Meats - Conclusion

This is the last post (that I had planned) on the topic of meats. I had planned one last investigation into the subject, but instead I'm just going to review some highlights of what I've learned on this subject over the last 3/4 year.

I'd like to start at the very beginning. I theorize the problem with meats begins like this: 

It starts innocently enough with a growing desire to be closer to God. Somehow one becomes confused over some point of the Bible - usually the use of the English word "commandments" in the N.T. (for example in I John). Down whatever path, one comes to the eventual conclusion that the 10 Commandments survived unchanged into the New Covenant (most especially the 4th). I actually hear that a lot. When asked, "What led you to [Armstrongism]?" people have most often responded, "I knew the true church would be keeping the Sabbath." Compounding problems then arise with verses like (MATT. 5: 17-18) or (MATT. 23: 23), which lead people to search for more answers and this leads to meeting up with one religious group or the other. Depending on which religious  group one finds, such things as tithing and holy days will be taught until eventually a person is so hopelessly deep into legalism that accepting the meats laws becomes almost logical. Afterwards, anything that is described in the O.T. as "forever" or "perpetual" is fair game. The border between the Old and New Covenants is destroyed, but group-think prevents people from realizing the truth that they are now a part of neither Covenant. Unfortunately, at the very start, the grace of the New Covenant was set aside and reliance on one's own righteousness set in. That is a perfect recipe for going astray. Hence Paul uses terms like "ministry of death". And ultimately, while a person claims to be "the elect", Jesus' sacrifice is lessened to the point where Paul describes it as being "of no effect". The unsatisfiable chase after personal perfection, along with the obligatory fear and doubt that comes from it, betrays this to be horribly true.

Many things are said to be for a ‘perpetual covenant’ between God and Israel, like for example the avoidance of fat. Whenever I mention that food law to any Armstrongist, they dismiss it. The law! Just not THAT law! I actually had a person tell me "No one can do that!" As if that makes any difference in the world. The law is the law is the law. If you start to keep food laws, then keep the food laws. The law has no middle ground (JAS. 2: 10). Just because something says it is a ‘perpetual covenant’, it does not follow that it is valid for the New Covenant.

The challenge is to realize these two items: 

(MATT. 5: 17-18) "17 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” 

and 

(2 TIM. 3: 16-17) “16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 

both declare the the amazing work Christ finished (JOHN 19: 30) when He fulfilled all the law and the prophets. It is a grave error to believe these verses say "keep the Old Covenant" because that is contrary to the salvation of Christ. It is the very error Paul fought so hard against. In fact, to keep a cherry-picked version of the Old Covenant, like the one taught by HWA, will without question cost you everything you think to save.

(GAL 5: 1-4) 1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. 2 Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised [in other words, set out to keep the law - circumcision is Torah not Talmud], Christ will profit you nothing. 3 And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised [in other words, set out to keep the Torah law] that he is a debtor to keep the whole law [not a cherry-picked version of it]. 4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

I argue that meats laws are not a weightier matter of the law whatsoever but were wholly ceremonial and wholly abolished by the New Covenant. Look, it's really quite simple. Jesus was party to the Old Covenant. He died. No amount of scriptural misinterpretation should confuse people about this one all-important point.

Once I simply accepted that fact, I came to believe Jesus Christ when He said “What goes into a man cannot defile him”, and “What God has cleansed you must not call common”, which blends with Paul who said “I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself”, and “For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving”.

To preach anything else is to say Christ's sacrifice is insufficient. So answer, in what way was Christ's sacrifice insufficient?

Contrary to what may appear overtly obvious, I did not write the posts on meats to get people to eat pork. 

If one believes the meats are a sin, then to them it is a sin -- but not because of law. If one eats and defiles their conscience, God forbid. I do not in any way promote that! The real issue I address here is condemnation and judgment. I exhort all who keep the food laws (to whatever degree) to stop judging and condemning people who do not keep the food laws. If someone loves God by having faith in Christ and keeping a high standard of moral excellence, then where is the excuse for breaking the clear commandments against judging another? We have One Judge. Do not call His brothers and sisters for whom He died “self-willed”, “disobedient”, “uncalled”, “condemned”, nor any other such thing, for, as Paul said, "Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died" (ROM. 14: 15).  My number one, primary, el numero uno complaint about the COGs is the judgment and condemnation. Meats or no, that has got to stop.

