* LCG News * 2005 Feast of Tabernacles Sites * Listing of Living Church of God Congregations *Sunset Times for the U.S. * News of Those Once Affiliated with the Global COG * Prayer Requests * Official Living Church of God What's New? page.

Click Here for the COGwriter Home Page which has articles on various COGs and articles supporting beliefs of the Philadelphia portion of the Church of God.

12/06/05 a.m. This morning I visited ntevangelism.org's website and noticed that it has not been updated for a while. So, I decided to go to its Common Ground Christian Ministries link. At that link it says:

You’ve reached the home of New Testament Evangelism, a ministry of Common Ground Christian Ministries, Inc. Our purpose with New Testament Evangelism is to help Christian congregations, without regard to denomination, become more effective in evangelism, healthier places for the nurturing of God’s people and well-grounded in sound doctrine.

In the first four months after the inaugural evangelism conference at the end of July, 2004 we traveled more than 18,000 miles presented more than 60 presentations on evangelism and building healthy congregations.

No further evangelical updates were noticed. This suggests to me that ntevangelism got off to perhaps a promising start, but that perhaps it has somewhat ran out of steam.

This group has, however, began (or become part of) something called Project Good Samaritan where they seem to raise some money for hurricane victims.

On other matters, the anti-COG crowd does not seem to wish to believe what the Greek says in Ignatius' Letter to the Magnesians. One, who criticized my article (while admitting that he has not even read it, though he read something from someone named Olsen years ago), wrote a rebuttal nearly as long as my article. It contains such insight such as:

(Where Olsen, and Thiel, go wrong is in the assumption that Sabbatarianism is the only true Christianity, and that Polycarp was a Sabbatarian, something of which is there not the slightest hint in any historical record.)

Really, not the slightest hint Polycarp was a Sabbatarian? Well, perhaps I should quote the first paragraph from my article:

Ignatius was an early leader in Antioch who apparently knew some of the apostles, as well as Polycarp the Bishop (or Pastor) in Smyrna (a part of Asia Minor).  According to the letter The Martyrdom of Polycarp by the Smyrnaeans, "on the day of the preparation, at the hour of dinner, there came out pursuers and horsemen" and the Polycarp was killed "on the day of the great Sabbath". The use of these two expressions ("day of the preparation" and "the day of the great Sabbath") strongly indicates that those in Polycarp's area were still keeping the Sabbath in the latter portion of the 2nd century.

The anti-COG crowd will believe whatever they will believe, but the truth is that the true Church did keep the Sabbath.

I should perhaps add that Polycarp was not Catholic (the anti-COG author suggests Polycarp was). Polycarp specifically refused to accept the authority of the Roman bishops who changed Passover from a 14th Nisan Holy Day, to an Easter Sunday holiday. Here is a little of what I have noted about him:

Every writer of the New Testament recorded warnings about false or heretical teachers. Some of the early heretics were later called Gnostics. In the late 2nd Century, the Catholic historian Irenaeus recorded that the Bishops of Rome had problems with them and that both John and Polycarp strongly renounced the Gnostic heretics:

"Valentinus came to Rome in the time of Hyginus, flourished under Pius, and remained until Anicetus. Cerdon, too…Marcion, then, succeeding him, flourished under Anicetus".

"But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna…always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time -- a man who was of much greater weight, and a more stedfast witness of truth, than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles... John, the disciple of the Lord…exclaiming, "Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within." And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, "Dost thou know me?" "I do know thee, the first-born of Satan" ”. [31]

Valentinus, Cerinthius, and Marcion are considered by Catholics[32] and others[33] to have been Gnostic heretics, while Hyginus, Pius, and Anicetus were bishops of Rome. Thus these quotes from Irenaeus show that the Roman bishops did not have a higher leadership role than Polycarp of Smyrna had, because it apparently took the stature of the visiting Polycarp to turn many Romans away from the Gnostic heretics.

According to a Catholic bishop, "Now with the heresy of the Ariomaniacs, which has corrupted the Church of God...These then teach three hypostases, just as Valentinus the heresiarch first invented in the book entitled by him 'On the Three Natures'. For he was the first to invent three hypostases and three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he is discovered to have filched this from Hermes and Plato." [34] Hence, it was Valentinus of Rome, who Polycarp renounced, who is believed to have been the first affiliated with Christianity to teach the Trinitarian concept of three hypostasis or make any clear statement of ‘equality’ regarding three alleged persons of God .

On the other hand, Polycarp [35] and the Apostle John (John 1:1-3), specifically referred to both the Father and the Son as God, but never referred to the Holy Sprit as God. Ignatius did the same in his letters to the Ephesians and the Smyrnaeans.[36]

Polycarp also correctly kept the Passover. Eusebius noted that in Polycarp’s region, “the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour's Passover” [37]. He was standing up for the of the true Church, hence so did his followers.

