Concerns About Church of God, a Worldwide Association

Facts and Commentary by COGwriter

In 2010, the United Church of God (UCG) was approached by its then president, Clyde Kilough, about making certain changes to its governance. Something about this resulted in his resignation and others in the top leadership in UCG. Because UCG has long had problems with unity, this combined with certain apparently festering issues among many in the UCG ministry resulted in at least 174 ministers/elders in UCG leaving in the following ten months. This was perhaps the biggest organization crisis that UCG ever faced as thousands once part of it are now gone and supporting Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA).

Some of those who left UCG at first became part of a group called Church of God, America (COGA), which seems to have gone to the wayside shortly after the formation of Church of God, a Worldwide Association (COGWA).

I believe that the crisis was a wake up call, a “knocking on the door” (cf. Revelation 3:20) if you will, for those in or formerly in UCG.  Yet, it seems that most who are or were part of UCG have not truly understood this as a warning as they have tended to be satisfied with a work that was not hot (Revelation 3:14-17). The split that affected UCG/COGWA could be part of a warning to those who have rejected Philadelphia-era governance and gospel proclamation priorities to get them to consider their state (Revelation 3:17-19).

Church of God, a Worldwide Association announced that COGWA is how it prefers to be abbreviated (some had wanted CGWA):

We have also chosen the abbreviation “COGWA” rather than “CGWA” as official for use in all our publications. We could not get the domain name CGWA for our website.

This article will provide some documentation of positions held by individuals that seem to have had at least some authority in COGWA to give an idea about COGWA doctrines, beliefs, and likely practices. In addition, some of my concerns and commentary will also be included.

COGWA's Official Starting Announcement

On December 23, 2010, COGWA made the following announcement:

Announcing the

Church of God, a Worldwide Association

Today we are announcing the formation of a new international congregation of believers, the Church of God, a Worldwide Association. Our church organization incorporated on December 23, 2010 and has members, congregations and ministers around the world.

The formation of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association, results from several fundamental disagreements within United Church of God, an International Association. After numerous efforts to engage in biblical resolutions and reconciliation, all efforts failed, and a separation became inevitable.

There is a report from COGWA (titled Timeline for the Establishment of Church of God, a Worldwide Association, dated about January 3, 2011) where it basically states that it did not decide to form until after UCG essentially rejected a 12/4/10 letter and that various discussions did not happen until the week of December 13, 2010. It also says that it was not until 12/20/10 that it was proposed that COGWA be formed, and that this was somewhat based on a 12/17/10 letter from Dennis Luker, where he indicated to certain ministers that they resign and have a “peaceful separation”. Apparently, some at COGWA were concerned how UCG was portraying this. UCG, on the other hand, had been indicating that it has information that suggests that those who left it were part of some long running conspiracy.

What was the truth about this?

Probably a little of both.  There probably are some in COGWA who had long hoped to break-away from UCG, while many there probably only recently made a decision to do so.  And UCG probably has some information on the former. But in my view, they are likely to be the two sides of the same ditch. There was also controversy about how a Sabbath matter was handled in Latin America. UCG lost most of its Latin American elders in the summer of 2010, because of that and apparently governance concerns.

Although the name Church of God, a Worldwide Association was possibly only going to be temporary, on January 11, 2011, that name was formally adopted to be continued by its voting elders:

January 11, 2011 – The meetings began as Interim Board President Mike Hanisko called upon Kevin Epps for the opening prayer. Mr.Hanisko then announced the result of the ballot for our church name. Of the 118 ballots cast, 78 chose “Church of God, a Worldwide Association.” So our temporary name has now become our official name.

Since essentially all the top ministry of COGWA was originally ordained by the old Worldwide Church of God (WCG), the selection of COGWA seems logical on its surface.

Governance and Leadership of COGWA

COGWA was in a state of flux since its beginning, and while that has calmed down there was confusion about it and what it wants to be.

Here is some of what COGWA has reported:

January 9, 2011 – The organizing conference of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association was opened at 1:00 p.m. by Mike Hanisko, president of the temporary Board of Directors…

Clyde Kilough then gave an opening address...Dave Baker then spoke on interim governance—noting that it was not the intention of this committee to set a precedent for what would be chosen for a long term government, nor how choices would be made, process-wise.


January 10, 2011 – Mike Hanisko, president of the temporary Board of Directors opened the meetings at 8:30 a.m. by asking Tom Diaz to lead the group in prayer.

The first order of business was to ballot upon two proposals for selecting the Interim Governance Team…

Bruce Gore, Chairman of the long-term governance committee, updated everyone on the work of this committee. He thanked everyone for the input that has been given, including over 60 papers on this subject that have come from members and ministers. He noted that the papers represented the widest possible range of ideas.

He shared with everyone that the committee plans to offer several options for governance to the organization. If possible, we want to avoid mistakes of the past. Answering the question, “Can you guarantee that this won’t happen again?” he said, “No. But we all want to reduce politics and the turnover of administrators. We also want to minimize the amount of balloting.”…

the men who served on the Temporary Leadership Team and those who served on the Temporary Board now become the Interim Governance Team. Those serving on the Interim Leadership Team are Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register and Richard Thompson. Those serving on the Interim Board are George Evans, Ken Giese, Mike Hanisko, Greg Sargent and Roger West.


January 14, 2011...

The most important decision now ahead of us is to determine the church’s long-term governance system. We hope to accomplish that relatively soon, but in the meantime many organizational issues need immediate attention and require having an administration and governance in place. To that end, the pre-conference short-term governance committee proposed two options. By more than two-thirds margin (84 to 37) the elders selected the one that called for the existing temporary board of directors and leadership team to continue serving in their roles until a permanent form of governance is established.

What is now known as the Interim Governance Team consists of Jim Franks, Doug Horchak, Clyde Kilough, David Register and Richard Thompson; the Board of Directors consists of George Evans, Kenneth Giese (secretary), Michael Hanisko, Greg Sargent (treasurer) and Roger West. To legally fulfill the requirements of the elders’ decision, on Monday Mr. Hanisko stepped down as president of the corporation and was reappointed as board chairman. This option also required the Interim Governance Team to select a chief executive officer from among themselves, so later that evening they appointed Clyde Kilough as president. The bulk of the day-to-day work falls on the shoulders of the governance team, but both groups will be working closely together.