I have also come to see that even if the food laws are no longer in effect, they are a wonderful lesson for us. They hold meaning. They are not without value. Jesus did not destroy any of the laws; He fulfilled them. He fulfilled all things. “Clean” and “unclean” are spiritual now, as opposed to symbolic/physical. Circumcision is of the heart. A good study into the physical symbolism of the spiritual reality will be fulfilling whether you eat or not.

I was surprised to learn that no animal was shown to be given to man to eat until Noah left the Ark. The distinction of the clean from the unclean animals that he took on that Ark were for sacrificial purposes, not for food. 

Sacrifice was there from the days of Adam, circumcision from the days of Abraham – both are now gone. Therefore, just because we see something before Sinai it does not follow that such thing is still valid today. The COGs would do well to answer, in what way are they valid today? Then perhaps they would see that all things are fulfilled. The sacrifices, Levitical priesthood, washings, and temple (among other things) some say will return in the future. But they are not here now. Therefore, just because we think we see something in prophecy for the Millennium (all prophetic interpretation is speculation) it does not follow that it is valid today. "For I am the LORD, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed" (MAL. 3: 6). It is the Lord's nature that 'changes not', but clearly His requirements for us do. 

I was surprised to learn that my Armstrongist beliefs caused me to unknowingly hold that all Christians had to become Jews in order to be Christians. I didn't realize that I believed that way. Recognizing it helped me to understand. And immediately God said "Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you" (GEN. 9: 3). That is everything. All. Total. "...Every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea" (GEN. 9: 2). No exceptions.

And still people use reasoning to nullify the clear an inescapable words of the Bible. This is not because of any Biblical evidence (as their argument is designed to nullify the words of the Bible) but by an emotional attachment to ideology alone. And this is idolatry - a violation of the very Commandments they claim to uphold.

There are two groups of Christians in the early church: the Jewish converts that were zealous for the law, and the Gentile converts that were instructed to keep no such thing. This was obviously for their conscience’s sake. Exactly as the Pharisees who troubled Paul, Herbert Armstrong commanded the Gentiles to be Jews in order to be Christians. This is contrary to the decree of the Apostles, even while HWA quite plainly did not keep the whole law. A great many things had to be erased from Jewish law for God to cleanse the gentiles; not just the food laws. If it were not so then no Jew could effectively preach to a Gentile or vice versa. The unclean meats were a shadow. Jesus Christ who casts the shadow is clean; the shadow is therefore cleansed. 

Peter didn’t understand this at first. It was not something Jesus taught Him while He was alive because they simply could not handle it then. Jesus taught Peter through the Holy Spirit when the time had come, after the calling of Cornelius. These things were confirmed through Paul and Barnabas through miracles. Peter and a few other Apostles just seemed to have a problem accepting it. We can see that the Apostles did mind the Talmud traditions, and that became a stumbling block for them. Old habits are hard to break. HWA's clever comment "Why didn't Peter understand a change in meats laws 10 years later?" drew me in. It wasn't 10 years, for one thing. And Peter was the very first Apostle sent to a Gentile. By that same logic, if he didn't understand that Gentiles were cleansed x years later, then they must not be! Ergo, none of us are Christians anyhow.

Ridiculous!

I also came to disagree that the basis of this debate should be health, seeing as properly cooked pork is much more healthful than fresh scallions (or jalapenos or peanuts or blueberries, etc) with salmonella. If meats are health laws it should say so somewhere in the Bible, but it does not. Nowhere in the Bible are food laws explained to be health laws. They are symbolically unclean in relation to sacrifice, and that's it. Oh, how very many times do I hear "God didn't give us poison ivy to eat." Perhaps not. But He didn't designate clean/unclean plants either. Trying to force meats into a health issue via cleverly worded arguments does not Biblical truth make. The fact remains - meats are not a health issue.

I was at first confused by the meanings of some verses. They seemed to be plain and without need of interpretation. Peter was right to say some of Paul’s writings are hard to understand (2 PET. 3: 15-16). But if it’s health we’re so worried about, then we must begin to treat fast food, hydrogenated oils, food allergies, and laziness with much greater seriousness.

