Worldwide Church of God: A convert to OT/NT onlyism?

In the early 1930s, Herbert Armstrong began a radio ministry, a magazine and a church that eventually became "The World Tomorrow," The Plain Truth, and the Worldwide Church of God. He had many unusual doctrines. These he taught so enthusiastically that eventually more than 100,000 people attended weekly services. After he died in 1986, church leaders began to realize that many of his doctrines were not biblical. These doctrines were rejected. Today the church and The Plain Truth are in full agreement with the statement of faith of the National Association of Evangelicals. Here is the story of how the church developed and how it changed.

Jesus Christ changes lives. He can change an organization, too. This is the story of how the Lord changed the Worldwide Church of God from an unorthodox church on the fringes of Christianity, into an evangelical church that believes and teaches orthodox doctrines.

The story involves both pain and joy. Thousands of members left the church. Income is less than one fourth of what it once was. But thousands of members are rejoicing with renewed zeal for their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

The story begins in Oregon, in the 1920s. Herbert Armstrong, a newspaper advertising designer, accepted Jesus Christ as his Savior. He described it in his autobiography:

"Jesus Christ had bought and paid for my life by His death. It really belonged to Him, and now I told Him He could have it! From then on, this defeated no-good life of mine was God's. I didn't see how it could be worth anything to Him. But it was His to use as His instrument, if He thought He could use it....

"In surrendering to God in complete repentance, I found unspeakable joy in accepting Jesus Christ as personal Savior and my present High Priest.... Somehow I began to realize a new fellowship and friendship had come into my life. I began to be conscious of a contact and fellowship with Christ, and with God the Father.

"When I read and studied the Bible, God was talking to me, and now I loved to listen! I began to pray, and knew that in prayer I was talking with God. I was not yet very well acquainted with God. But one gets to be better acquainted with another by constant contact and continuous conversation. So I continued in the study of the Bible. I began to write, in article form, the things I was learning."

As Herbert Armstrong studied the Bible, he came to a number of unusual conclusions. Eventually, he began to preach and to lead small congregations of believers. In the early 1930s, he started a radio program and a small magazine.

Armstrong often focused on areas in which his conclusions were different from traditional doctrines. This aroused interest. He emphasized the unusual, the never-before-understood. With advertising flair, he created interest in various doctrines by teaching things that other preachers did not.

Most people did not accept his unusual views, but he persuaded a few people that traditional churches were wrong, and that he had the truth. This small group supported the radio ministry (called The World Tomorrow) and the magazine (called The Plain Truth). Finances were always tight, but the ministry gradually grew along the Pacific Coast of the United States.

In 1947, Herbert Armstrong moved his ministry to southern California, so that he could have better access to the radio industry. He also began a small school to train leaders for the church -- Ambassador College, in Pasadena. Finances continued to be very tight, but the ministry continued to grow as time was purchased on more and more radio stations.

Since the message went out by radio throughout North America, the people who responded to the message were scattered throughout the United States and Canada. Young graduates of Ambassador College were then sent to various cities to gather the believers into small churches.

The church grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s. The radio program was sent to England, Australia, the Philippines, Latin America, and Africa. Church offices were opened in numerous nations around the world. The name of the church was changed from "Radio Church of God" to "Worldwide Church of God."

But growth began to slow in the 1970s. Christ did not return in 1975, as many ministers had speculated. Minor doctrines were changed, weakening some members' respect for Armstrong's doctrinal authority. Armstrong's son, widely considered to be an heir apparent, was accused of improprieties, and he eventually left with a few thousand other members to form the Church of God International.

Another article about Herbert Armstrong For photos of Herbert Armstrong, see Transformed by Truth

Nevertheless, many people continued to be attracted to Herbert Armstrong's style and teachings, and the church continued to grow slowly until Armstrong died in 1986 at the age of 93. He left a denomination that numbered 120,000 people in attendance every week. Annual income was 200 million dollars. Plain Truth circulation was in the millions every month, and the television program was one of the top two religious programs in America.

As the Worldwide Church of God criticized traditional Christianity, it also attracted criticism. Many people considered Herbert Armstrong to be the leader of a heretical cult. Today, the leaders of the Worldwide Church of God reject Armstrong's doctrinal errors, but we do not hide our past. Rather, we acknowledge that our errors were deep and serious, but that Christ has rescued us from them.