After the conference ended on Tuesday, the governance team organized its duties according to the mandate spelled out in the option the elders chose. Jim Franks will manage the areas that pertain to ministerial and congregational care; Richard Thompson will coordinate financial affairs with the treasurer and accounting firm in addition to coordinating our festival planning; Doug Horchak will be the liaison with the international areas; David Register will work with areas of communication and our education program including youth camps; and Clyde Kilough will focus on media efforts pertaining to preaching the gospel…

But as the long-term governance committee chairman, Bruce Gore, noted in his conference presentation, we also know that no structure of governance can guarantee a problem-free future. We all must be governed first and foremost by God’s Holy Spirit working effectively in each one of us…

Until next time, may God be with you all,
<signed by>
George Evans
Jim Franks
Kenneth Giese
Michael Hanisko
Doug Horchak
Clyde Kilough
David Register
Greg Sargent
Richard Thompson
Roger West

Peter Hawkins, former CEO of UCG in the United Kingdom resigned on February 8, 2011, and became listed with COGWA’s London congregation. Les McCullough, the UCG President of UCG prior to Clyde Kilough, also became associated with COGWA.

COGWA has spent what seems to be a lot of time to work on its form of governance.

On 7/13/11, COGWA's secretary wrote:

  1. In regard to our proposed Governance Plan, Constitution and Bylaws: 138 elders approved and 10 elders disapproved. Therefore, the Governance Plan, Constitution and Bylaws are approved.
  2. In regard to our two options for selecting leadership: 82 elders chose Option 1 (Balloting) and 66 elders chose Option 2 (Balloting/Impartial Selection). Therefore, we shall select leadership using Option 1 (Balloting).

So, with a choice of balloting vs. another type of balloting, the eldership of COGWA choose balloting.  This is not a surprise.  Those elders apparently were not interested in the type of governance structure that all of them at least publicly supported when they were part of the old WCG (as nearly all of them once were).

When Jesus returns no one thinks that He will implement the type of balloting governance that COGWA adopted.  Jesus would clearly support a hierarchical form of governance. Perhaps that should be the standard today?

The style of governance that COGWA has thus far been operating under is very similar to that which UCG began under. This differs from that of the old WCG. For some details, please see The Bible, Peter, Paul, John, Polycarp, Herbert W. Armstrong, Roderick C. Meredith, and Bob Thiel on Church Government.

How Large is COGWA? Has it Grown?

COGWA seems to be the largest group to come out of UCG (David Hulme's COGaIC had been the largest prior to this).

Notice the following from Jim Franks to COGWA's ministry 3/4/2011:

As of March 1, we have more than 200 congregations holding weekly services with more than 170 elders and 8,000 in attendance around the world.

On May 27, 2011, COGWA reported that it had 9,037 attend the first Day of Unleavened Bread.

As far as number of congregations, as of 09/11/2011, COGWA listed 237 congregations with 111 in the USA, 3 in Canada, 50 in Latin America, 4 in Europe, 13 in the Caribbean, 28 in Africa, and 28 in Asia/Pacific. COGWA is likely the second or third largest COG (UCG may still be the largest, LCG is the second or third largest, PCG seems to be the fourth largest).

On November 3, 2011, COGWA's Jim Franks reported:

We also had a very strong international attendance during the Feast this year. You may not be aware of this, but about 40 percent of our total Church attendance resides outside the United States…The Feast of Tabernacles and Last Great Day capped off an extraordinary year for us…Our highest actual attendance on a holy day in the U.S. this year was 5,002. By including a very conservative estimate of two people per connection for the Webcasts during the Feast of Tabernacles, we calculate that COGWA had a total attendance of around 5,300 in the U.S. and close to 9,500 worldwide.

These figures suggest that UCG was hit hard by the crisis. UCG's income may tumble. UCG itself reported back on February 4, 2011 that it had lost 53% of its paid USA ministers. But UCG has continued until now, not appearing to be overly damaged (other than the fact of the loss itself), but mainly going along similar to how it did prior to the COGWA split (with less expenses to help balance out the lessor income).

In 2012, COGWA reported around 9,200 at its Feast of Tabernacles' sites.

Here is what it reported about 2016:

According to the preliminary numbers, our attendance has grown by 750 people since our first year (2011). The difference from year to year has been small, but it is encouraging to see the increase over the five-year period from 2011 to 2016. (Member letter, November 3, 2016)

So, there was some growth in COGWA.

On December 5, 2018, The 7th Day Sabbath Church of God News website had the following on its news page:

The figures reported by the churches are:

United Church of God: 12,360 according to Peter Eddington on 26th February 2018.

Church of God a Worldwide Association: approx.11,000 (5,500 in the USA), according to Jim Franks on 29th November 2018.

Continuing Church of God: 3,800 according to Robert Thiel. (Over 3600 are in Africa.)

The LCG, PCG and RCG do not give out numbers, but attendances for all three have been declining significantly.

Living Church of God: 6,000? 9,000 was presumably the attendance when Robert Thiel left LCG to form his own church, and it surely hasn’t sunk to 3,000 today. The only membership loss announced publicly was the transfer of the Geneva, Switzerland, congregation to COGWA.

Philadelphia Church of God: 3,500? Stephen Flurry commented a couple of years ago that PCG had levelled out at around 5,000. In 2017 The Philadelphian magazine listed 143 congregations, indicating that 2,000 must be on the low side.

Restored Church of God: 1,000? If it isn’t down to this figure (or lower) now, it surely will be soon – David Pack is continually losing members and ministers – even his second-in-command left recently.

COGWA is the natural beneficiary of transfers from LCG, PCG and RCG, because it has retained the tenets of Armstrongism, and has a more Christian leadership.

As Jim Franks commented in the June issue of One Accord, “I enjoyed my four years at Ambassador College, and I learned a lot. But I also realized that there is more to developing leaders than attending four years of college … One thing we have learned is that leadership without conversion is of little value. Over the years we have seen many examples of outstanding leaders and great speakers who were lacking in this most basic principle of Christianity.”

COGWA no longer vets prospective members before allowing them to attend. Instead it has copied the United Church of God in introducing a standardized website for each congregation, stating location and times of services, and welcoming people to visit. Whereas the Festival of Tabernacles in LCG, PCG and RCG is restricted to members and their families, COGWA has an open attendance policy.

As far as LCG goes, that the 6,000 estimate was low. So much so I called its Charlotte HQ on 12/05/18 and verified that they have over 10,000.

While size is not an indicator of truth, the truth is that the CCOG has been the fastest growing COG in the 21st century. The three groups with more congregants than CCOG (UCG, COGWA, LCG) have essentially been slow growing and the other two shown on the post (PCG and RCG) have had substantial losses of congregants in the past 6 or so years.

Unlike UCG, COGWA, and LCG who got the bulk of their members because of a split from another organization (as PCG also somewhat also did–but not as quickly directly as the others did), CCOG did not do that.

Currently, about 3,800 are considered and/or wish to be considered congregants with the CCOG.

Anyway, the only group in the list above to add over 3,000 congregants in the past six years in the Continuing Church of God which began with 5 people on December 28, 2012. The three groups with more congregants than CCOG above (UCG, COGWA, LCG) have basically been stagnant as far as congregant growth goes in the past 1/2 dozen years (they have had relatively little) and the two groups with less congregants than CCOG in that list have significantly lost congregants during that period.