I was also surprised to learn what little agreement there is among the COGs about any of this. Armstrong taught one thing at one time, another thing at another time, and yet another thing at a third time. One group says this, another group says that, another group says the other thing. I even recall hearing one minister describe the issue in terms of "lobsters are gross." (And that's entirely a matter of personal preference. I used to think potatoes were gross.) If it were all so plain, why the confusion?

Whether you believe clean and unclean meats to be a physical law of health, a spiritual sin, a ceremonial sacrifice ritual, or just something you arbitrarily do, I hope you can agree with me that our understanding of the Bible is not open to personal interpretation. The Bible should interpret the Bible. Nor either can any man change the law as I often found HWA had done (what disturbs me most is people are fully aware of that yet go along none the less). I did this study because I thought if my Armstrongist preconceptions were true then they could stand up to scrutiny. I will leave it up to the reader to decide the outcome. Our relationship with God is on an individual basis. Much of how I was taught seemed to be an attempt to make me too afraid to read the Bible for myself. I never realized that I accepted much of what I did because Herbert W. Armstrong claimed he taught the truth and said I would go to the second resurrection (or worse) if I didn’t agree. Simply taking the word of a person because they claim to be some end-time celebrity is most definitely NOT Biblical. The old fallback “that’s not how I was taught” is probably the most dangerous position of all. Only after much study and prayer can we come to have a deep and mature understanding of God’s Word. Sometimes what the Bible is saying is not immediately obvious. A Christian walk is a growth process. It is dangerous to read into the Bible without a humble and teachable attitude. It is dangerous to use phrases like "non-negotiable". If something is true, it will be true every time you revisit the subject. And revisit you should. One must be ready to prove what is good or disprove even long standing beliefs.

Christians Tithe?

This is the final post (that I had planned) in my study of tithing in the New Covenant. How can I possibly sum this topic up? I feel no matter what I say it will be insufficient in so many ways.

In past posts we have seen that the best minister is an unpaid minister. Paul exhorted elders to imitate him (I COR. 11: 1), and he was unpaid. Unpaid ministers will attest to the manifold benefits of such a practice. The Didache shows:

"Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord. But he shall not remain more than one day; or two days, if there's a need. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet. And when the apostle goes away, let him take nothing but bread until he lodges. If he asks for money, he is a false prophet."

We have also firmly established the abolition of tithes - and not only tithes, but the entire the Old Covenant as well, taking the Levitical priesthood with it. What should the New Covenant congregation do? The thought of a Church without tithes is unfamiliar to some and naturally uncomfortable. What is commanded if not tithes?

In short, one word: giving! We can see clearly, both in the Old Testament and the new, that helping the poor and needy is a salvation issue. 

So, what is the correct method for the New Testament Church? Instead of a multi-tiered tithe system, Christ installed a newer (and in my opinion more difficult) system, in which the Christian is to share all that he has with his fellows. Ten percent seems an insufficient baseline to start with.... but there is much more! 

(LUKE 6: 38) Give, and it will be given to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.

(MATT. 10: 8) Freely you have received, freely give.

(LUKE 12: 32-34) 32 “Do not fear, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. 33 Sell what you have and give alms; provide yourselves money bags which do not grow old, a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches nor moth destroys. 34 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

(ROM 12: 1) I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 

(EPH. 4: 28) Let him who stole steal no longer, but rather let him labor, working with his hands what is good, that he may have something to give him who has need.

The Earliest Example

What I read in the New Covenant bore very little resemblance to Armstrongism. Once again we see the idea of 100% as opposed to 10%, 20%, 30%, 30% + offerings, etc....

(ACTS 2: 44-45) 44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. 

(ACTS 4: 32) 32 Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common.

(ROM. 15: 25-27) 25 But now I am going to Jerusalem to minister to the saints. 26 For it pleased those from Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor among the saints who are in Jerusalem. 27 It pleased them indeed, and they are their debtors. For if the Gentiles have been partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister to them in material things.

They didn't divide away 10%, they distributed to whomever had need. I should point out that this was in no way a hippie commune. People still retained ownership of their own goods. It was a simple matter of generosity. Whomever had extra generously supplied the lack of whomever had need.

(II COR. 8: 13-15) 13 For I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened; 14 but by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may supply their lack, that their abundance also may supply your lack—that there may be equality. 15 As it is written, “He who gathered much had nothing left over, and he who gathered little had no lack.”