In some ways, we were like Saul of Tarsus, who zealously persecuted Christians. He was confronted by Christ, transformed, and given a new mission. Although he began to preach about Jesus right away, his most significant work did not come until more than ten years later, when he became Paul, the missionary apostle.

We hope that we are also used by Christ to proclaim his gospel worldwide. But that is getting ahead of the story. In order to understand the Worldwide Church of God today, it is helpful to see how we started. We turn our attention now to the doctrinal mix that made Armstrong both interesting and unorthodox.

Three doctrines were instrumental in Armstrong's conversion: 1) That God is the Creator, 2) That the Bible is true, and 3) That the Bible does not change the Sabbath to Sunday. Armstrong was guided to this third doctrine by a member of the Church of God (Seventh Day), a small group that has some similarities to the Seventh-day Adventists.

Armstrong was eager to obey God, and he saw in Scripture that God commanded his people to keep the seventh day as a Sabbath. Although most Christians do not keep the seventh day, no one was able to prove to Armstrong that God ever authorized his people to change or ignore this commandment. Armstrong felt that he had to choose between Bible and tradition, and he chose the Bible. However, he had no seminary training, nor any disciplined study of church history, biblical interpretation, or the original languages of Scripture.

He reasoned that if traditional Christianity could be wrong about such a major topic, perhaps they were wrong on other things, too. Armstrong became skeptical of all Christian tradition and he studied everything from scratch. He could not find biblical proof for many traditional doctrines. This bias against traditional orthodoxy became part of the WCG culture, and it was an advertising hook that captured many people's interest.

Armstrong had a high respect for Scripture. If the Bible said it, he was willing to do it, no matter how difficult it might be. His zeal is commendable -- and his respect for Scripture made his message more believable. "Don't believe me," he often said, "believe the Bible. Blow the dust off your own Bible, and read what it says." Many people were surprised at what they found.

Armstrong believed that Jesus is God, but he usually gave much more emphasis to God the Father. That is because some churches focused so much on Jesus that they offered "cheap grace" (as Dietrich Bonhoeffer later called it). Armstrong emphasized God's role as Lawgiver, as One who is to be obeyed.

Armstrong accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior, a substitutionary sacrifice for our sins, as divine. But he did not have the theological training to know how to reconcile the biblical data that Jesus is God and the Father is God and yet there is only one God. He mistakenly taught that God is a family, and that the Father and the Son are two beings in that family, and that when humans are resurrected, they will be born again as members of the God Family.

Armstrong did not see biblical proof that the Holy Spirit was a distinct person, so he taught that the Holy Spirit was an impersonal force. In this, his teaching was similar to the Jehovah's Witnesses, but there is no evidence that he obtained his doctrine from them. This anti-trinitarian view had circulated in several groups.

Armstrong preached that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, but he also stressed the necessity of obeying God. An emphasis on law-keeping formed another major component of WCG culture.

Armstrong believed that if a person loves God, the person will obey God's commands. If a person does not keep the Sabbath, Armstrong concluded, then that person must not love God. Unfortunately, he viewed the Sabbath as the ``test commandment'' — in effect, a requirement for being considered a true Christian. Other churches were false churches, children of the devil.

In addition to the weekly Sabbath, the WCG observed seven annual Sabbaths, based on Leviticus 23. WCG members also avoided pork, shrimp and certain other meats (Lev. 11). They gave one tithe to support the ministry, used another to keep the annual Sabbaths, and in some years gave a third tithe to the church for its poor members. The financial requirements were high, but they also increased the levels of commitment. Where a person's treasure is, there the heart will be also. Members of the WCG had their hearts in the church and its work.

Armstrong taught that repentance involves a change in behavior, that Christianity involves a way of life. In the WCG, this focused primarily on prohibitions. WCG members were not allowed to vote, serve in the military, marry after divorce, go to doctors, use cosmetics, or observe Christmas, Easter and birthdays. All this emphasis on rules, however, meant that grace was rarely mentioned. Many members became legalistic in their own relationship with God, and judgmental of other Christians.

Armstrong viewed himself as God's apostle, leading the one true church. Armstrong had supreme doctrinal authority. If anyone was disloyal, that person would most likely be fired and expelled from the church fellowship. (Legally, Armstrong was under the authority of a board of directors, but they always supported his decisions.)