While I do not believe that COGWA’s intent was to remain stagnant and mainly grow from getting people once in UCG or LCG, that essentially is what has happened.

Where is COGWA Located?

While COGWA claims congregations around the world (mainly in North and South America, with perhaps some in New Zealand, Europe, South Africa, and elsewhere) its main office was originally in Florida. Here is COGWA's Q&A on this:

Will the headquarters remain in Florida?

As was pointed out in the December 24, 2010, announcement regarding the formation of the Church of God, a Worldwide Association our temporary headquarters is located in Palm Coast, Florida.

This temporary office was established as a necessary step of incorporating in Florida.

The location of UCG's main office was a factor that has caused controversy for several years.

In 2012, COGWA found a location in Allen, Texas (located some miles north of Dallas), which is where it is now based.

But it plans to change that:

Our finances are strong, and we have an excellent cash reserve. We believe it is in the best interest of the Church to build or purchase our own office building here in the Dallas area. In Dallas the cost of leasing is roughly equivalent to the price of buying, but when you buy you have something tangible at the end of the day, whereas leasing leaves you with nothing (except the prospect of higher rents!).

In November we will renew our lease here in Allen for one additional year, securing our current location until May 31, 2018. That should give us time to locate land and build an office, which seems to be the most efficient and best use of our resources. We have been looking for almost two years, but haven’t yet found the right location. We will keep you informed as to our progress. Please continue to pray for God’s guidance in these decisions. (Member letter, November 3, 2016)

Location has been an issue for COGWA.

COGWA's Doctrines to be Essentially the Same as UCG's

As far as beliefs, COGWA's Jim Franks indicated that COGWA would have the same ones as UCG did:

January 10, 2011 – ...Mr. Franks then shared a document establishing our commitment to doctrinal integrity. This includes the following principles:

  1. We commit our support for the 20 fundamental beliefs as developed and approved by the elders in 1995.
  2. We commit to establishing a doctrinal review process for all publications that contain doctrinal material, whether posted on the Internet or printed. This process must involve levels of review and include senior ministers known for their doctrinal integrity.
  3. We commit to establishing a committee for doctrinal oversight, entrusted with the responsibility of resolving doctrinal conflict and answering doctrinal questions from within the organization, among the elders and among the membership.
  4. We commit to providing a process by which any elder or member may submit doctrinal questions and/or material for doctrinal review. This process will provide for several levels of review by senior ministers.

Of course, UCG has had doctrinal deviations that not all of its membership seems to have been aware of. Some of these are included in the article Differences between the Living Church of God and United Church of God. COGWA issued a limited statement of beliefs that is available at

COGWA's focus seems to be on rebuilding and starting anew. For one small example, notice the following from its official website:

Starting Something New?
by Joel Meeker - January 21, 201

Are you starting something new?

Certainly, COGWA is new, but in many ways it seems to be trying to take several of the same steps that UCG did when it formed.

Central Funding, But Local Can Be Allowed

In a letter to its membership dated January 20, 2011, the Interim Leadership of COGWA stated:

Following this letter is a proposal outlining our recommendations for financial management. It allows, as we have for the last 15 years, for both central and local collections of tithes and offerings. Some local congregations have already collected a considerable amount of money, which is  understandable since we have had a central post office box for only three weeks. However, in order to move forward with making plans to hire employees to be able to preach the gospel and care for the congregations, we need to be able to accurately gauge the income that will be received centrally.

Here is some information from that document, which is called Financial Procedures for the Church of God, a Worldwide Association Collection and Disbursement of Financial Resources During the Interim Start-Up Phase Submitted by the Interim Leadership Team and Board of Directors January 2011:

The Church of God, a Worldwide Association, is in a start-up phase, although certain considerations required at the birth of an organization will change as it matures. The immediate critical success factors are:

1. Prepare forecasts, budgets and plans.

2. Pay for required local congregational needs, such as halls, supplies and sound systems.

3. Provide financial assistance for needy members and retirees.

4. Provide an employed pastor for every congregation.

But we need to be extremely frugal. Spending decisions should always be made with care, and in the start-up phase expenditures must be made only for what is absolutely necessary.

As we stabilize and can forecast income with greater confidence, the next steps will include finalizing long-term governance, selecting leaders and administrators, developing strategies for doing the work of the Church including spreading the gospel, and allocating resources based on those decisions.  

Barely a month into its organization, the Church of God, a Worldwide Association, has funds both in a central account and (of unknown amounts) in many local church accounts. This makes it impossible to forecast, budget and allocate responsibly.

Our first step is to decide how we are going to approach the initial critical success factors listed above. We suggest the following:

 Both the central office and each congregation should prepare a budget.

 Each local congregation should be responsible for paying for its immediate needs. If sufficient funds are not available locally, a subsidy will be sent from the central office.

 Providing financial assistance to either congregations or needy members should be primarily handled centrally, in coordination with the local pastor. Local congregations should keep enough money in reserves to handle unforeseen emergency needs.

 As funds permit, the hiring of pastors should be managed centrally and not attempted locally.

These matters require centralized forecasting, budgeting and planningthat can only be accomplished with a coordinated pooling of resources. If individual congregations desire to continue collecting funds locally, the costs involved in the financial management of the local congregation should be considered. Costs not readily seen are those related to pastoral care and providing for those in need, including widows and retirees. Without some system of sharing resources, we may find that our widows and retirees will be without support. We believe this is unacceptable for the Church of God based on the scriptures that insist we care for these individuals. A laborer is worthy of his hire, and pure religion is to visit the fatherless and widows in their need (1 Timothy 5:18; James 1:27).

Local Start-Up Considerations

Anyone should feel free to send their tithes and offerings to the local congregation, the central account or both.

This is fairly similar, though not quite the same, as how UCG began. It is similar because it is giving members a choice about where to tithe. It is not the same, however, as it seems clear that COGWA wants people to realize that it truly intends a centralized budget for the USA and is suggesting that the local situation will be dealt with centrally after it is ready. At least that is my read of this.

Gospel Proclamation a Priority or an After Thought?

COGWA has made a couple of pronouncements which suggest that it should proclaim the gospel:

(December 23, 2010) Our mission is to preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God to all nations and make disciples from among those whom God calls. Our doctrines are based in the first century teachings of Jesus Christ as practiced by the apostles. Our values are grounded in the biblical record. We will strive to humbly follow this example.


January 10, 2011 – ...Ken Treybig then gave a presentation on preaching the gospel. We want to assure everyone that we are committed to doing this he said. Continuing, he noted that we must fulfill the commission Christ gave the Church. How we can do this with a smaller group? Perhaps it will have to be done in a measured way, most likely with an Internet focus, but also with print…

There are several concerns I have about the above.

One, is that the leadership of COGWA never really seemed to make gospel proclamation a top priority when they were part of UCG.