Irenaeus reported, “And when the blessed Polycarp was sojourning in Rome in the time of Anicetus, although a slight controversy had arisen among them as to certain other points…For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp to forego the observance [in his own way], inasmuch as these things had been always observed by John the disciple of our Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant; nor, on the other hand, could Polycarp succeed in persuading Anicetus to keep [the observance in his way], for he maintained that he was bound to adhere to the usage of the presbyters who preceded him. And in this state of affairs they held fellowship with each other; and Anicetus conceded to Polycarp in the Church the celebration of the Eucharist, by way of showing him respect; so that they parted in peace one from the other, maintaining peace with the whole Church, both those who did observe [this custom] and those who did not.”[38]

But were they truly in peace after that? The Catholic monk Epiphanius wrote, “For long ago, even from the earliest days, the Passover was celebrated at different times in the church…In the time of Polycarp and Victor, the east was at odds with the west and they would not accept letters of commendation from each other”.[39]

What these writings seem to show is that the aged Polycarp went to Rome to primarily deal with Gnostic heretics that claimed to be Christian. He also he tried to persuade the Romans to observe Passover on the 14th day of the first month, and not on an annual Sunday. Apparently Anicetus conceded enough (such as about Polycarp’s position on that and probably about Marcion—who Anicetus agreed was a heretic) that no recorded major ‘blowup’ between the two survived. Notice that the east (Polycarp’s side) did not accept the authority of the bishop of Rome on the timing of Passover (Victor later tried to excommunicate Polycrates for this) and they refused commendations from each other. This was a clear split.

Since Polycarp was apparently a disciple of John, it is logical that the true church could be traced from the last apostolic head of the Ephesus church to the first major head of the Smyrna church once it became predominant (recall that Revelation 2 lists the Smyrna church following Ephesus church).

The above is included in my article Location of the Early Church (and it includes the footnotes). Furthermore, perhaps I should add that Polycrates, a successor to Polycarp, also refused to accept Roman Catholic authority. Both Polycarp and Polycrates kept Passover on the 14th of Nisan, the same as the Church of God, and refused to switch to Sunday. If Polycarp was not a Sabbatarian, then he would have most likely accepted Sunday for Passover.

12/05/05 a.m. CG7 reported:

Focusing on the theme "The Kingdom of God is at Hand, the church in Harrisburg, PA, (Pleasant Hills Christian Church) hosted a fall festival October 18-25th.  Each autumn this congregation participates in a Christ-centered celebration of the tabernacling (dwelling) of God with His creation -- past, present and future.  Brethren from Texas, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania joined in the activities, which included Bible studies, daily worship services, recreational activities, and lots of fellowship.  Speakers included Bible Advocate Editor Calvin Burrell (Denver, CO), local church pastors Bruce Chesney and Robert Wertz, Bill Hicks, Director of Missions Ministries, Joe Kirkpatrick and Jerry McClenagan from Texas, and Richard Wiedenheft, NE District Superintendent.  A wonderful time of worship and fellowship was enjoyed by all.  Plans are already underway for next year's celebration. 

While some few in CG7 have historically kept the Feast of Tabernacles, having it mentioned at the CG7 site, plus having Calvin Burrell attend, AND planning on doing it again next year is significant, to me at least.

Holy Days are one of the several ways that CG7 differs from the old WCG. Information on those differences can be found in the article Teachings of the Church of God, Seventh Day.

On other matters:

LONDON (Reuters) - Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan offered twin warnings at home and abroad on Friday about the urgency for the United States to tackle its huge budget deficits to preserve the global economy's health.

In a keynote speech in London ahead of his final appearance as a key participant in a Group of Seven finance ministers' gathering, Greenspan deplored a move toward unstable budgets and trade protectionism that could trigger a messy unwinding of world financial imbalances.

"If...the pernicious drift toward fiscal instability in the United States and elsewhere is not arrested and is compounded by a protectionist reversal of globalization, the adjustment process could be quite painful for the world economy," he told a conference.

The 79-year-old Greenspan, who steps down at the end of January, appeared intent on rounding out his 18-year tenure with a sharper call for discipline in government spending while time remains to get U.S. finances under control.

In a taped address earlier in the day to a Philadelphia Fed conference, Greenspan said that U.S. spending on defense and homeland security will slow eventually but "our budget position will substantially worsen in the coming years unless major deficit-reducing actions are taken."

"In the end, the consequences for the U.S. economy of doing nothing could be severe," the Fed chief warned.

"Could" is an understatement. And severe is more severe than I believe the Fed chief is thinking--especially if the severity is worsened by natural disasters, etc.

12/04/05 a.m. In a paid ad in The Journal, Jim O'Brien's group announced:

We’re pleased to announce that the following excellent speakers will present seminars at the Winter Family
Tournament in Lexington, Kentucky:

Ronald L. Dart, speaker on the Born to Win radio program and founder of Christian Educational Ministries; Dr. David Antion, professional psychotherapist and founder of Guardian Ministries; Dr. Tom Roberts, author, professor and director of ministerial development with Church of God 7th Day; Guy Swenson, founder of Common Ground Ministry, which sponsors several Good Samaritan projects as well as programs for Church Evangelism; Pam Dewey, popular speaker and published author; Bill Jacobs, family therapist, youth minister and founder of LifeResources Ministry; Trisha Svehla, professional speaker, adjunct professor and trainer for management groups; Gilford Monrose, Youth Minister with Church of God 7th Day; Jeff Henderson, former radio announcer, now pastor of Believers in Christ Church of God, located near San Francisco, Calif.; Tony Kuczynski, speaker on family topics; and musicians Brent Kern and Brian Smith.

The Winter Tournament led to the departure of Jim O'Brien and others from UCG about a year and a half ago. This year's dates are 12/23-12/26/05. As can be seen by the attendees, they are clearly trying to broaden the appeal of the tournament. Many of those speakers hold views that differ from those held by the Philadelphia portion of the COG (for example, most of those speakers do not seem to believe in the idea of church eras many of us understand Revelation 2 & 3 to be discussing). Here is a link to an article on Dr. Antion's Church of God, Southern California and one to Ron Dart's Christian Educational Ministries.