Armstrong also had many unusual ideas about prophecy, and these may have been the most attractive doctrines of all. He taught that the United States and Britain are modern descendants of the northern ten tribes of Israel, and that therefore many biblical prophecies apply to the Anglo-Saxon peoples. He saw himself as an end-time fulfillment of prophecy, with a message of warning for the "Israelite" peoples.

The Great Tribulation would soon start, he warned in the 1930s, in the 1940s, in the 1950s, in the 1960s, in the 1970s, and in the 1980s — but the good news is that Christ will soon return and rule for 1,000 years. In fact, the millennium was so important to Armstrong that it became the center of the gospel. It was the reason the radio and television broadcasts were titled ``The World Tomorrow.'' The millennium was the good news.

Obviously, there are a lot of doctrinal errors in this list. Equally obviously, we would not describe them as errors unless we had understood why they were in error. We have worked hard to inform our own members about where we went wrong --- and we say "we" with all honesty, for all the current leaders of the church once believed and taught these erroneous doctrines. We have all criticized other Christians as false, deceived, children of the devil.

We have much to apologize for. We are profoundly sorry that we persecuted Christians and created dissention and disunity in the body of Christ. We seek forgiveness and reconciliation.

Much of our doctrinal foundation was faulty. And yet part of it was true. Some of our members came from other denominations, but others were unchurched people who had little previous exposure to Christianity. Many people came to Christ in the Worldwide Church of God, accepted his death for their sins, and trusted in him for salvation. Many lives were transformed from sin and selfishness, to service and humility. A germ of life continued inside the crust of erroneous doctrines.

After Herbert Armstrong died, that germ of life slowly began to grow, breaking off the crust that had once limited it. It took many years --- and many tears. Here's the story:

In 1986, shortly before he died, Herbert Armstrong appointed Joseph Tkach (pronounced Ta-cotch) to be his successor. Tkach had been a loyalist who supervised all the ministers. He was more an administrator than the magnetic personality that Armstrong had been. Tkach assigned other people to present the television program and write the articles.

The church continued to grow slowly. In 1988, Tkach made minor doctrinal changes. He taught members that it was permissible to go to doctors, take medicines, observe birthdays and wear cosmetics. He realized that many of the prophetic speculations that had made the television program and magazine so interesting couldn't actually be proven from Scripture.

Questions also arose about some of the things that Armstrong had written, and some of his books were withdrawn from circulation until further study could resolve the questions. Some members were troubled that the church was no longer teaching the same things that Armstrong had, and in 1989, 3,000 members left to form the Philadelphia Church of God to preserve Armstrong doctrines.

In 1990, the church peaked at 133,000 in weekly attendance. More doctrinal changes were made as Tkach realized that some of Armstrong's unusual beliefs, though sincere, were not biblical. The focus of the gospel is Jesus Christ and grace, not prophecy or the millennium. Budgetary reductions began to affect the television broadcast. More Armstrong literature was discontinued and/or edited.

In 1991, Tkach revised the church's explanation of what it means to be born again, noting also that humans will never become Gods. He also announced a study about the modern identity of the lost ten tribes, and accepted the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Membership, attendance, and income began to decrease slowly.

In 1992, income continued to decrease, and a prominent minister and 3,000 members left to form the Global Church of God.

In 1993, the church accepted the doctrine of the Trinity. The church declared that the cross was not a pagan symbol, that it is not a sin to have illustrations of Jesus, and that Christians may vote. Such changes may seem inconsequential to most Christians, but each change was significant for WCG members because each change attacked strongly held beliefs about how we ought to express our devotion to God. Each change had to be explained from the Scriptures and had to explain how previous explanations were not correct.

In 1994, the television program was cancelled and employees were laid off. The church also explained to the members that true Christians can be found in other denominations.

But perhaps the most traumatic change came in December 1994: Tkach announced that Christians do not have to keep old covenant laws such as the weekly and annual Sabbaths, two and three tithes, and avoid pork, shrimp and other meats. In many ways, the Sabbath had been the foundational doctrine of the entire denomination, so this was the biggest change of all. (Click here for the text of the sermon Tkach used to announce these changes, and click here to see a menu of papers analyzing these doctrines.)

Many members did not accept these changes. After decades of understanding their identity as Christians in terms of Sabbath-keeping, and after making many sacrifices in order to keep the Sabbath, they could not easily accept the idea that it really didn't matter.