Is this what Armstrong taught? Is that what we see reflected in his followers? Is there any doubt that within the COGs the majority withheld from each other, even towards their poor brethren? The idea of a tithe prevented the very mindset that God wanted to foster within us. We had already given at the office, so to speak, and our obligation was finished. It is a fact that we did not live according to this example as a whole. While some in the church had a superabundance (HWA chief among them), some went bankrupt trying to follow an abolished system of compulsory tithing. And yet, as is often the case, those who had the least were usually the most willing to give while those who had the most were usually the most willing to withhold.

Money Only?

Now, I feel it should be stressed that giving need not be monetary. How many times are we shown that God gives us Spiritual gifts, and we are to share those gifts. Perhaps a person is destitute and cannot give money. To a tithing system, that person is a liability. Their ability to contribute is cut short. However, in the New Covenant, we are free to give what God has graced us with. Should that be a spiritual gift, great; labor, wonderful; comfort in time of need, excellent; a good example, much needed. If a Christian has anything to give or share, it all counts in God's eyes.

(LUKE 11: 41) But rather give alms of such things as you have; then indeed all things are clean to you.

(ACTS 3: 2-6) 2 And a certain man lame from his mother’s womb was carried, whom they laid daily at the gate of the temple which is called Beautiful, to ask alms from those who entered the temple; 3 who, seeing Peter and John about to go into the temple, asked for alms. 4 And fixing his eyes on him, with John, Peter said, “Look at us.” 5 So he gave them his attention, expecting to receive something from them. 6 Then Peter said, “Silver and gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk.”

(I TIM. 5: 9-10) 9 Do not let a widow under sixty years old be taken into the number, and not unless she has been the wife of one man, 10 well reported for good works: if she has brought up children, if she has lodged strangers, if she has washed the saints’ feet, if she has relieved the afflicted, if she has diligently followed every good work.

(JAS 2: 14-16) 14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?

Give To Whom?

The COGs have a tradition of not helping anyone outside their own organization. Anyone not in the immediate organization is brushed of as a lost cause, usually with a prideful comment like "let the dead bury the dead" or "God is not calling everyone at this time". Is this correct? To whom should a Christian give?

(MATT. 5: 42) Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.

(LUKE 6: 29-31) And from him who takes away your cloak, do not withhold your tunic either. 30 Give to everyone who asks of you. And from him who takes away your goods do not ask them back. 31 And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise. 

(ROM. 12: 20) Therefore “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; If he is thirsty, give him a drink; For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.”

(ACTS 10: 1-4) 1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian Regiment, 2 a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always. 3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, “Cornelius!” 4 And when he observed him, he was afraid, and said, “What is it, lord?” So he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have come up for a memorial before God.”

Cornelius was an Italian.

 

The Thought Counts!

No, we didn't care for the rest of the world, least of all our 'enemies'. We viewed them as useless; counting the hours until they would be swept away in the Tribulation for their disregard of the Old Covenant. This is a horrible attitude! It is judgmental, it is contrary to the Gospel, and it demeans those Christ died to save. 

We should have learned from the example of Zacchaeus. He wasn't perfect, but he gave generously and he made right his wrongs. When Jesus visited him, the crowd gossiped against Jesus because Zacchaeus was a sinner; in their eyes unworthy of God's love.

(LUKE 19: 8) Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.” 

Did Christ judge him and dismiss him until the second resurrection?

(LUKE 19: 9) And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham; 10 for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.”

Not only did we teach and live contrary to what Christ taught, but we were commanded to withhold any generosity. The tithes were not ours! Only Headquarters was close enough to God to know how to waste the tithe money. After tithes were sent in, if any was left, that too was begged of us, "Send in your widow's mites!" In the face of it all, we were told that God loves a cheerful giver. Well, it's a minor point, but one cannot "give" tithes as they are a requirement not belonging to us, like taxes. That being the case, then we cannot be a cheerful giver in relation to tithes. No... tithes are abolished in the New Covenant, but the attitude in giving still counts!

(MATT. 20: 25-28) “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. 26 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. 27 And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

(I COR. 13: 3) And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.