In a paid ad in The Journal, ACD's claimed:

(Isaiah 45:5-6). The consistent message in the Bible is that there is one and only one true God—an individual. This is in direct conflict with the idea of YHWH being a “God Family” with multiple members. How can you have YHWH be composed of more than one God Family member and yet make the statements that there is no one beside him (not them).

This unitarian heresy is actually easy to disprove. It is also very provable that the true COG has been binitarian throughout its history. More information is in the updated article Binitarian View: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning

On other matters, since the cogwriter page often refers to historical events, a reader wanted everyone to understand the following: 

It is likely that the terms C.E. and B.C.E. will be used more. I, as most of you realize, normally use A.D. and B.C. unless I am directly quoting a source that uses C.E. and B.C.E.

LCG's Wayne Pyle reports:

This has been a most exciting year for Tomorrow’s World audience growth in North America. 

According to the latest information we have seen from Nielsen Media Research, the organization famous for TV ratings, the weekly Tomorrow’s World viewing audience has experienced a 25 percent jump over last year’s group of viewers.  We began the year with a total of 6.2 million TV households having viewed the telecast over the previous six years, and so far this year the viewership has zoomed to more than 7.8 million households, which is 25 percent above a year ago. 

The increase was greatly helped by the addition of 29 TV stations across America, with the Inspiration Network being a major contributor.  These stations connected the Tomorrow’s World telecast to 38 million homes. 

While only a fraction of American and Canadian viewers watch the telecast each week, our average weekly viewing audience has been growing steadily.  The telecast has now been watched by more than six percent of all Americans and Canadians, or about one out of every 16 Americans and Canadians has viewed the Tomorrow’s World program at least one time over the past seven years.  As many as 400,000 TV households are viewing the telecast each week.  We are very grateful for the marvelous doors Jesus Christ has opened to do His Work!

So with only about 7,000 in attendance, LCG is reaching 400,000 television households per week. An article of possible interest may be Should the Church Still Try to Place its Top Priority on Proclaiming the Gospel or Did Herbert Armstrong Change that Priority for the Work?

On still other matters, I noticed that the anti-COG crowd is taking shots against my Ignatius article, and my other historical research. The simple fact is that I am not the first researcher to notice the errors that the anti-Sabbatarian translators made when translating Ignatius' Letter to the Magnesians (the earliest document I found questioning it was written about 100 years ago). It is too bad that those who are against us are not interested in the truth. And the short version of the truth is that the Greek term κυριακήν simply did not mean Sunday in the early second century.

Two articles of related interest may be Another Look at Ignatius and Is Revelation 1:10 talking about Sunday or the Day of the Lord?

12/03/05 a.m. Last night, ICG's Mark Armstrong reported:

We’ve enjoyed continued good response to the Garner Ted Armstrong program, despite the fact that it is not presently airing on WGN.  The good news is that many of our regular viewers are continuing to contact us, giving us an opportunity to explain the situation and encourage them to remain in contact with us.  Even with the short week due to the Thanksgiving holiday the program on the Trinity racked up 366 requests one hundred sixty of which came from first time responders. 

Actually, even without WGN, ICG still probably is the getting the third or fourth number of respondants from television/radio of the COGs. LCG is clearly the leader, followed by PCG, followed by either CEM or ICG. Fifth and sixth are probably CGI and then UCG.

I have not seen any actual respondant numbers from PCG, CEM, or CGI recently and have based my order basically on number of stations and/or magazines sent.

Last night's edition of WCG Today reported:

The headquarters staff enjoyed the annual Christmas party Thursday evening. It was nice to spend time with fellow employees in a relaxed atmosphere not pressured by deadlines.

It is not nice, however, to endorse paganism, but they seem to enjoy these things.

In the Nov-Dec 2005 edition of UCG's Good News (which arrived the night before last) were these statements from its editor manaing editor Scott Ashley:

The lesson of Sodom

One citizen of ancient Pompeii got one lesson right—the man who scribbled "Sodom and Gomorrah" on one of the city's buried walls. His simple, three-word judgment says more about the city than many books that have been written about it.

A modern visitor to Pompeii doesn't have to look very hard to see evidence of the moral climate of the city. Up to several dozen buildings have been identified as likely houses of prostitution. Some, due to the explicit wall paintings and graffiti found in them, leave no doubt as to their purpose...

Yet today many of our cities are no different from Sodom and Pompeii. Seldom mentioned in news coverage was the fact that the devastating December 2004 tsunami wiped out the portion of the Thai coast infamous for its child-sex trade, or that New Orleans was devastated by Hurricane Katrina five days before 100,000 gays and lesbians were to be welcomed into the city for its appropriately named "Southern Decadence" festival.

Will we ignore the lesson?

Does the catastrophe that befell Pompeii hold lessons for us today?

It certainly should.

In a related article, UCG's Melvin Rhode's writes:

Hurricane Katrina: Is God Removing His Protection?
The destruction from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita was so great and far-reaching that many wonder if God is playing a hand in these events, either punishing the United States or removing His protection—or both.

In a generally-related story in The Journal, SDA scholar Samuele Bacchiocchi wrote:

The recent rash of natural disasters has spawned many competing explanations from across the religious and ideological spectrum...

God controls the forces of nature

That natural disasters are the natural consequence of sin does not mean that there is no supernatural involvement in them. In our scientific age we tend to discount supernatural forces, looking instead for “natural” causes of disasters. The very designation “natural disasters” implies that there is no supernatural involvement. Such a view is foreign to the Bible.