The second is that by indicating that this will be done in a measured way and mainly on the internet, this suggests that COGWA's financial priorities will not be in the direction of public proclamation. Remember that Jesus taught:

21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (Matthew 6:21, NKJV)

Notice the following from Jim Franks to COGWA's ministry 3/4/2011:

Starting over is not easy, but within a matter of 10 weeks a new organization is up and running—not quite on all cylinders just yet—but up and running. On Feb. 7, sixty employees began work for COGWA. As of March 1, we began providing financial support for international areas (Latin America, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Ghana, the Philippines, Caribbean, French regions of Africa, France and New Zealand—with more to come). This will be a large financial undertaking, to the tune of $900,000 on an annual basis. Outside of the employment of 60 people, this will be the largest expenditure to date for the new organization.

The above is consistent with what I expected (as well as what I have written about COGWA).  COGWA's main financial priorities will be to provide employment for ministers as well as to provide other financial support for their congregations.  Gospel proclamation will likely to continue to take a lower priority. 

I have not heard of a radio or television program intended for the public being produced and aired by COGWA or plans to utilize those media (for point of reference, Continuing Church of God was on radio 4 weeks of its formation, as I personally did a total of 15 radio appearances within its first year and scores since; see also Does the CCOG go through the ‘door’ of radio to reach the world?).

But there is more. Several leaders in COGWA were affiliated with the now probably defunct COGA. Why is this a concern?

COGA, perhaps realizing that it may have tight finances, but definitely realizing that its heart is not into public proclamation of the gospel, listed the following at its website:

Having chosen to associate in a supportive way, we commit to the following:

1. To put Matthew 6:33 as the first priority.

2. To participate in a Daily Bible Reading program

3. To implement the Ephesians 4:12-16 model.

4. To practice Matthew 18:15-18 and 1 Timothy 5:19-20.

5. To manage finances responsibly.

6. To preach the gospel.

So gospel proclamation is admitted to be its lowest priority on public commitment.  It seems to have governance as third. When the above came out, Leon Walker, Larry Salyer, and Ken Giese were directors of COGA (formed in the fall of 2010) and/or affiliated with IAO (International Ambassador Outreach, which seemed to have formed in the summer of 2010). And Ken Giese is on one of COGWA's governing boards. I believe that the COGA position will tend to reflect more about what COGWA will actually do, hence this is a major concern.

In what I consider to be an attempt to rationalize its low priority on gospel proclamation, it wrote the following its commitments:

What does this mean in practical terms?

1. To put Matthew 6:33 as the first priority.

It is always good to put first the things God and Christ say to put first—loving God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength; seeking first His Kingdom and His righteousness.

If we fail to put these first, we can justify unrighteous actions–if they support something important to us such as doing a work. If we fail to reinforce the top priorities, we will fill those places with what seems right to us at the time.

At times the success of a church or of a minister has been measured on how much enthusiasm we have for preaching the gospel. Preaching the gospel is important, but it must not take precedence over the two things Christ said to put first: seeking the Kingdom and seeking God’s righteousness. Part of seeking the Kingdom is to preach it in preparation for Christ’s return. We will do this collectively as we have funds and manpower to do so…

6. To preach the gospel.

As part of preaching the gospel, we will build stable congregations to receive the people God calls. We will witness personally by being able to answer questions about our faith with confidence and accuracy. We will promote congregations sharing an Internet presence to preach the gospel. (Acts 1:8)

I consider that COGA’s approach is at best Laodicean as it certainly is not "hot."  Since Ken Giese held/holds the position of  “Director: Advisory Board” for International Ambassador Outreach, is apparently a founding member of COGWA, and apparently concurred with IAO’s funding of projects related to COGA, there is a link.  And this may be disturbing for those in COGWA because it claims its “mission is to preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God to all nations and make disciples from among those whom God calls.”

Yet, COGA’s priorities show that it had no real intention to fulfill Matthew 24:14, or the order of priorities in Matthew 28:19-20. And that gives me more reasons to wonder about COGWA.

And while placing Matthew 6:33 as its first commitment may help some rationalize against placing proper priority on public proclamation, I believe that listing that actually shows significant carnality on COGA’s part.  Let’s quote and look at the context of that scripture:

25 “Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing?  26 Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?  27 Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?

28 “So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin;  29 and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.  30 Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?

31 “Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’  32 For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.  33 But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.  34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.  (Matthew 6:25-34, NKJV)

Notice that Jesus was telling His followers not to be worried about carnal matters like what they would eat, but instead be oriented towards the kingdom of God in their personal lives.  Yet, COGA suggests that this gets them out of gospel preaching commitments like Matthew 24:14; 28:19.

Notice what Matthew 24:14 states:

14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14)

COGA did not seem to feel that it needs to preach that gospel much to the world as a witness as long as it declares that simply seeking God’s kingdom is a top commitment.  This seems a bit on the selfish side.  In my view, COGA really was off track in its rationalization of its commitments.

Larry Salyer who is/was a director at COGA is/was also a director of International Ambassador Outreach (IAO).  IAO’s 12/01/10 press release began with:

International Ambassador Outreach (IAO) was formed in 2010 to help support the financial needs of congregations and care for members of the Church of God…

(For more details, please see the article UCG, IAOM, LCG, and Other UCG Options and IAO Reports Finances.) Larry Salyer is listed as having a COGWA congregation in Ruston, Louisiana. Both Larry Salyer and Leon Walker (both once of COGA) were nominated to be on the Ministerial Board of Directors for COGWA (COGWA Letter, July 31, 2011).

Earlier, Dixon Cartwright in his publication The Journal reported:

The conservatives, including those who are in the process of separating themselves from the UCG, are the diehard Herbert Armstrong fans. They include Leon Walker, Larry Salyer, Mike Hanisko, Ken Treybig, Mike Blackwell, Tom Kirkpatrick, Jim Franks, Dick Thompson and others who in recent days no longer sit on the council or occupy other positions because they have left the UCG. These folks are among the founders of the new Church of God a Worldwide Association.

It has been, and remains, my view that the first purpose of COGA (and now COGWA) is to keep ministers employed, and that pretty much everything else is a lower priority.  And this opinion is not only based upon its publicly admitted (as viewed on 12/23/10) list of commitments, but also on the fact that International Ambassador Outreach originally formed essentially to fund the Latin American ministers and then was expanded to include funding of other UCG ministers who might leave that organization.

This is not to say that the COGA/COGWA ministers did not have any legitimate grievances against UCG (or UCG towards them, for that matter), but I see at best a Laodicean work was the goal for COGA.  If there were any Philadelphians who considered COGA, they need to reconsider as COGA’s foundations seem to be highly Laodicean.