(II COR. 9: 6-15) 6 But this I say: He who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. 7 So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver. 8 And God is able to make all grace abound toward you, that you, always having all sufficiency in all things, may have an abundance for every good work. 9 As it is written: “He has dispersed abroad, He has given to the poor; His righteousness endures forever.” 10 Now may He who supplies seed to the sower, and bread for food, supply and multiply the seed you have sown and increase the fruits of your righteousness, 11 while you are enriched in everything for all liberality, which causes thanksgiving through us to God. 12 For the administration of this service not only supplies the needs of the saints, but also is abounding through many thanksgivings to God, 13 while, through the proof of this ministry, they glorify God for the obedience of your confession to the gospel of Christ, and for your liberal sharing with them and all men, 14 and by their prayer for you, who long for you because of the exceeding grace of God in you. 15 Thanks be to God for His indescribable gift! 

(I JOHN 3: 16-18) 16 By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 17 But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him? 18 My little children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth. 

Especially, do not be deceptive in your giving. Do not lie to God in making a promise on giving that you won't keep, nor should you make inflated claims about your giving (it is far better to hide your giving). Remember Ananias and Sapphira!

(ACTS 5: 1-11) 1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. 2 And he kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.”

5 Then Ananias, hearing these words, fell down and breathed his last. So great fear came upon all those who heard these things. 6 And the young men arose and wrapped him up, carried him out, and buried him.

7 Now it was about three hours later when his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 And Peter answered her, “Tell me whether you sold the land for so much?” 

She said, “Yes, for so much.” 

9 Then Peter said to her, “How is it that you have agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.” 10 Then immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. And the young men came in and found her dead, and carrying her out, buried her by her husband.

I would mention briefly that both (II THS. 3: 10) and (I TIM. 5: 8) talk very sternly about laziness and an unwillingness to work to earn one's own way. Paul is no fan of people who make a career out of receiving charity when they are perfectly capable of work. Charity is one thing. The poor will always be with us (MATT. 26: 11). Abusing the system to take unfair advantage of the generosity of others is something else entirely.

God Will Reward!

Not that I am saying that Christians should give in order to receive a reward from God, but at times giving is difficult and our carnal natures can work against us. Knowing that God will reward the faithful can go a long way to overcoming your own limitations.

(MATT. 10: 40-42) 40 “He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me. 41 He who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet’s reward. And he who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man’s reward. 42 And whoever gives one of these little ones only a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple, assuredly, I say to you, he shall by no means lose his reward.”

(EPH. 6: 8) knowing that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free.

Conclusion.

If Christ taught tithing, what place would the righteous have in asking “when did we see you and clothe you and feed you?” Clothing and food would not have been tithed, but rather food items only, since that is the focus of the Old Covenant tithe system. And tithing, being called mandatory as well as the sole responsibility of the layman in the church, even the source of their righteousness (which is a grave error), if it were taught by the Apostles it would have been immediately recognizable to all who read the Bible. In all of the early Christian documents we find absolutely no mention of tithing. In fact, the Didache is clear that the teachings of the Apostles were contrary to any demand for money. Instead, what do we see? I think these next two selections summarize our Christian duty nicely!

(MATT. 25: 31-46) 31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’ 41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’ 44 “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” 

(ACTS 20: 32-35) 32 So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified. 33 I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel. 34 Yes, you yourselves know that these hands have provided for my necessities, and for those who were with me. 35 I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’

With all honesty, beloved by God and treasured, you who are still in Armstrongism, consider these verses. Consider this entire study (not that it is anything, or the only such study), and consider carefully all that our Lord Jesus Christ has done for us [which is entirely nullified by a partial keeping of the law]. If you allow yourself to read the New Covenant without the fear of Armstrongism, seeing the truth with the spiritual eyes Christ gives you rather than the eyes of Herbert Armstrong, then you cannot help but see that it is true -- tithes are abolished. In its place is a system of generous giving. What would you say to Christ if you stood before Him, if He asks why you should not be with the goats? Will you say "I was afraid and hid your talents with the ministry"? I would hope not. All you need do is step into the New Covenant.

New Covenant Sabbath

Since I discontinued association with my former COG on August 23rd, 2008, I have heard much ado about the Sabbath. It is THE sacred cow of Armstrongism. Well, I need to talk frankly about the Sabbath.