Numerous biblical passages suggest that God does micromanage the forces of nature, including earthquakes, storms, floods and droughts, to accomplish His purpose (Deuteronomy 11:14-17; 28:12; Job 5:10; Matthew 5:45; James 5:17-18; Psalm 97:4), “to accomplish all that he commands them on the face of the habitable world, whether for correction, or for his land, or for love, he causes it to happen” (Job 37:12-13; also Job 28:10-11; Psalm 107:25, 29; Nahum 1:3-4). Ezekiel writes: “Thus says the LORD God: I will make a stormy wind break out in my wrath; and there shall be a deluge of rain in my anger” (Ezekiel 13:13). Amos asks the rhetorical question: “Does evil befall a city, unless the LORD has done it?” (Amos 3:6)"...

What is God telling us?

What is the Lord telling us through the recent rash of natural disasters that have reached epic proportions?

The answer is to be found in Christ’s words uttered in the face of the tragedy that killed 18 persons when the tower in Siloam fell upon them: “Unless you repent you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:5).

Christ did not spend His time arguing about who was to be blamed for the tragedy. Instead, He reminded His listeners that tragedies are a wake-up call to repent.

The present intensification of natural and man-made disasters must be seen as clear signs of God’s final warning to mankind of the impending divine judgment.

These disasters tell us that, as in the experience of ancient nations, God will not allow human rebellion and wickedness to continue much longer (Genesis 15:16). Soon Christ will come to bring an end to the colossal crises that engulf our fragile planet (Romans 8:19-22).

Since these things are about to happen,“what sort of persons ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God”? (2 Peter 3:11:12).

And those points should be considered by all. Interestingly, before these series of disasters, LCG book out a booklet, which is available on-line titled Who Controls the Weather?

12/02/05 a.m. The Sep-Oct 2005 combined issue of The Journal is finally out.

Thr front page mentions some FOT reports, UCG ministerial changes, Alan Ruth, and other stories. Inside articles include one from Ken Westby on humor, Brian Knowles on Orthodoxy (a related article of possible interest may be Similarities and Dissimilarities of the Orthodox Church and the COGs), a version from an article from me concerning Ignatius and the Sabbath, an article on Jerusalem that appears quite interesting, a piece from Samuel Bacchiochi that intend to report about tomorrow, and other articles.

One article I hadn't mentioned above contains a twist that I do not recall seeing before. John Sash wrote:

Type of Death Angel
Jesus was delivered from death at night, just as ancient Israel was. Midnight is when the cohort of soldiers sent by the high priests took Jesus, according to Matthew. The cohort was a type of the Death Angel. The Death Angel took the firstborn of Egypt at midnight and he took the substitution for Israel, the Passover Lamb, Christ, at midnight.

The darkness of night figuratively refers to Satan and his reign over earth. Midnight is the darkest part of the night. It’s his time. The Bible is a book of imagery, and not just imagery but opposite imagery.

Satan, the Death Angel, brings his gift of death at midnight. God’s gift is the opposite, eternal life. God is pictured as light. His deliverance comes at dawn with the bursting forth of light...

For the children
The Death Angel is not the only one riding through the air bringing his gifts to little children. There’s another who travels through the air on the midnight of midnights, the winter solstice and “up on the rooftops trot, trot, trot, and down through the chimneys . . . Ho, ho, ho”—or however the song goes.
He travels at night and at midnight delivers his gifts to little children. His name is Santa Claus.

Christmas originally fell on the winter solstice but, because of a calendar error, is now a few days off. It’s celebrated at night, not the day. Midnight is when Santa comes, not the day. Christmas was originally a celebration on the midnight of midnights. It was Satan’s night, his night of celebration. The gifts he bears to mankind, God’s little children, are death.

Half empty
What about Christians observing Christmas? Some say the early“church” syncretized paganism with Christianity and thus it is wrong. Others say how can Christmas be wrong when it celebrates the birth of
Jesus the Christ. Is the glass half empty or half full?

I like to think that maybe God in some manner arranged for the one night of Satan, the Death Angel, a night of pagan revelry with its sacrifices (possibly even child sacrifices) and worship of false gods, to be transformed into the main Christian holiday, celebrating the birth of the Lord and Savior of mankind who was to die that midnight, and in so doing win victory over the Death Angel, the Midnight Angel, Satan. “Midnight” was utterly defeated. Because Christ our Passover defeated Midnight, we who are figuratively Cinderella are also saved. Our Prince will come for us.

While I am not totally convinced of those particular allegories, Christmas clearly was not an originally Christian holiday. Even the Roman Church teaches that it did not observe it prior to the 3rd century (see article in The Catholic Encyclopedia)--though (in other articles) it admits that Passover and Pentecost were.

Regarding The Journal, here is a link to its first and last page www.thejournal.org/issues/issue104/jf103105.pdf

12/01/05 a.m. PCG reports:

Though two nations voted no to the EU constitution last spring, the European Union has been forging ahead almost as if nothing happened. The constitution requires ratification of all 25 member states to go into effect. With the French and Dutch rejections earlier this year, however, the European Commission—the bloc’s legislative body—said that, instead of the constitution being dead, it was time for a “period of reflection.”

Some argue that the constitution has already been implemented in various ways—that the charter is merely a codification of certain procedures. Certainly the EU is moving on in complete assurance that its 500-plus-page document won’t have to be trashed.

Perhaps that is why the Commission is seeing to it that it is taught to Europe’s schoolchildren now—as though the treaty were in full force.

