?
Progression to godhood - right from one of the little on line books at the ucg site.
Progression to godhood?? United teaches that we are children of God. Children look like parents.
1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
Rom 8:16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,
Rom 8:17 and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.
It's not that we become "gods". We don't become God the father. We don't become Christ, the son. That's blasphemy. But we DO become part of God's royal ruling family and joint heirs of EVERYTHING with our older brother Christ.
But it doesn't surprise me you overlooked that point.
Well THAT was snarky...
Perhaps anglo-israelism,
That's not exactly a new belief. The notion of manifest destiny, or the thought of America as a new Israel being blessed by God, has been around for centuries. I'll admit that there's a substantial amount of study needed to verify it biblically....but it can be done.
or may be that 'god' is a family
God is a family. The church is family. Christ is the head of the church, we are members of that body. We call each other "brother" and "sister". God is our father. And that's just scratching the surface...how much more "family" can it get?
Was Jesus sinless at that moment? YES, He was in the glory he had from before the beginning of time (Joh 17:5 )
God called up the "ghost" of Moses and Elijah? He called up the dead?
What a laughable strawman, except that it blasphemous many times over. For starters, specifically show me where in the scripture passages involved here that the term 'ghost' or equivalent term is used (crickets) Jesus answers you lame accusation -
Mk 3: 22 ¶ And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.
23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
26* And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.
27 No man can enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.
28* Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
30* Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.
It's an abomination to the Lord, Jesus Christ, to have someone try to call up the dead. So it's not likely that he himself would do it.
Perhaps you should do a more detailed word study on the subject. Jesus had the power and authority to cast out demons by the legion. God has the power to permit Jesus to speak with the eternal 'spirits' of these men and not demons impersonating them (real meanings of your Deut posting)
On the other hand a vision of a future kingdom where Moses and Elijah have been resurrected makes perfect sense in the context of the total scripture on the subject.
Sorry, the Gospels tell a completely different story doug in the parallel accounts as well as the context of the whole bible. I see a lot of opinion and no bible to support this claim of yours.
I would also advise you to look up all the usages of "homara" in new testament scripture. In nearly every verse, save one, it's translated as "vision". And it always refers to a supernatural event that while real, didn't didn't happen in objective reality.
And yet the other two gospel witnesses to the event use words reflecting physical vision, and they cannot be ignored within the context of scripture - a fact that you have yet to face up to in your 'explanation'. Furthermore, definitions of word are based upon context, and while usage is important, to insist on a singular definition when the other testimonies to the event make it clear that the other definition is correct.
If this was a simple 'vision' as you claim, why was it necessary for them to separate from the rest and go to a high mountain if this was just a 'spiritual' vision, and not a physical one. Secondly, all the other 'spiritual' visions occur with only one person at a time, this involved 3 persons in broad day light.
vs 2 "transformed before them" - indicative mood - a simple statement of fact.
vs 3 "there appeared " - also indicative, simple statement of fact
And were these three talking about the 'future kingdom', what does the scripture say?
Lk 9: 31* Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.
Context means a lot here, and context doesn't support you interpretation that they were talking about a future kingdom, the scriptures tell us they were speaking about the here and now.
If he could do that anytime he wanted then what was the point of living a sinless life? An elaborate charade? A show of piety?
Joh 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
Jesus asked to be glorified just before his death....AFTER he finished the work that his father gave him.
You're telling me that he was glorified BEFORE he finished all his work?
They are listed throughout the Bible and have been compiled by the church. These could contain volumes but include:
Belief in only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4)
Belief in the Trinity (Matthew 28:19, among others)
Belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus (1Co 2:2)
there are many others, but this is adequate for this stage of the discussion
My "roots" are in the Christian church of the 1st century. The Church of God exists independently of any organization. The doctrines of the Church of God have been adhered to and practiced by Christians throughout history, both in organizations and out.
Quaint
The organization I fellowship with, United Church of God, is composed primarily of many who are part of the body Christ. However I'm certain that not everyone who fellowships with United is part of the body of Christ, just as I'm certain that not everyone who claims to be Christian is part of the body of Christ.
Since you bind yourself to that organization, you should be aware of its origins and that ucg is founded upon armstrongism. If you don't want to be a follower of armstrong through his proxy ucg, then perhaps you need to find a real church.