In early 1995, hundreds of ministers and 12,000 members left to form the United Church of God. Thousands more stopped attending any church, and many congregations were left with only half the members they used to have. Church income dropped another 50 percent, and hundreds of employees were laid off. Friends and families were split. It was a time of anguish and depression.

Something unexpected also happened: Many members, after struggling to understand the doctrinal change, began to experience a new sense of peace and joy through a renewed faith in Jesus Christ. Their identity was in him, not in the particular laws they kept.

The Sabbath doctrine was changed in order to be more biblical; the result was that members became more spiritual. Members focused more on their relationship with Jesus Christ; they also had an increased interest in worship. Organizationally, this doctrinal change had catastrophic results. But spiritually, it was the best thing that ever happened to the WCG.

Another major change also occurred in 1995: Joseph Tkach Sr. died after a brief battle with cancer. He designated his son, Joe, as his successor, and the board of directors honored this appointment.

A few additional doctrines were changed later in 1995: The church officially rejected the doctrine that the Anglo-Saxons descended from the tribes of Israel, and the church permitted the observance of holidays such as Christmas and Easter.

It was a tumultuous decade. Now, the Worldwide Church of God is about half the size it used to be. The television ministry, once one of the largest in America, is gone. Circulation of The Plain Truth fell from a peak of 8,000,000 down to less than 100,000. The number of employees in Pasadena fell from 1,000 to about 100. Some pastors were also terminated, and lay pastors were appointed for small congregations.

The church's properties in Pasadena are greatly underutilized and up for sale. Ambassador College/University was forced to close because the church could no longer subsidize it, and its properties have been sold. An era of change is coming to an end.

Evangelical churches have also re-evaluated their stance toward the WCG. One of the first friendly groups was the Haggard School of Theology at Azusa Pacific University. Fuller Theological Seminary also helped. Cult-watching groups such as the Christian Research Institute complimented the church when it accepted the doctrine of the Trinity. In 1995, more evangelicals embraced us as brothers in the faith. We cite the International Church of the Four Square Gospel in particular. We are grateful for these gestures of reconciliation.

In March 1996, Joe Tkach wrote an editorial in The Plain Truth [click here for article] apologizing to members and all who have been hurt by the church's erroneous teachings and practices. He asked for forgiveness and cooperation. In July 1996, Christianity Today published a long article on the Worldwide Church of God --- "From the Fringe to the Fold," by Ruth Tucker (pp. 26-32) [click here for article]. And in 1997, the church was accepted as a member of the National Association of Evangelicals. [click here for press release]

The apostle Paul, after his encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus, immediately began to preach that Jesus is the Son of God (Acts 9:20). But he was not immediately accepted into Christian fellowship. The Christians in Jerusalem were skeptical, and it took a bridge-builder named Barnabas to bring him into the group (verses 26-27). Not long thereafter, Paul was sent away to Tarsus (v. 30).

God had great plans for Paul -- but it took quite a while for those plans to be implemented. Paul spent three years in Arabia, many more years in Tarsus. What he preached and whom he reached, we do not know. But it must have been a time for Paul to clarify his thoughts. He had heard the arguments of the early Christians; he knew well the arguments of the Jews who did not believe. And he was faced with undeniable evidence that Jesus was in fact the Messiah.

Paul had help from his new-found Christian friends. He already knew what they were teaching, and they taught him more, and yet he still had more to think about. Why did the Messiah have to die? Why did the Jews not accept the Messiah God had given them? Where had the Jewish religion led them astray? If one could be right with God under old covenant laws, then why did God have to send his Son to die? Paul had to think about all the implications -- thoughts we would later read in his epistles. It took many years to make a transition from a worship rooted in the Old Testament, to a faith based in the new covenant.

Paul, whom God had chosen to be a missionary to the gentiles, was waiting in the wings for many years. Luke tells us that Paul wasn't even around when the first gentiles came into the church (Acts 10). Paul doesn't enter the picture until after many gentiles had already become part of the church at Antioch (Acts 11:20-26). And it was only after some time in Antioch that Paul actually got around to do the missionary work for which Christ had called him.

There are many similarities between the story of Paul and the story of the Worldwide Church of God. We have roots in the old covenant, and the new has been revealed. We have embraced the new with joy, and there have been Barnabas-like people who have helped reconcile us to other Christians, and who have helped teach us. And yet it is taking us some time to understand our identity and our role in the Christian world.