Over 120,000 copies of a textbook have been distributed to primary school children across the Continent, according to a November 20 Telegraph article. The book, funded by the Europeans’ taxes, takes two children through the complexities of the EU, led by a character named Good Father Houpette.

“‘You will be astonished by what I will tell you,’ Father Houpette tells them. ‘You will see that the EU is a necessity.’ … When they arrive at the chapter on the constitution, the children are pictured reading the rules and regulations of an indoor sports hall. ‘Not long ago the European Union was given regulations such as these,’ Father Houpette says. ‘With this new constitution everything will go like clockwork, just like in your club.’ There is no mention of the fact that the constitution was rejected by French and Dutch voters” (emphasis ours).

The EU will prod on. Some version of "the Holy Roman Empire" will be revived.

Speaking of Europe, LCG's Dr. Winnail writes:

Which Way for Germany?

What role will Germany play in the 21st century? Will we see a "Europeanized" Germany blend into the fabric of a united continent, or will Germany try again to take over Europe? Will a more powerful and assertive Germany be a friend or foe of America and other Western nations? The return of Germany to a position of power in Europe has raised once again the German Questions! Who are the Germans? How did they acquire their striking national characteristics? What does the future hold for Germany?

Such questions may seem irrelevant to generations born since 1945. After all, Germany has been a stable democracy, a good neighbor and dependable ally for over 50 years. Based on what Germany has achieved in the last half-century, some assert that "prospects for a larger, potentially more powerful Germany living at peace are promising" (Radice, p. 207). Supposedly, Germans no longer harbor great power ambitions because "the lesson of two world wars has been fully understood" (Germany’s New Position in Europe, Baring, p. 29).

However, these optimistic views may be shortsighted and dangerously flawed. Astute observers with longer memories are concerned. Could a reunified Germany become "an uncaged giant, a Fourth Reich—a German Empire?" (Germany and Europe, Marsh, p. 167). A former Washington Post bureau chief in Bonn and Berlin sees Germany as "the most conflicted, powerful, promising and dangerous country in Europe" (After the Wall, Fischer, jacket). Italian journalist Luigi Barzini has described Germany’s tendency to make sudden and unexpected changes. He warned it is "important to keep an eye on the German Proteus [a Greek sea god capable of assuming different forms] in an attempt to fathom the probable shape of things to come…Its decisions could once again overwhelm Europe and the world" (The Europeans, Barzini, p. 107).

While many assume it is impossible to predict the future in the complex field of international relations, that simply isn’t true! The Bible outlines the future course of world history by predicting the actions of specific nations. One key to understanding Bible prophecy is to be able to identify the nations involved. National characteristics that remain consistent over the centuries provide important clues. As we will see in this article, Germany can be identified in the prophecies of the Bible and her future course of action can be known. That identity is surprising and the future is sobering—in the short run—but exciting in the ultimate outcome of God’s plan for mankind.

The complete article is available at http://www.lcg.org/cgi-bin/lcg/studytopics/lcg-st.cgi?category=Prophecy1&item=1116548355 and is titled "The Fourth Reich?"

One of the reasons that the COGs are considered to be a cult by some is our teaching that God will ultimately save almost everyone. The COG position, however, is not as unorthodox as our critics suggest. Not only is this a view held by the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Church, it is also a view held by one that Protestant scholars have termed one of the greatest early theologians. The noted historian K.S. Latourette noted, that the early third century writer Origen "was, indeed, one of the greatest Christian minds". And while I cannot agree with that (Origen had many problems), it is of interest to note that Latourette observed:

Origen taught that ultimately all the spirits who have fallen away from God will be restored to full harmony with Him. This can come about only with their cooperation, for they have freedom to accept or reject the redemption wrought in Christ. Before full restoration they will suffer punishment, but that punishment is intended to be educative, to purge them from the imperfections brought by their sin. After the end of the present age and its world another age will come, so Origen believed, in which have been born again will continue to grow and the unrepentant will bve given further opportunity for repentance (Latourette K.S. A History of Christianity, Volume 1, Beginnings to 1500. Harper Collins, San Francisco, 1975, p.151).

While we in the COGs would not word it quite that way, this does show that the idea that God has a plan that will give the unrepentant an opportunity after this present age does have a historical basis (it also has a biblical one). More information can be found in the article Hope of Salvation: How the COGs Differ from Protestantism.

11/30/05 a.m. Yesterday, WCG announced that it added the following from Michael Morrison's book to its Christian Odyssey website:

Sabbath, Circumcision, and Tithing
Chapter 2

Does God make mistakes?

...God does not change (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17). Indeed, his Hebrew name Yahweh indicates that he is The One Who Is, or the Eternal One (Exodus 3:14). But if God remains the same, how can his laws change? Can the Eternal give temporary laws?...

A temporary law

Paul asks, "What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come" (Galatians 3:19). It was a temporary addition, designed from the start to be in force only until Christ came. That is why sacrifices and offerings are no longer needed. The same law that restricted the priesthood to Levites, the same law that commanded animal sacrifices, is all swept away by the coming of Christ.

Of course, this does not possibly apply to the Sabbath as it was created for mankind, before any one sinned (Genesis 2).

The fact is that the 2nd century Christian Church still kept the sabbath, and did not feel that it was done away.

According to the letter The Martyrdom of Polycarp by the Smyrnaeans, "on the day of the preparation, at the hour of dinner, there came out pursuers and horsemen" and the Polycarp was killed "on the day of the great Sabbath" (The Martrydom of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, Verses 7.1 & 8.1. Charles H. Hoole's 1885 translation) . The use of these two expressions ("day of the preparation" and "the day of the great Sabbath" strongly indicates that those in Polycarp's area were still keeping the Sabbath in the latter portion of the 2nd century.