Remember, it was Jesus who condemned the Laodiceans for their work (Revelation 3:14-19), but He praised the Philadelphians for theirs (Revelation 3:7-10).  Not only were COGA’s commitments at best lukewarm, they definitely are different than that of the Philadelphian church. I do not see COGWA as necessarily different (although at least in writing they indicated that they would be).

I believe that going for the UCG side of the ditch to the COGWA side of the same ditch will not result in a more effective proclamation of the gospel and will not do much to support Matthew 24:14. Of course, since the "gospel of the kingdom" involves government and COGWA apparently does not intend to install the type of governance that Christ will establish during His kingdom, this whole area of Matthew 24:14 is a major concern to me about COGWA.

Actions (fruits, cf. Matthew 7:15-20) speak louder than mission statements. 

COGWA's Financial and Gospel Priorities

Since its beginning, I have questioned the committment of those running COGWA to fulfill Matthew 24:14 and to have gospel proclamation priorities consistent with Matthew 28:19-20.

In a letter to COGWA's membership dated 3/15/2011, Clyde Kilough wrote:

The obvious affordable vehicle we have for immediate use to launch gospel proclamation efforts is the Internet, and what a tool it is—the tool that reaches literally the entire world! We’ve never come close to tapping its full potential, but we certainly can begin carving out our niche. It doesn’t matter that we may be a small flock; with the power of the Internet, the gospel message has the very real capability of reaching farther, and with greater impact, than ever before. Furthermore, this is the media device that offers the greatest opportunity for broad-based ministerial and member participation. We should note that by no means does this exclude other formats of media presentation—print, radio, television, etc.

He also wrote:

…this is something we are delighted to announce—we are dedicating the first holy day offering of the Feast of Unleavened Bread entirely to preaching the gospel. This will provide the “seed money” for sowing our future efforts. In a time when we don’t have an annual budget in place and there are many hungry mouths, it will also assure that the gospel is guaranteed its seat at the resources table and that its share isn’t gobbled up before it even has a chance to get started.

Some will consider that the above is a good first step.  Those who compare that to the gospel proclaiming financial priorities of the old WCG under Herbert W. Armstrong, what was done at the start of the Continuing Church of God will realize that COGWA obviously is relegating gospel proclamation a relatively low financial priority.  COGWA does not want to be so cold as to not do it, but neither so hot that it is a top priority (cf. Revelation 3).

In a member letter dated 8/19/11, COGWA's new Board stated the following:

Of the three major steps needed to establish a permanent governance and administrative system, two are now complete—we have selected our form of governance, and the Ministerial Board of Directors has now been named. A remaining major step is for the MBOD to name a president and to approve the management team he selects…If we are right in God’s sight, then He will bless us in what we do. If we are not right then we will struggle and eventually fail…

We commit to you that our greatest priority will be the spiritual strength and spiritual growth of the Church…

We are committed to preaching that gospel to this world and teaching God’s way of life. We may be small, but there are ways to harness the powers of technology to proclaim a witness to the truth of God with a bigger and more effective voice. We are committed to getting this done!

We are committed to preserving and defending the doctrinal integrity of the Church of God and to helping the Church become stronger through being grounded in the true doctrines of Christ.

The above appears to be COGWA’s four priorities and in the order of importance to the Board.  It has spent its first 8 months of official existence mainly on trying to work out its governance (COGWA is a split from the United Church of God and all of its board members were once affiliated with Herbert W. Armstrong).  This amount of time and focus suggests that COGWA still is likely to have problems with governance/administration and perhaps will have future splits.

As far as “feeding the flock” this seems to be the second listed priority, followed by its hope to do public proclamation, followed by its commitment to doctrinal integrity.  These priorities seem neither hot nor cold  (cf. Revelation 3).  Jesus seemed to list priorities in a different order than COGWA in Matthew 28:19-20.

Of course, COGWA said that it would use the internet as its primary means of preaching the gospel to the world.

And after a disappointing start, COGWA's has had some impact.

It took COGWA nearly three years to put out its first proclamation magazine, Discern:

Today, Monday, Dec. 16, 2013, we are excited to offer, free of charge, this bimonthly, online e-magazine that will give you insight based on an in-depth analysis of God’s Word, the Bible. For example, here are some of the articles you will find in this first issue (Kilough C. Discern. viewed 12/22/13)

So, finally it has what it considers to be a magazine for its public proclamation website.

To put this in perspective, the Continuing Church of God (CCOG) produced its first Bible News Prophecy magazine within five weeks of its formation, and also printed it. CCOG’s Bible News Prophecy magazine has also been produced in multiple languages (English, Spanish, Mandarin Chinese, Kiswahili, and Tagalog), with additional languages (see also The Final Phase of the Work). For COGWA to take three years to produce its first an online proclamation magazine helps demonstrate that gospel proclamation was not really a priority.

Notice what COGWA reported the following about how it would handle its initial Holy Day offering:

On the first holy day you gave some $370,000 in the offering, and I cannot help but conclude that this outstanding outpouring was because your hearts are in the very cause for which this offering was dedicated—preaching the gospel! (Kilough C. Member Letter, April 29, 2011)

And while that seems to be a fine offering to get started with, FWIW, UCG reported $544,408 for the same Holy Day (with an expectation of 560,000 when all receipts are in). But what did it do with it?

Its first official announcement (posted by 12/9/11 but dated 12/10/11) of a regular periodical (called One Accord) stated that it was directed towards members and would be an online publication that would begin in January 2012.

Sadly, thousands associated with COGWA seem to be satisfied with that type of work. While I do not doubt that pouring a Holy Day offering into the internet will not widen COGWA’s reach, the approach espoused so far by COGWA is consistent with the concerns I have had about that group from its formation.

Of course, if gospel proclamation was truly the priority for people in COGWA, they would not have fragmented and formed COGWA in the first place.

COGWA supporter Michael Hanisko posted:

Several members have asked recently how COGWA is doing financially. I thought you would appreciate reading this encouraging financial update from Steve McNeely, one of our accountants: “We were blessed with a generous Pentecost offering and steady deposits during the month of June. Total income for the month was just over $800,000, and for the year it stands at approximately $3,880,000. Expenses continue to be well managed and held to a minimum, and we are very grateful for everyone operating on a frugal budget as we become more established in the early organizational stages. As of June 30, 2011, we have approximately $1,430,000 in the bank, of which just under $400,000 has been restricted to use for preaching the gospel. We also have set aside temporarily restricted income that will be used during the year for specific purposes, such as assistance and Feast expenses. The low point for cash flow is historically right before the Fall Feast Days so we are trying to build our operating reserves. We currently have about one month’s worth of expenses in reserves, which is not a lot, but it is significant considering we started with nothing.”

“We are continuing to work on entering detail for contribution receipts. The mail detail is processed through May, and we are working on the holy day offerings. It is a big job. Our goal is to provide a combined first and second quarter contribution receipt in the next two or three weeks.”