We do not have any delusions of grandeur, that we will be as great as the apostle Paul. We do not imagine that we will turn the world upside down. We do not think we will transform the church like Paul did. But we do expect God to use us to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. Perhaps there is a niche out there that needs our particular experience. Perhaps God is preparing us for situations that do not yet exist. We do not know, but we remain ready to respond to God's leading.

When our foundational doctrines were changed, some people claimed that the Worldwide Church of God should just close its doors and tell all its members to go to authentic Christian churches. Ironically, we heard this not from other Christian churches, but from a few of our own members! They were angry and bitter that the WCG had caused such pain in their lives by teaching erroneous doctrines. They concluded that the WCG had been built on false pretenses and therefore had no right to exist.

We acknowledge that many of our doctrines were erroneous. We acknowledge that the WCG would not exist without those erroneous doctrines. But we do not conclude that Jesus Christ rescued us as a group merely to have us disband. He has bought and paid for this church. It belongs to him, and we have told him that he can have it! If it is of any value to him, he can use it as his instrument, and we are happy to let him lead us. We rejoice in the fellowship we have with him, and we believe that he is already leading us into usefulness.

Due to our shared experiences, we have things we need to learn as a group, and we will not learn these things as well if we disband. We also hope that our shared experiences also give us something to teach.

As a group, we are enjoying a new interest in worship. We are discovering spiritual gifts and lay ministry. We are learning to function in new ways.

Our strengths as a denomination include a high respect for Scripture and a willingness to do what it says. We recognize that Jesus, as our Savior and as our Lord, gives us instructions for our thoughts, words and actions. We know that Christ makes a difference in the way we live. He transforms our lives in this age, as well as giving us eternal life.

We have also stressed prayer and study as important aspects of spiritual growth. Our recent history gives us a concern for grace, and an awareness of legalism.

Of course, the story is not yet over. Jesus is not done with us yet. We are still being shaped and fashioned for his purpose. We praise him and worship him, and seek to know his will for our lives.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For further information on the history of the church, you may wish to consult one of the books listed below:

J. Michael Feazell, The Liberation of the Worldwide Church of God. Zondervan, 2001. J. Thomas Lapacka, Out of the Shadows: Finding God's Truth in a World of Deception. Concordia, 2001. Joseph Tkach, Transformed by Truth. Multnomah, 1997 - this book is no longer in print, but is available on our website. Walter Martin, Kingdom of the Cults. Bethany House, 1998. Earlier editions of this book were written before most of our doctrinal changes were made. The 1998 edition has an appendix documenting our transition into orthodoxy. This appendix is available at http://www.wcg.org/wn/98apr/cult.htm. George Mather and Larry Nichol, Rediscovering the Plain Truth. InterVarsity, 1997. Ruth Tucker, "From the Fringe to the Fold: How the Worldwide Church of God Discovered the Plain Truth of the Gospel." Christianity Today, July 15, 1996. This is available at http://www.wcg.org/wn/96aug27/ct.htm

Can you prove from scripture, not tradition, that Armstrong was wrong about the above?

No one could have ever proven anything to Armstrong, so there should be no surprise there.

Herbert couldn't be proven wrong when it came to divorced people being allowed to remarry as long as their first spouse was still alive either.

That was until he fell for his 46 year old divorced secretary, when he was 86 him self, then he began studying the Bible and lo and behold, he found he was aloud to marry her after all.

All this, while my mother and step father had to separate even though they had been married for over 12 years at the time, and had two boys, and the oldest boy was the one I posted about on this thread #10.

Several local marriages were broken up from that belief until the shoe was on Herbert’s foot, then the scripture became flexible.

The original WWCG has apologized for all the harm they caused, even though they no longer teach the doctrine of separatist you belong to, and yours still tries to divide God's people into camps as they always have.

So were to believe that God has worked for 6 thousand years to save only your little group of a couple of thousand people that are to teach and rule the billions he will call later, am I right about your belief on that?

Acts 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

Is it your contention that Paul was coming to preach on Sunday? If so then how come he's telling them to gather things on the first day day of the week when he's going to be there on the first day of the week? Isn't this the opposite of what he wanted?

Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

This was on what we would call a Saturday night. The first day of the week begins Saturday at sundown. This could have been any night. It wasn't uncommon for the early members of the church to get together to eat...or break bread.