Information on the second century writings on the Sabbath (and even some on Sunday) is documented in the article on Ignatius and the Sabbath.

11/29/05 a.m. Yesterday, ACD's Brian Knowles reported:

Canadians seek relations with extra-terrestrials
There are times when I’m embarrassed to be a Canadian and this is one of them. A former Canadian Minister of Defense and Deputy Prime Minister, Paul Hellyer, is seeking to establish relations with visiting extra-terrestrials. He has asked the Canadian Parliament to hold hearings on “Exopolitics” – relations with ET’s.

Hellyer was Defense Minister (1963 – 1967) under the government of Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the man who instigated Canada’s descent into Leftist ideology. Says Hellyer, “UFOs are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head.”...

Has anyone ever offered the public and the scientific community concrete, physical, observable evidence that extra-terrestrial civilizations have visited the earth? Why is the discussion of this subject always couched in the language of conspiracy and cover-up? Does it rightfully belong with the stories about the Loch Ness monster, Sasquatch, the abominable snowman, and ancient visitors from space leaving behind a tomato from which all life evolved?

Is it a way of preparing the world to view the return of Christ as an alien invader to be repelled?

We reported, you decide.

On other matters, what happens to babies when they die? The Catholics are once again discussing this:

Theological panel to discuss fate of unbaptized babies

Vatican, Nov. 28 (CWNews.com) - The International Theological Commission is meeting this week in Rome, chaired for the first time by Archbishop William Levada, the new prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

According to a Vatican statement issued on November 28, the topics will include the fate of children who die without having been baptized. The statement said that the Commission will consider the question in the light of God's plan for salvation, taking into account the unique role of Christ's mediation and the sacramental role of the Church.

Even though the Catholics are discussing this, as one raised as a Catholic, this is the subject that made me realize that the Protestants did not have the answers over 30 thirty years ago when I first heard of the COG. An article of possible interest, that does discuss what the Bible shows happens to babies who die is Hope of Salvation: How the COGs differ from most Protestants

Speaking of the sacramental role of the Church, last night I read the following admission from a leading Catholic scholar:

A Catholic might ask whether the apostles also engaged in what we would call sacramental ministry. One must reply that the New Testament provides very scanty evidence of this (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 35).

Very scanty is almost an overstatement. There is actually no evidence of anyone in the New Testament going to the sacrament of confession (then being told to repeat various prayers by rote), the Catholic version of confirmation, or having the sacrament of extreme unction, as three examples. Furthermore, such practices are also NOT found in the writings of the so-called "apostolic fathers" (those individual leaders who wrote who may have actually known the original apostles).

11/28/05 a.m. The following is from SCG's home page under NEW:

New Messages can be found in the Mutimedia page, Including Ramond McNair's 1978
The Meaining of Pentecost

There are also links to R McNair's Journal ads. Apparently SCG is another small group trying to work with Raymond McNair. This should show any with ears to hear, that presuming that R. McNair is also working with them, that he has gone way over the edge doctrinally. More information on SCG can be found in the article titled Its Not Stedfast.

The following was part of a sermonette I gave here a couple of weeks ago, plus a few additions I uncovered since about Peter and the Catholic Church:

The Church of Rome teaches,

that Peter founded the Church of Antioch, indicates the fact that he laboured a long period there, and also perhaps that he dwelt there towards the end of his life...It is also probable that Peter pursued his Apostolic labours in various districts of Asia Minor for it can scarcely be supposed that the entire period between his liberation from prison and the Council of the Apostles was spent uninterruptedly in one city, whether Antioch, Rome, or elsewhere... Peter returned occasionally to the original Christian Church of Jerusalem...The date of Peter's death is thus not yet decided; the period between July, 64 (outbreak of the Neronian persecution), and the beginning of 68 (Kirsch J.P. Transcribed by Gerard Haffner. St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by Kevin Knight. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

It is not biblically clear that Peter founded the church in Antioch (Stephen or Barnabas seems more likely, see Acts 11:19-22), but he probably spent a lot of time there Antioch (Galatians 2:11). However, it is clear even from Catholic history that Peter spent little time in Rome.

The Catholic Encyclopedia also admits this about Peter,

"we possess no precise information regarding the details of his Roman sojourn" (Kirsch J.P. Transcribed by Gerard Haffner. St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

No precise information means that the Roman Church has essentially relied on accounts, nearly all of which were written over 100 years after Peter's death, that say that he was in Rome and/or died in Rome. But even those accounts suggest that he was not there very long. (It should be noted that there are accounts that Peter actually died in Jerusalem or Asia Minor, but they also are of questionable reliability.)

Interestingly, when personally addressing the leadership for the Christians who lived in Rome, Paul never mentioned Peter, even though he listed at least 27 others (see Romans 16). The Catholic Encyclopedia article about the Epistle to the Romans mentions this about Paul not mentioning Peter:

The complete silence as to St. Peter is most easily explained by supposing that he was then absent from Rome. Paul may well have been aware of this fact, for the community was not entirely foreign to him. An epistle like the present would hardly have been sent while the Prince of the Apostles was in Rome and the reference to the ruler (xii, 8) would then be difficult to explain. Paul probably supposes that during the months between the composition and the arrival of the Epistle, the community would be more or less thrown on its own resources.(Merk A. Transcribed by W.G. Kofron. Epistle to the Romans. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIII. Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Another explanation is that Peter simply was not in Rome long enough for Paul or any early writer to consider that Peter was actually the bishop of Rome. Note that it takes MONTHS from when Paul could have written the epistle and for it to get to Rome. How could Paul have possibly assumed that that Peter was not in Rome then and would not be in it for months? Only because he knew Peter was not some type of bishop of Rome! Because if Peter the bishop of Rome was, Paul would have most likely at least referred to him or his absence in this epistle, as at some time he would have expected Peter to read it in Rome. But this never took place. Since it is believed that "Romans was likely written in the fall of A.D. 57" (The Nelson Study Bible, New King James Version. Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, 1997, p. 1876), it is most likely that Peter had not even been to Rome (as until at least 54 A.D. he had meetings in Jerusalem--see below).

