[magisterium]

Ah, yes! This article comes from "The Good News: A Magazine of Understanding." This would be the magazine of a splinter-group successor to Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God, yes? Unfortunately for the late Mr. Armstrong, his many novel doctrines are all over 1900 years too late in their formulation to be expositions of "authentic, primitive" Christianity, and most of the others that he borrowed seldom have, in turn, more than a 200 year-old pedigree themselves, which is equally incapable of establishing apostolic origins to the doctrines! Armstrongism is little more than a cult, in which an appreciation for historical Christianity is of no concern whatsoever. Lauditory, extensive use of that hack and fraud Hislop (!) as source material for much of this article is certain proof of this magazine's complete disregard for the continuous, 2000-year witness of true Christianity, from the Apostolic Era to the Early Fathers, and down to our own day.

What utter rubbish this article is! It makes objections that never existed for very near 1900 years since the time of Christ, and still dares to complain of the novelty of Easter celebrations! Whew!

[Uri’el-2012]

What utter rubbish this article is! It makes objections that never existed for very near 1900 years since the time of Christ, and still dares to complain of the novelty of Easter celebrations! Whew

When you can not refute the argument, ridicule !

[DouglasKC]

Ah, yes! This article comes from "The Good News: A Magazine of Understanding." This would be the magazine of a splinter-group successor to Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God, yes?

The magazine is published by United Church of God. This is from A Brief History of the United Church of God

: Many of the current ministers and members of the United Church of God were once members of the Worldwide Church of God, a nonprofit corporation under the leadership of Herbert W. Armstrong until his death in 1986. A subsequent unwarranted shift toward nonbiblical practices and beliefs led numerous ministers and members to leave the fellowship of that organization.
Concerned with uneven administrative practices of the former assembly, more than 100 ordained ministers developed a new administrative structure that was more directly accountable to members and the ministry.

Unfortunately for the late Mr. Armstrong, his many novel doctrines are all over 1900 years too late in their formulation to be expositions of "authentic, primitive" Christianity, and most of the others that he borrowed seldom have, in turn, more than a 200 year-old pedigree themselves, which is equally incapable of establishing apostolic origins to the doctrines!

I would say that Armstrong didn't really come up with any new or original doctrine. Instead his strength was to publicize biblical doctrine that had been trivialized and ignored by the traditional church. Ideas such as observing God's holy days and not man created holy days were nothing new.

Armstrongism is little more than a cult, in which an appreciation for historical Christianity is of no concern whatsoever.

I can't argue what "Armstrongism" holds because I'm not an "Armstrongite". However, I do know that traditional Christianity has decided that in many cases tradition should trump the bible.

What utter rubbish this article is! It makes objections that never existed for very near 1900 years since the time of Christ, and still dares to complain of the novelty of Easter celebrations! Whew!

The only things that need to be addressed are:

1. Was Easter observed by Christ?

2. Did the Lord specify which days are holy and which days to observe?

3. Did the traditional church stop observing these days and substitute their own?