“While the money in the bank gives us only a relatively small margin for needs and reserves, given the amount of time we have been in operation, we are very grateful for God’s blessings and the continued, generous financial support from the brethren. This is a very important part of building an organizational foundation upon which we can do the work God has commissioned to us.”

In its last audited financial statements, UCG had reported an income of USD$23,870,107.  If COGWA would have gotten about 1/2, it would have been expected to have an income for the first six months of 2011 much closer to USD$6,000,000 than 4,000,000.

In its announcement dated 02/09/12, COGWA had the following from its President Jim Franks:

On Jan. 1, 2011, we had only a week of existence and approximately $135,000 in the bank. On Jan. 1, 2012, after the completion of our first fiscal year, we showed an unrestricted cash balance of $1.3 million. Yes, indeed, it was a remarkable year!…

In addition to the good news on the financial front, we have now concluded the lengthy process of locating an office. I am happy to announce the location of our new headquarters office in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. We will be leasing an office suite consisting of 5,590 square feet of space on the first floor of the building located at 1301 Central Expressway South, Allen, Texas. Allen is a suburb of Dallas and is located just a few miles north of the city along the Central Expressway (also U.S. Highway 75). The name of the building complex is “The Office Campus at Allen,” and it is in a beautiful setting with easy access to the freeway…

While the location decision was left to the administration, I wanted to make sure everyone agreed with the final selection. Joel Meeker, Leon Walker, Larry Salyer, David Baker, Fort Worth pastor Britton Taylor and I were involved in this review. Jason Lovelady and Clyde Kilough were not present for this final review, but both had seen the properties on a previous trip. Dallas pastor Doug Horchak was out of the country but had also seen the properties at an earlier time. At the end of the day, all present agreed that the Allen property was superior to the others and offered everything we desired at an affordable price (below our budget)…

I hope you are as encouraged as I am by our progress

There was no mention of gospel proclamation in the above letter, though the internet was mentioned.

Now, on May 31, 2012, COGWA announced:

From Clyde Kilough: We are making excellent progress in getting our new public-proclamation website, lifehope­, ready for launching at the ministerial conference...

Last week you received the announcement about changes in the distribution of our monthly church newspaper, One Accord. For the first four issues we sent copies of One Accord in bulk to each congregation to distribute to the members who don’t have Internet access or don’t have the ability to download or print it. We have made it a priority to make sure everyone is kept up-to-date with the events and happenings in the Church.

So, getting information to its members has been a high priority and that soon it will have a website devoted more towards public proclamation.

Officially, COGWA formed in December 2010. Its main seven accomplishments since that time seem to have been:

  1. Getting much of the paid US based ministry of the United Church of God to leave and support it.
  2. It held the Feast of Tabernacles in many locations.
  3. Getting thousands of former UCG members to support it.
  4. Accumulating over one million dollars as an extra reserve.
  5. Finding and moving to an office in Texas.
  6. Not falling into the type of apostasy that happened in the Tkach WCG/GCI.
  7. Announcing a ministerial training program (called Focused Mentoring Program).
  8. Starting various websites, including Foundation Institute and Life, Hope, & Truth.

Although COGWA has claimed that public gospel proclamation was to be its top priority, this does not seem to truly be the case. Perhaps that wil change.

Prophetic Vagueness

When I have reviewed COGWA's writings on Daniel 11, the King of the North, and the King of the South (three different papers), there is a lot of vagueness in the writings as COGWA is not sure what it believes on many points, and is wrong on one or more it claims to understand.

Here are some examples:

Dual fulfillments

Verses 35-39: The reference to “the time of the end” in verse 35 offers a challenge in interpretation. Some understand this as referring to the time just before Christ’s return, and others see it as the end of the Maccabean struggles. Some of the actions can be attributed to Antiochus Epiphanes, and some seem to be prophecies of the beast power that will exist at the end of this present age. These verses apparently have dual fulfillments, spanning from the time of the Maccabees until the return of Christ.

The preceding verses in Daniel 11 represent extremely detailed prophecies that have been fulfilled exactly as they were revealed to Daniel. It is important to note that the Roman Empire defeated Seleucid Syria in 65 B.C. and that it defeated Egypt in 30 B.C. Thus the first identities of the king of the North and the king of the South came to an end.

The time of the end

In verses 40-45 we read of actions of a king of the North and a king of South “at the time of the end” (verse 40). The end-time identities of these nations are yet to be determined. (Treybig D. Daniel 11: The Most Detailed Prophecy in the Bible. viewed 06/03/14)

It is also interesting to note that the prophecy through verse 39 seems to end before the first century and not resume until “the time of the end” referred to in Daniel 11:40. (Treybig. The King of the North. viewed 06/03/14)

COGWA's contention that Daniel 11:39 was fulfilled thousands of years ago is inconsistent with the view contention that the verses of Daniel 11:35-39 have future fulfillment--which they do. For more on this, check out the article: USA in Prophecy: The Strongest Fortresses and/or a related sermon: Do these 7 prophesies point to the end of the USA?

The chapter that COGWA refers to as the most detailed prophecy in the Bible is essentially admits it does not understand the details of it. Statements such as "offers a challenge in interpretation" suggest, to me at least, that COGWA has disagreement about how to interpret the statements or simply does not know. Most likely it is both.

Prophetic Misunderstandings

While it is vague in areas that it should not be, in some areas, COGWA has posted positions that are in error.

Here is something related to 2 Thessalonians 2:

The apostle Paul explained how this deception would come about in writing to the church at Thessalonica. He wrote, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4). The popes have claimed the title “vicar of Christ,” which means “to stand in the place of Jesus Christ.”

The Adam Clarke Commentary describes this “man of sin” in verse 4 as “having the highest place and authority in the Christian Church, he acts as God—taking upon himself God’s titles and attributes, and arrogating to himself the authority that belongs to the Most High” (note on 2 Thessalonians 2:4). God reveals that prior to the return of Jesus Christ many will be deceived by this coming individual and the false religious system that is behind him.

Babylon the Great with its entire system centered in Rome and the final pope who is called a false prophet (Revelation 19:20) will come to a sudden end when Jesus Christ returns. (Haeffele J. What is Babylon? viewed 06/03/14)

Speaking of the time just before the return of Jesus Christ, the apostle John wrote, “Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18). . . .

The specific person to whom John referred has additional names in other passages of the Bible. These include:

Although we do not know who this specific individual is at this time, we will be able to identify him in the future because of the “power, signs, and lying wonders” that will be granted to him by Satan the devil to deceive humans into disobeying and rebelling against Christ (2 Thessalonians 2:9). (Swanson B. Antichrist. COGWA. viewed 06/03/14)

It has compounded the one above by again wrongly teaching the following in an issue of its Discern magazine:

Writing to Church members in Thessalonica, Paul implored them “not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled … as though the day of Christ had come” (2 Thessalonians 2:2). He explained, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God” (verses 3-4).