The cited Catholic quotes show that the Church of Rome acknowledges that Peter labored long in Asia Minor (hence, he could not truly have been the bishop of Rome then as they are quite far apart--it normally took MONTHS to travel from Rome to Asia Minor in those days, plus there were no telephones or fast ways to communicate), tended to return to Jerusalem (which is near Asia Minor), spent little time in Rome, and that there are no precise details of anything that Peter did in Rome.

While it is possible that Peter visited and even died in Rome, that of itself would not seem to be a reason for the city of Rome to have to be the place of the headquarters of the true church. There also is no known early document that states that upon his death Peter bequeathed the cathedra (ecclesiastical chair of authority) to anyone (recall also that Jesus Himself died in Jerusalem, and the importance of His death to the Church is more significant than that of Peter).

When Jesus discussed the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16) with Peter, this was in the Jerusalem area. When the Holy Spirit was given in Acts 2, this was in the area of Jerusalem. Peter and the other apostles spent a great deal of time in Asia Minor.

Furthermore, Rome was a Gentile area, not full of circumcised Israelites. Who does the Bible teach had that responsibility? Look at what Paul wrote:

7. But contrariwise when they had seen that to me was committed the Gospel of the
prepuce, as to Peter of the circumcision
8. (for he that wrought in Peter to the Apostleship of the circumcision, wrought in me also
among the Gentiles) (Galatians 2:7-8).

Thus it does not appear that Peter was considered to be the bishop of Rome during Paul's lifetime (and they both died about the same time).

If Peter, and he alone, had the keys, the fact that, according to The Catholic Encyclopedia "Peter pursued his Apostolic labours in various districts of Asia Minor" shows that PETER COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE BISHOP OF ROME FOR MUCH OF THE TIME THAT HE "HAD THE KEYS"! IT IS AN ABSOLUTE FACT THAT PETER WAS NOT THE BISHOP OF ROME BEGINNING WITH THE START OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH that began on the Pentecost after Jesus was resurrected (Acts 1-2). NOR COULD PETER HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN BISHOP OF ROME FOR MUCH OF THE THIRTY-PLUS YEARS AFTER THAT TIME AS HE TRAVELED WITHIN ASIA MINOR AND TO JERUSALEM REPEATEDLY. Rome is simply not close enough to Asia Minor or Jerusalem for Peter to have been based out of Rome. Thus Antioch or other regions within Asia Minor would seem to have been the main areas that Peter possibly could have had an episcopate.

Actually, the book of Galatians specifically mentions that Paul visited Peter on two occasions, and both of those were in Jerusalem and not Rome. Why? Because Rome was still not the headquarters of the Church at a very late time in Peter's life. This is clearly documented from the Bible:

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, 16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days (Gal atians1:15-18).

Afterward I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22 And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ (Galatians 1:21-22).

Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me...and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1,9).

What does all that mean? Well, since according to The Catholic Encyclopedia, "St. Paul's conversion was not prior to 34, nor his escape from Damascus and his first visit to Jerusalem, to 37" (St. Paul. Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911). Thus the earliest possible date for Paul to have made his second recorded visit with Peter was 54 A.D. (3 years plus 17 plus 34 A.D., and it may have been later, like 57 A.D.). And from there, Peter told Paul to go to the Gentiles again. Hence Peter could not have become the Apostle to the Gentiles in Rome until much later (if at all)!

Interestingly, The Catholic Encyclopedia admits,

It is comparatively seldom that the Fathers, when speaking of the power of the keys, make any reference to the supremacy of St. Peter (Joyce G.H. Transcribed by Robert B. Olson. Power of the Keys. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIII. Copyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Hence, it may be that the idea that Peter was the only apostle that church leadership could be traced through and that it must be Rome does not appear to have much early support (more information can be found in the article Was Peter the Rock Who Alone Received the Keys of the Kingdom?).

11/27/05 a.m. Yesterday, I read one of the letters of the so-called "apostolic fathers" titled the Epistle to Diognetus. I noticed that it seemed to confirm my conclusions regarding Ignatius and the early Christian view of the Sabbath. Specifically the following portion where the writer claims that the Jews:

And again to lie against God, as if He forbad us to do any good thing on the sabbath day, is not this profane? (The Epistle To Diognetus, Chapter 4 verse 3. Translated by J.B. Lightfoot. In Apostolic Fathers. Lightfoot & Harmer, 1891 translation, Online version © 2001 Peter Kirby).

This is simply additional evidence that the way of sabbath emphasis of those who professed Christ was different from that held by many of the Jews then.

Samuele Bacchiocchi obviously read it before I and came to similar conclusions:

In Luke, Christ is reported as saying that the Sabbath is the day to loose human beings from physical and spiritual bonds (Luke 13:12,16). In John, Christ invites His followers to share on the Sabbath in the divine redemptive activity (John 9:4; 5:17; 7:22-23). Had Pastor Taylor taken time to study Christ’s Sabbath pronouncements, he would have discovered that the Gospels unanimously present the Sabbath as a time to serve God especially by rendering a loving service to human needs.