If you take away Christian tradition then these two passages are mighty weak arguments for overthrowing the word of God in the bible and doing away with the worship day he ordained...especially when it's considered how many times it's mentioned that Paul preached on the sabbath.

Armstrong is correct on these three points but that doesn't make him right elsewhere.

True enough. Pick out something else and we'll see if he was wrong or right on it.

I do not assume that the Church is the New Israel. Your question is better addressed to the amils. We dispensationalists do not equate Sunday with the Sabbath or Israel with the Church.

Okay, we'll see who responds...

Can you prove from scripture, not tradition, that Armstrong was wrong about the above?

And can you prove that God ever intended for the Gentiles to keep the Sabbath?

The New Covenant changed everything, the whole Jewish belief was left for them to carry on, but the Gentiles were given a whole new plan of salvation and freedom that Israel never had.

The Jews were to keep the covenant God made with them and Moses, we Christians are to keep the New Covenant that was made at the Last Supper, and which Paul revealed to us during his ministry.

Paul and all the Apostles agreed that all the Gentiles were to be given at that present time was as stated in Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

I realize you're developing a spin on this scripture, but its only your conjecture, and not solid scripture as I have quoted.

The Sabbath was never kept by any man until God gave it to Israel at Sinai, and the Jews still keep it today, but we Christians were never given the Sabbath.

No one could have ever proven anything to Armstrong, so there should be no surprise there.

Apparently Joe Tkach could... :-)

Herbert couldn't be proven wrong when it came to divorced people being allowed to remarry as long as their first spouse was still alive either. Several local marriages were broken up from that belief until the shoe was on Herbert’s foot, then the scripture became flexible.

I'm sorry you felt wronged personally by Armstrong on this issue. Biblically speaking I agree with the first position. I think your parents were doing right in God's eyes and they will have rewards for doing so. But like you and me Jim, Armstrong was only human. Were your parentse free to leave the church if they didn't agree with the doctrine being taught?

Based on the people I know they caused more harm changing the doctrine radically then they ever did before. Don't get me wrong, I've heard of lots of things wrong in Worldwide, but they are nearly all administrative difficulties or authoritarian problems.

I'm sorry Jim, but that's just not accurate. You well know that our doctrine is that most people are going to be saved and given eternal life. An us against them attitude is pretty self defeating if you're going to have to spend eternity with someone whom you disagree with now.... :-)

If by "your little group" you mean United Church of God, no. If by "your little group" you mean the body of Christ, yes. Scripture teaches that the elect will live as kings and priests in God's kingdom. The number in all probability is going to well exceed a couple of thousand. The role of the elect is to teach God's ways to even more people during the milleniel kingdom.

And can you prove that God ever intended for the Gentiles to keep the Sabbath?

If you remove Christian tradition that's the only possible conclusion you can come to.

The New Covenant changed everything, the whole Jewish belief was left for them to carry on, but the Gentiles were given a whole new plan of salvation and freedom that Israel never had.

That's certainly what tradition teaches. It's true that Israel never had an explicit promise of eternal life in the old covenent. But the basic laws of the old covenent applied to the new with one twist: Christ's sacrifice removed the penalty of the law, death, for our past sins. And his live, Christ living in us, helps to ensure that we won't incur the penalty of the law by keeping us from future sin. Not much really changed biblically except in tradition.

The Jews were to keep the covenant God made with them and Moses, we Christians are to keep the New Covenant that was made at the Last Supper, and which Paul revealed to us during his ministry.

Well yeah....

Paul and all the Apostles agreed that all the Gentiles were to be given at that present time was as stated in Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

I realize you're developing a spin on this scripture, but its only your conjecture, and not solid scripture as I have quoted.

Spin? Here's my "spin". Is this an all inclusive list? Were gentiles free to do anything else? Could they rob? Swear? Slug their neighbors? No because this is a list of the pagan stuff they're supposed to stay away from. Where are they supposed to learn the other stuff that makes them Christian??

Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

The Sabbath was never kept by any man until God gave it to Israel at Sinai, and the Jews still keep it today, but we Christians were never given the Sabbath.

Again I understand that's tradition. But it's not borne out biblically or historically. God is eternal. When he blesses and sanctifies the 7th day it stays blessed and sanctified eternally unless he removes it. He never did, but man did.