This “lawless one,” “man of sin” and “son of perdition,” as Paul called him, will claim to be Christ (verses 3-4, 8). Because of the “power, signs, and lying wonders” granted to this man by Satan, many will be deceived by this “delusion” (verses 9-11). But this evil man will be destroyed by Christ at His second coming (verse 8).

Since Paul had written about this individual several decades prior to when John penned his general epistles, John may have had Paul’s teaching in mind as he wrote about the Antichrist. (Treybig D. Discern, November-December 2017)

The final Antichrist promotes the 'man of sin' of 2 Thessalonians 2. While that 'man of sin' is AN antichrist, he is NOT the one identified by John as the coming final Antichrist.

The 'man of sin' is not the main religious leader and false prophet, but the final King of the North of Daniel (see Daniel 11:36-37). COGWA seems to be relying too much on one or more non-biblical traditions than it is scripture. For more details, please see the article Who is the Man of Sin of 2 Thessalonians 2?

Notice this explanation related to Daniel 9:27:

So the phrase “he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week” refers to the Messiah. (Henson D. 70 Weeks of Daniel: What Does the Prophecy Mean? viewed 06/03/14)

The above is in error. Verse 27 refers to the prince who is the one who will become the King of the North in Daniel 11. More details on Daniel 9:27 can be found in the article The 'Peace Deal' of Daniel 9:27.

Because COGWA does not understand a lot of the details in Daniel 9:27 and Daniel 11, it will not know when the time to flee that Jesus discussed in Matthew 24 will be (see also There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians. Why it May Be Petra). People who do not know what to expect will not know what to watch out for nor realize when the Great Tribulation will start until it is too late (see also When Will the Great Tribulation Begin?).

On the other hand, unlike UCG, COGWA seems to take a bit more of a stand in accepting the teaching about church eras. It has reported:

Students of the Bible have also noted that the messages to the seven churches imply a progressive history of things “which will take place after this” (Revelation 1:19). Some have described this as the chronological development of the Church or church eras.

Addressing this perspective, the late professor Dr. John F. Walvoord notes: “Many expositors believe that in addition to the obvious implication of these messages the seven churches represent the chronological development of church history viewed spiritually. They note that Ephesus seems to be characteristic of the Apostolic Period in general and that the progression of evil climaxing in Laodicea seems to indicate the final state of apostasy of the church. … The order of the messages to the churches seems to be divinely selected to give prophetically the main movement of church history” (John Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 1989, pp. 51-52).

Another scholar, C.I. Scofield (1843-1921), editor of the Scofield Study Bible, gives a similar explanation:

“Again, these messages by their very terms go beyond the local assemblies mentioned. It can be seen that Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7), though a local church in the apostle’s day, is typical of the first century as a whole; Smyrna (Revelation 2:8-11) characterizes the church under persecution, e.g. from A.D. c. 100-316; Pergamos (Revelation 2:12-17), ‘where Satan dwells’ … is suggestive of the church mixing with the world, e.g. in the Middle Ages; Thyatira (Revelation 2:18-29) reveals how evil progresses in the church and idolatry is practiced; Sardis (Revelation 3:1-6) is representative of the church as dead, yet still having a minority of godly men and women, as during the Reformation; Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13) shows revival and a state of spiritual advance; and Laodicea (Revelation 3:14-19) is illustrative of the final state of apostasy which the visible church will experience” (Scofield Study Bible, Revelation 1:20).

While the Bible does not give us specific dates for the time periods or eras of the Church’s development and many of these periods of time overlap, there are indications of this historical progression within these messages to the churches...

The messages to the last four churches speak of Christ’s return—an indication that at least a remnant of Thyatira, Sardis and Philadelphia will still exist, along with Laodicea, in the end time (Revelation 2:25; Revelation 3:3, 11, 20). Treybig D. Seven Churches of Revelation. viewed 08/23/14)

I agree that there are 'church eras' and that four will exist to a degree at the time of the end. That was also the view of the old WCG.

Understands Some Prophet Criteria, But Fails to Act

In an article by its Chris Moen, the Church of God, a Worldwide Association posted an article to help people determine if a prophet was a true one:

Four tests to prove whether a prophet is true

We need to carefully consider God’s Word—the Bible—in order to discern between false and true prophets. The Bible provides four tests to determine the genuineness of a prophet.

1. Does the conduct of the prophet reflect godly character?

Jesus and the apostles warned many times about deceptive prophets. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus said, “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15-17).

These prophets can be identified by their “fruits”—a term used metaphorically by Jesus to describe one’s actions and character. The law of God is the only standard we have to determine whether someone’s fruits are good or bad. True prophets will live in accordance with God’s law.

2. Do the predictions of the prophet come true?

Moses instructed ancient Israel: “When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him” (Deuteronomy 18:22).

The Bible gives a few exceptions. It shows that God has the prerogative to change His mind, as was the case with Jonah’s prophecies about Nineveh (Jonah 3:10). Also, this does not mean that God’s true servants couldn’t be wrong about timing, as Paul was in assuming he would be alive at Christ’s return (1 Thessalonians 4:15).

Except in circumstances like these, if a prophet’s predictions do not come to pass, then he or she is not a true prophet.

3. Are the words of the prophet consistent with Scripture?

God explained to those who foolishly seek knowledge from mediums and wizards, “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:19-20).

Peter declared that the apostles could truthfully attest to many fulfilled Bible prophecies concerning the life and deeds of Jesus Christ. “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. ... And we have the prophetic word made more sure” (2 Peter 1:16, 19, Revised Standard Version).

Peter also stated that true prophets do not speak their own words. As Peter wrote, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20, emphasis added).

4. Do the people benefit spiritually from the prophet’s ministry?

God’s desire was that ancient Israel would serve as a model nation and represent Him to the nations around them. Israel would be blessed as it fulfilled God’s expectation.

With this background, God warned His people, “‘Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,’ says the LORD, ‘and tell them, and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send them or command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all,’ says the LORD” (Jeremiah 23:32; also read verses 13-14).

The results of a prophet’s ministry can also indicate whether this person is a false or true prophet.

Although COGWA left out some criteria, even based upon the above criteria, there is one person in one of the COGs that meets all those criteria, and he is not part of COGWA, but physically heads up the Continuing Church of God (CCOG). Yet, despite what COGWA is teaching, its members do not take proper action.

Consider also that Jesus taught:

41 He who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward. (Matthew 10:41)

Jesus is telling His followers that if a true prophet is out there, that they need to follow. Yet, in this Laodicean time (Revelation 3:14-18), most real Christians will not listen to what Jesus said on this and many other matters.

While some discount prophecy and prophets, notice what Jesus admonished His faithful to do:

35 For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. 36 Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man. (Luke 21:35-36)

Are we not a lot closer to the end now than when Jesus stated that? Should you not be watching world events as properly explained in the light of Bible prophecy?