The new Christian understanding of the Sabbath as a time, not of passive idleness, but of active, loving service to needy souls, represents a radical departure from contemporary Jewish Sabbathkeeping. This is attested also in an early document, known as the Epistle to Diognetus (dates between A. D. 130-200), where the Jews are charged with "speaking falsely of God" because they claim that "He [God] forbade us to do what is good on the Sabbath-days—how is not this impious?" (4:3).

The positive humanitarian understanding of Sabbathkeeping is rooted in Christ’s fulfillment of the redemptive typology of the Sabbath, which is presented in the Gospels in several ways. Viewing the rest and redemption typified by the Old Testament Sabbath as realized by Christ’s redemptive mission, New Testament believers regarded Sabbathkeeping, not as a ceremonial practice abolished by Christ, but as a day to celebrate and experience the Messianic redemption-rest by showing "mercy" and doing "good" to those in need. What this means to us Christians today is that on and through the Sabbath we celebrate Christ’s creative and redemptive accomplishments by acting redemptively toward others (Bacchiocchi S. A New Attack Against The Sabbath - Part 3, Endtime Issues No. 78. 12 December 2001).

More information on early writings and the Sabbath can be found in the article Ignatius and the Sabbath (which also quotes from the Didache).

11/26/05 a.m. According to the BBC, tomorrow the Swiss are voting about loosening up a Sunday law:

Swiss set to back Sunday shopping

If Swiss shoppers want a Sunday retail fix, they pop down to their local railway station or airport.

Trading laws say they can shop only in airports or one of seven railway stations, and are limited to travel related goods such as books and food.

But this Sunday they can vote to extend the law so that more shops can open.

If they vote yes, it could lead to a big growth in 25 'RailCity' shopping centres. But if it is a no, 150 stores and 2,000 jobs could go.

The Swiss government is pushing the law because it wants a tighter definition of Sunday trading rules and it thinks visitors to the country should not be faced with closed shops when they arrive...

But calls for wider Sunday trading face stiff opposition from a number of political parties, trade unions and church groups.

Just three days after the referendum, the Swiss parliament is due to discuss the issue of making it easier for any business to open on a Sunday...

"There is huge pressure from some political parties to open Sundays up for business," said Wolfgang Burgstein from the Catholic Church organisation Justitia et Pax.

But whether there is the demand for even more Sunday shopping is in doubt.

"We don't want to open all our stores on Sundays," said Mr Schlepfer.

The Sunday laws do make life more complicated for those who observe the biblical sabbath.

Last night, ICG's Mark Armstrong reported:

I hope you all had a terrific Thanksgiving holiday. It is the one national holiday that intrinsically acknowledges the existence and power of Almighty God, and remains completely devoid of false concepts or ancient pagan forms of worship. In spite of all that is wrong in the world, we certainly have a tremendous number of things for which to be thankful!

This is true! Including that shops in the US are mostly open on Sundays, is a small blessing that some others do not have.

On other matters, apparently my quoting from Christianity Today concerning the latest Harry Potter movie upset the at least part of the anti-COG crowd at AW. Dennis Diehl wrote:

Bob, [after reading your comments on the latest Harry Potter film] we better NEVER catch you actually watching or reading something before you declare it's truth and purity for the masses...that's cheating. We simply need you to have a negative opinion, feel a certain either limited or pick and choose Biblical way about it, and then find someone to quote in agreement with you. That's how all COG ministers and true believers do it.

Actually, while on a plane, I did see one of the tamer Potter movies (as I reported here a while ago), thus these comments are of course typical of the COG critics. The other fact is that I quoted others that did see the current one. Also, perhaps I should add that I have never seen an x-rated movie (or whatever rating that is equivalent), but Jesus's comments in the Sermon on the Mount suggest that it would be best for Christians to avoid those, sight unseen--thus it is not needful for us to view everything personally.

Speaking of AW, a former UCG member (whom I have known for about 19 years, and who is not in LCG) sent me the following as AW is now inquiring about Malnet:

Before this turns into another COG "urban legend" perhaps some light ought to be shed onto the Malnet story. In the days when AOL/Compuserve dominated the internet and the WWW was still fledgling, a way was sought by some members to distribute information about what was going on in the WCG per the doctrinal changes (anonymously of course). It wasn't a newsletter and it certainly didn't have a logo, it was simply a network for passing on information in the form of collecting and distributing emails. It was not started or controlled by disaffected WCG officials, or paid ministry (although later some apparently were members of it).No...I am not Mal.

Malnet grew in importance as sources from inside the administration in Pasadena began passing along info. Tkach Sr. apparently knew about the network as after making another one of his pronouncements in Pasadena, he yelled " I suppose this will be on Malnet tonight!". It was.

Malnet was not formed for the purpose of supporting the beginning of UCG. Its primary purpose was to spread the word about what the leaders of the heresy  in Pasadena (and supporters) were up to - we obviously couldn't trust the WN at that time. When UCG formed, and the bulk of Malnet members had left to GCG or UCG, then it was shut down.

Malnet was pretty rudimentary for todays standards. But it did get out the information to lots of people - and in this way did frustrate the attempts by Tkach and Co to keep a lid on what they were doing.

I never participated in Malnet and really have no other information on it.

Click here for previous news

Click here to go back to the COGwriter home page

ma

Volume 9, issue 18