Just as a druggie suffers when his supply is removed, he learns to begin a new life eventually, but some simply replace the hard stuff for milder drugs, such a pot or alcohol, but their still on drugs in my book.

And the only reason it sounds good to you is because that theory puts you in final charge under Christ. and supports your belief that everyone in the world is wrong except your little spin off group which will eventually set the world straight because of your works belief, and every one will see that your recapturing Israel’s laws and becoming a better Jew then the Jew, as though that was what God had really wanted all along, not our faith.

In this case, Paul will not be with you, because he certainly didn’t act like a Jew when he told us there is nothing that can defile a man as did Christ in Mark 7.

Ro 14: 14. I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Paul used the Greek word koinos for unclean, which is caused by eating or touching something physically, not the akathartos you would like to claim, and its is used 32 times in the NT to point to spiritual unclean-ness, such as evil spirits and demonic forces, and not once does it have anything to do with meat or eating, or something tangible, being able to contaminate someone.

That’s a cop out and you know it. Your Church believes that only those who believe as you do, will be allowed into the millennium as the spiritually saved of God, and that it will be your little group of law keepers who will teach and train all of us to understand God’s will.

That’s so egotistical, and so divisive to think the whole Bible was written just for you, since only your mindset of pull your selves up by your own bootstraps mentality, could override Christ promise that our faith in Him would save us, and not that of works.

Its Christ goodness that will save us, and if your thinking you’ll be saved by your strict keeping of the law, I think you may be very disappointed when you find out that Christ made salvation available to all mankind, and not just to a few spiritual supremeist.

The good news is, that God still loves you anyway, and he knows why your particular personality needs physical proof of everything, so that’s why you want to be able to point to a law and say I’m keeping that law, then point to the next one and say…..etc.

As Paul said in 2 Cor 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

I prefer having faith that Christ will remind me of all the laws he wishes to be observed, and since you prefer holding them in your hand and touching them and constantly pointing to them as reminders of God’s laws, I guess it only means you haven’t the faith to trust Christ to keep you from forgetting them.

The only difference between you and the Jew, is that the Jew doesn’t believe the Messiah has come, where you believe he’s come, but didn’t really change much except doing away with sacrifices, and helping you to be strong and overcome.

Well, Jews no longer need sacrifices either, and they are much better at keeping the legalities of the law then you or I, so where does that leave you now? IMO, :-)

If you remove Christian tradition that's the only possible conclusion you can come to.

Instead of you choosing the words Christian Traditions, I prefer the word scriptural proof. Also, where did you find the term “penalty of the law,” I find it no where in the NT, and I never said anything about Jews not being promised eternal life, what’s that about?

Christ living in us, helps to ensure that we won't incur the penalty of the law by keeping us from future sin. Not much really changed biblically except in tradition.

Helps? …..Helps?…. Not in my case, the only way I will see eternal life is if Christ takes care of it all for me, my works are as filthy rags, and so if Christ doesn’t save me, I haven’t a chance, since even one small sin I may not even be aware of, condemns me to death.

God has made them part of my hard drive programming, and I know when I sin or am about to sin way before any written law can be read by me.

Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

I explained this before.

Acts 15:19. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
V-20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
V-21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

Since the Gentiles were not allowed in the temple to hear Moses being taught, then James certainly wasn’t referring to the Gentiles learning the rest of law from them.

So why didn’t James simply tell them to observe the ten commandments? Which ones would have devastated them to find out they must keep it?

Please tell me why, at such a perfect opportunity, the Gentiles weren’t given the law? Why did they give them the 2nd and the 7th Commandment and leave out the other eight?

Why did they give them 2 of the Levitical laws, but not the other hundreds?

Let me tell you why, because they knew the Jewish laws were not to be given to the new Testament Gentile Church, but they weren’t sure how the Holy Spirit was going to handle it, so they made it as simplistic as possible.

While they didn’t want to burden them with all the laws they were struggling with, they were afraid the Pharisees and the other hard line Jews would accuse them of teaching against the laws of Moses. They used two of each groups of the laws, which were pure common sense, but still cleared them of possibly being accused of throwing out Moses law.

It had nothing to do with Gentiles going to the temple later, and hearing all the rest of the law, as taught by Moses.

Instead, this decision by the council in Jerusalem made it clear that it was a new day for the Gentiles, and all the hassling they had been receiving from the Jews, who had been telling them how they must become as a Jew, and keep all the laws of Moses, and this was settled once and for all.