The various Laodiceans will not properly understand end time prophecy, and that will contribute to them NOT fleeing when they should (cf. Matthew 24:15-21; Revelation 12:14-17).

A video of related interest is titled 17 Laodicean Errors in Prophecy.

In the Continuing Church of God:

19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Peter 1:19-21, KJV)

A detailed article about prophets in the Church of God is How To Determine If Someone is a True Prophet of God. That article not only has scriptures, it also has historical COG writings that should help people who will believe the truth to be able to see the truth.

Years ago, I also gave a sermon titled How to determine if someone is a true prophet of God and it is available at the ContinuingCOG YouTube channel. Some may also find it of interest.

COGWA has several prophetic misunderstandings which, unless it changes, will prevent its people from knowing when the Great Tribulation will begin until it is too late.

Concerns About COGWA

I have seen nothing from COGWA that convinces me that it will adopt a biblically-appropriate form of governance nor have its priorities align better with those of the Bible.

Others, obviously, may disagree.

But the lack of gospel proclamation success in UCG when many of the COGWA leaders helped run it, combined with the statements that COGA put out (with Leon Walker, Larry Salyer, and Ken Giese being somewhat involved with it) makes me extremely concerned that COGWA will simply spend the vast majority of its income on its ministry with a relatively insignificant percentage going to proclaim the gospel in an attempt to fulfill Matthew 24:14. So far, COGWA has not suggested that its spending priorities match its mission statement as far as gospel proclamation goes. (Note: I wrote all of this section prior to the March 1, 2011 letter from Jim Franks, the March 15, 2011 letter from Clyde Kilough, or the Board's letter of August 19, 2011 or Jim Franks' February 9, 2012 letter or the May 31, 2012 announcements, all of which have thus far confirmed what I have been warning about.)

Thus far, COGWA has not demonstrated that its top priority is truly the proclamation of the gospel--its financial priorities have been mainly internal. Does anyone with COGWA believe that its approach to public proclamation really has been hot and not lukewarm?

While getting a magazine such as Discern is a step in the right direction, the fact that it took three years demonstrates that COGWA, in my view at least, does not have the proclamation fruits or priority to proclaim the gospel like a Philadelphian Church of God remnant group would do. Those who truly discern should be able to figure out that COGWA’s emphasis on public proclamation is not hot.

People who do not understand key aspects of the Book of Daniel and reject a true prophet, like those in COGWA, will not possibly know when the Great Tribulation will begin or when they should flee per Jesus' instructions in Matthew 24.

I truly believe that the crisis in UCG with COGWA was a type of a wake up call, a “knocking on the door” (cf. Revelation 3:20) if you will, for those in or formerly in UCG.  This crisis affecting UCG could be part of the final warning to those who have rejected Philadelphia-era governance and gospel proclamation priorities to get them to consider their state (Revelation 3:17-19).

If you are or were part of UCG/COGWA and are confused about what to do, please pray, fast, and study the Bible about this. Decide if you wish to follow the lukewarm or those that Jesus Christ has truly been using to do the work–those who have had the same basic governing principles for over 40 years. Consider checking out the Continuing Church of God as you should see that it has the proper Philadelphian emphasis on the work, doctrine, governance, and prophecy.

For a while, it’s been decision time for those who have been affiliated with UCG (as well as other groups). Most of those part of the COGWA and UCG leadership have already demonstrated, to me at least, that neither group intends to be Philadelphian. But that choice still remains for all individuals called by God.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

The Bible, Peter, Paul, John, Polycarp, Herbert W. Armstrong, Roderick C. Meredith, and Bob Thiel on Church Government What form of governance did the early church have? Was it hierarchical? Which form of governance would one expect to have in the Philadelphia remnant? The people decide and/or committee forms, odd dictatorships, or the same type that the Philadelphia era itself had?
Unity: Which COG for You? Why so many groups? Why is there lack of unity in the Churches of God? Has it always been this way? What can/should be done about it?
Preparing for the 'Short Work' and The Famine of the Word What is the 'short work' of Romans 9:28? Who is preparing for it? Here is a link to a related video sermon titled: The Short Work.
The Final Phase of the Work What is the final phase of the work? Who will lead it? Do you have the courage to support it? Here is a related YouTube video titled The Final Phase of the Work. The written article has been translated into Spanish La Fase Final de la Obra.
Leading the Final Phase of the Work Matthew 24:14 teaches “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come ” will be fulfilled and RCG is not the group doing this. Who is leading the final phase of the work? What did Herbert Armstrong and the old WCG teach about that and about prophets? Does Bob Thiel meet the criteria that the Bible and the old WCG set? What is the proof? What has the Continuing Church of God been doing?  This is a sermonette length video.
Differences between the Living Church of God and United Church of God This article provides quotes information from the two largest groups which had their origins in WCG as well as commentary.
Continuing Church of God The group striving to be most faithful amongst all real Christian groups to the word of God.
CCOG.ASIA We in the Continuing Church of God also have the url which has a focus on Asia and has various articles in Mandarin Chinese as well as some in English, plus some items in other Asian languages. 我们在继续神的教会也提供此网址, 关注于亚洲并且有各种各样的中英文文章,其中一些用菲律宾语翻译的文章也正在进行中,准备添加到这个网站中。
CCOG.IN This is a website targeted towards those of Indian heritage. It has a link to an edited Hindi translation of The Mystery of the Ages and is expected to have more non-English language materials in the future.
CCOG.EU This is a website targeted toward Europe. It has materials in more than one language (currently it has English, Dutch, and Serbian, with links also to Spanish) and it is intended to have additional language materials added.
CDLIDD.ES La Continuación de la Iglesia de Dios. This is the Spanish language website for the Continuing Church of God.
PNIND.PH Patuloy na Iglesya ng Diyos. This is the Philippines website Continuing Church of God. It has information in English and Tagalog.
Paglalahad ng Mga Paniniwala ng Patuloy na Iglesya ng Diyos This is the Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God in Tagalog, the primary language of the Philippines. Here is a link to the first Tagalog edition of the Bible News Prophecy magazine: MGA BALITA NG PROPESIYA NG BIBLIYA January-March 2013 edition.
Should the Church Still Try to Place its Top Priority on Proclaiming the Gospel or Did Herbert W. Armstrong Change that Priority for the Work? Some say the Church should mainly feed the flock now as that is what Herbert W. Armstrong reportedly said. Is that what he said? Is that what the Bible says? What did Paul and Herbert W. Armstrong expect from evangelists?
The Laodicean Church Era has been predominant circa 1986 A.D. to present. These are non-Philadelphians who mainly descended from the old WCG.

COGwriter 2011/2012/2013/2014/2015/2016/2017/2018 1205

Back to home page