I see that "Sabbath" means "do nothing" to some groups... in exact opposition of what God wants.

(MATT. 11: 28-29) 28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

'Rest', as you can see here, is for the soul in the NT, not the rear-end. Working or not working is not what the Christian concentrates on. Being laden isn't with a physical burden.

(HEB. 3: 18-19) 18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

People who had the Sabbath were not entering into rest. They were resting physically one day a week but still not resting. The rest is not physical rest, but something to be 'entered into' by those who follow Christ. It requires faith! Almost no faith whatsoever is required to rest from physical work. It is plain to see, physical work and obedience through physical rest are not being spoken of here.

(HEB. 4: 1) Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it.

The rest is a promise from God. Do we need a promise from God to sit? (Some do. But I mean in general?) The answer is no.

For instance, and of great importance, the rest being spoken of can be fallen short of. How do you 'fall short' of physical rest? By not resting restfully enough? Hardly! I once "rested" from physical work in a pool on the weekly Sabbath at the Feast of Tabernacles in Tucson Arizona. The heat was unbearable. My friends and I decided we would sit in the cool water and rest. Everyone else sat in the heat with all their fine clothes on because they were too afraid it might be too close to "work", and by extension, a sin. (The looks I got must have been similar to those Jesus got when He and his disciples went through the fields.) My friends and I weren't swimming, or even horse playing, we were sitting and talking. We were doing the same thing hundreds of other people were doing, only we were in a pool in the heat of the day. When the sun went down, everyone else got in too. Now, what Spiritual benefit do you suppose those people had by exposing themselves to the hot desert sun and sweating for hours? Not one bit!

We are talking about physical matters when we talk about physical rest. Sin is spiritual. Some would say, "It is because people aren't keeping the Sabbath in their heart. They secretly desire to break it and only keep it grudgingly." So let me get this straight. It's not only warming a chair on the 7th day of the week that counts, but HOW you warm that chair? I disagree. Although, this answer does start down the road to understanding! (It just fails to continue thereon. It falls short.)

The problem IS with the heart! That much is absolutely correct. Only, the fork in the road presented is physical rest from work vs. spiritual rest from sin, and the COGs take the path of physical rest. With the physically-oriented mind, that is the logical path, I'll admit. But it neglects to take into account the verses I've just presented which clearly and plainly show the rest is not physical after all. Therefore the true path is not to physical rest, but spiritual rest. It begins in the heart, and it ends in the heart, not with the rump.

How very often did I hear, and parrot, "Have a relaxing Sabbath!" Think about this for a moment. Of what benefit to the world is inactivity? Whom have you benefited? Have you not several hours of rest each day? Does not the Biblical day begin at evening, and therefore is not physical rest one of the very first things you do each day? Whom, besides yourself, does this truly benefit? Can you share Christ while you lie still and silent? Can you inspire others through your relaxing? Can you preach the gospel in snoring? What good comes of it?

(PRO. 6: 6-11) 6 Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise, 7 Which, having no captain, overseer or ruler, 8 provides her supplies in the summer, and gathers her food in the harvest. 9 How long will you slumber, O sluggard? When will you rise from your sleep? 10 A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep— 11 so shall your poverty come on you like a prowler, and your need like an armed man.

Consider the ant, you sluggard! While you rest on your laurels in slothful inactivity every 7th day, what good have you done? Whom have you fed? Whom have you lifted up? When Christ asks you why you didn't do as He asked but chose to spend every 7th day holding still, will you tell Him, "I was afraid, and went and hid your talent in the ground" (MATT. 25: 25)?

(PRO. 24: 30-34) 30 I went by the field of the lazy man, and by the vineyard of the man devoid of understanding; 31 and there it was, all overgrown with thorns; its surface was covered with nettles; its stone wall was broken down. 32 When I saw it, I considered it well; I looked on it and received instruction: 33 A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest; 34 so shall your poverty come like a prowler, and your need like an armed man.

So, those who rest their backsides every 7th day in idle uselessness, thinking you keep the law, consider the ant you sluggard, because it clearly states unless you keep every last stitch of the law you have only managed to estrange yourself from Christ. Physical rest won't heal that breach. But those who rest your souls in Christ, enjoy your peace every day, while it is called "today". The Lord will come to His temple, which you are, and your soul will have true rest --- daily.