Acts 15:30 So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle:
V-31 Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.

Read that again,

THEY REJOICED FOR THE CONSOLATION”

CONSOLATION, = "exhortation," RV, "comfort"; Why did this news comfort them? Why did they rejoice? What was there about this news that was so great to hear?

Let me tell you again, It showed them and everyone there including the apostles, that the Jewish laws were not going to be forced on them, as this had been their concern.

Somehow the Holy Spirit was able to teach them with out the law which was written in stone, and later John had observed how well it had worked, and was able to assure them it had been the right way.

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

The anointing abides in us, and teaches us all things, of truth and cannot lie. The anointing replaced the written law by placing it in our hearts.

I don't really know where to begin with this. I am a wretched sinner Jim, just like you. Just like everyone. The death of Christ paid the penalty for my sins. Christ living through me saves me. By faith, I let Christ live in and through me. If you want to call that works, or ascribe an attitude to me then so be it.

Ro 14: 14. I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Paul used the Greek word koinos for unclean, which is caused by eating or touching something physically, not the akathartos you would like to claim, and its is used 32 times in the NT to point to spiritual unclean-ness, such as evil spirits and demonic forces, and not once does it have anything to do with meat or eating, or something tangible, being able to contaminate someone.

That's what you keep saying and what the tradition you are embracing tells you. But there really are animals that are akathartos and you know it. It's in Acts 10 and it's translated as such in the septuagent. But you already know all this... :-)

No Jim, it really is the body of Christ who will be there. I have no idea who is or who will be in the body of Christ. I only know that my salvation is secured. Christ said:

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

The bible was written for everyone. Faith in Christ means letting Christ live in and through us.

It's not Christ "goodness" that saves us, it's Christ himself fullfilling the righteous requirements of the law by living through us.

Let me try an analogy. There are laws against speeding. Every day for 10 years a man sped every chance he got. Sometimes he did it willfully, sometimes unknowingly, sometimes there were speed traps. But he never got caught. One day he got caught and went before the judge. The judge said "We've been watching you. We know that you've been speeding for the last 10 years and we're prepared to put a hefty fine on you for doing so. You're guilty. But you know what? You're free to go because that gentlemen over there has offered to pay all your fines for you. Not only that, he has offered to drive you anywhere you want to go for the rest of your life so that you won't speed anymore."

The man is a sinner, Christ is the man who paid the fine. Now tell me: Should the man accept the whole offer from Christ? Or should he let Christ pay the fine and then keep driving himself, knowing that he's going to keep acting the same way? And if he did let Christ drive and you saw the mans car go by always obeying the speed limit would you be calling the man legalistic, or Christ?

Thanks Jim. God loves you too despite of your hard headedness and lack of obedience... :-)

2 Cor 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

What exactly is written in our hearts Jim? Hint:

Jer 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

I admit it, I'm a sinner. Invariably everything I consider righteous, or good, or proper is wrong. Thank God all I had to do was learn obedience and to follow the direction of Christ and the scriptures.

Well, Jews no longer need sacrifices either, and they are much better at keeping the legalities of the law then you or I, so where does that leave you now? IMO, :-)

I guess that would depend on whether I was keeping the law physically and not spiritually, as Christ deplored, or whether the law was being kept spiritually and physically, as only Christ can do.

Have a good afternoon....

Sorry, forgot the word of God when it comes to gentiles and the sabbath:

Isa 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

Besides this having nothing to do with the New Covenant since it clearly states that it’s the Mosaic Covenant that dealt with the Sabbath and strangers, and not the New.

And why is this about the sons of the stranger, and not the stranger himself?

Consider this, the stranger may have lived with Israel for years, but he was always a stranger in their eyes, unless they became proselytes.

But what about their children, who had been brought up living with and knowing the Jews as his own family. He was possibly as Jewish thinking as most Jews were, and God made it clear to them that He loved them also, and had a plan for them.

He told them that if they joined themselves to the Lord, and served and loved Him, and kept his sabbath and didn’t pollute it, and held to His covenant………………………………………

Isa 56:7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

Unless the the New Testament church was offering sacrifices and burnt offerings on the alter, then this certainly isn't taslking about the New Covenant era now was it, so then it has nothing to do with the New Testament times.

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.