Beats me. I don't follow Herbert Armstrong and never did. He's dead. He was a great promoter of doctrines that have existed throughout history, but as far as I know he didn't come up with anything new.
tsk, tsk doug, I'm disappointed. You follow the doctrines of a group who have founded their doctrinal interpretations upon armstrong's teaching and separated from the wcg because those teachings were being done away with. tsk tsk.
It's not that we become "gods". We don't become God the father. We don't become Christ, the son. That's blasphemy. But we DO become part of God's royal ruling family and joint heirs of EVERYTHING with our older brother Christ.
Tsk, tsk doug, you don't even know the deeper teachings of your group. In a little booklet titled "What Is Your Destiny?" on page 15 it states "But we must be careful here. Human beings are not literally gods—not yet, at any rate. . . . Another aspect of this is that man has the ultimate potential of becoming the same kind of beings the Father and Christ now are.
What is being taught here is that "ontologically" we are equivalent to god, just in the process of being made into a god. How mormonesque of ucg. Best listen to what God says about this :
Isa 43:10* Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
That's not exactly a new belief. The notion of manifest destiny, or the thought of America as a new Israel being blessed by God, has been around for centuries. I'll admit that there's a substantial amount of study needed to verify it biblically....but it can be done.
And has been proven unbiblical over and over again, yet forms the roots of the "Christian Identity" movement - a hyper anti semitic group.
God is a family.
No, God is God in the singular, to say otherwise is to introduce polytheism into the mix, and since ucg believes that others can become gods - they may have strayed into that zone as well.
Because sinful man could not bear under the fullness of His glory and holiness as God the Son. The point of the man living the sinless life was to be the perfect sacrifice for our sins.
Jesus asked to be glorified just before his death....AFTER he finished the work that his father gave him.
That is the restoration of the full glory He had. A permanent restoration of His glory. The mount was only a temporary glorification.
Hbr 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
There is nothing in scripture to indicate that anyone can talk to the "eternal" spirits of dead men. The prohibition against consulting familiar spirits is exactly because men can't communicate with dead people. Demons know this so they impersonate dead people for various reasons.
It's also not scriptural to suggest that anyone besides Christ already has eternal life:
1Ti 6:15 which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords,
1Ti 6:16 who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.
Christians have a down payment on eternal life, the holy spirit of God,
Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 1:14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.
Scripture indicates that the fate of the dead is to sleep in the grave until either Christ returns, if you're a Christian, or until the great white throne judgment if you're not
1Co 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—
1Co 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
I think you misunderstood my question. Where in scripture does it say you have to believe "X" to be a Christan?
Since you bind yourself to that organization, you should be aware of its origins and that ucg is founded upon armstrongism. If you don't want to be a follower of armstrong through his proxy ucg, then perhaps you need to find a real church.
Hey can I play tear down others too? What denomination do you claim?
I don't think you quite understand the point or the import of what you're espousing.
Jesus Christ voluntarily gave up an element of his glory to become human. He became human so he could experience all the temptations that we humans do and remain sinless.
Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
Php 2:7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
Php 2:9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name,
That's the sequence. That's why he asked to be glorified before his death.
Joh 17:1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,
The HOUR had come. It hadn't come before. If he could have attained a glorified state without living a full sinless life then there was no reason for his sacrifice. He wasn't risking, or sacrificing, anything.
There's no need to theorize a "temporary" glorification. The ONLY thing that matches up with scripture is that the transfiguration was a vision of a future glorification...Christ IN the kingdom of God.
It fufills his statement:
Mar 9:1 And He said to them, "Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power."
Mar 9:2 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up on a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them.
Mar 9:3 His clothes became shining, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them.
Mar 9:4 And Elijah appeared to them with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.
He made a statement in verse 1, and then kept the promise by showing those disciples a vision of the future kingdom of God.
Thank you for mentioning the booklet What Is Your Destiny
It makes a clear, scriptural case that God is family, and that we, as his children, are entitled to inherit all things. This shouldn't be a surprise...God modeled earthly things after heavenly things. Earthly families resemble, or should resemble, the heavenly family.
1Jn 3:1 Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him.
1Jn 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
Why do you disagree with John?
Rom 8:16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,
Rom 8:17 and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together.
Rom 8:18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
Rom 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.
Rom 8:20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope;
Rom 8:21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
Dogs beget dogs, humans beget humans, spirit begets spirit. God is spirit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.