Why do you keep the Sabbath? 

The number one explanation I've heard is "It's the 4th Commandment." Let's briefly look at that, starting by asking "Is the Old Covenant still in force?" Of course your answer would be "no", or at least I hope it would be. So, let's clarify with, "What was the Old Covenant?"

(DEU. 4: 13) So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

The 10 Commandments were the Old Covenant! So when you say "The Old Covenant is gone", you must include the 10 Commandments which framed it! So when Christ says "If you love Me, keep My Commandments" (JOHN 14: 15) it is not speaking of the 10 Commandments at all (not according to the old physical, shadowy keeping of law anyhow). 

Too much for you to bear? Let me also give you this which Paul had given us.

Romans 7: 1-4 and I COR. 7: 39 both spell it out quite clearly through an example of marriage. When a spouse dies, the covenant that bound them is nullified. Christ, being the first party to the Old Covenant, died, thus nullifying that agreement - and the 10 Commandments that framed it! There is no reasoning around this fact. There are but two options: ignore Bible truth to blaze on in your opinion anyhow, or accept this. 

And don't think to haul out yet another saying of Mr. Armstrong's, "The only Commandment anyone has a problem with is the 4th!" Because I guarantee you that very saying, which ensnared me and many others in the past, in fact works completely against you. I would ask you the same question; what problem do you have with the 4th Commandment? What I mean is, why do you see the other 9 have been magnified, but not this one? Murder is in the heart long before the act thus it is spiritual, adultery is in the heart long before the act thus it is spiritual, covetousness is in the heart long before any outward show appears therefore it is spiritual, circumcision is of the heart, sacrifices are of the heart, etc, etc -- but we, in our misunderstanding and legalism, clung to the idea that only the 4th Commandment has made it into the New Covenant absolutely unchanged and unmagnified. We patted ourselves on the back so very often saying the rest of the world does not understand. The joke was on us, because it was we who did not understand. It would appear the only Commandment the COGs have a problem with is the 4th!

(GAL. 4: 21-25) 21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—

And what happened on Mt. Sinai? The giving of the 10 Commandments. This fully applies to the Sabbath!! And the point is of utmost importance. Taking the wrong stance and trusting in your own keeping of the law could very well cost you everything! 

(GAL. 5: 4) You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. 

But closely note the very next thing Paul writes. What does he emphasize?

(GAL. 5: 5) For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith

The number two explanation I've heard is, "God rested on the 7th day of creation; the Sabbath was from the beginning." Review the entirety of Hebrews 4. God rested when the works were finished - not just 'on the seventh day', but when the work was finished. This was symbolic. God offered rest to those in the Exodus, who every last one learned to physically rest every 7th day or they were removed, but yet they were not allowed to enter "that rest". Joshua took them into the Promised Land, but even those ones, who were idle every 7th day, still did not enter "the rest". Therefore, as the author of Hebrews rightly concludes, there remains a rest to be entered into. This is not a 7th day sluggishness, or certainly "that rest" would have been attained by those people. God spoke of another day. As in the beginning, Christ said "it is finished" (JOHN 19: 30), and now He rests from that work. He came to save all mankind, and the work of opening salvation is complete. Right now there is a rest, attainable in faith. We can enter this rest when we cease our works... carnal works. It is a spiritual rest --- a rest for the soul.

When was the last time you asked "Why do I keep the Sabbath?" It's not so simple as "It's the 4th Commandment" or "God rested on the 7th day of creation." The Bible tells us specifically why the Sabbath was instituted:

(DEU. 5: 15) And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.

Maybe the correct question is "When was the last time you were enslaved in Egypt and brought out from there?" If you see yourself as being Spiritual Israel, and Christ brought you out from the Egypt of sin, then why do you insist on a physical Sabbath? It is contrary to the very theology you espouse. Our rest is in Christ. Our rest is Christ. "For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath" (MATT. 12: 8). And what is that rest?

(MATT. 12: 12) Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath

But, do we do good only one day each week? No! There is the carnality of mind coming through again. Not one day a week, but each day! When we enter the rest, through faith, which is to do good and put away evil, we do it at all times. There is no special day of the week when it is better to do good or worse to do evil. The rest of Christ is entered in to. When we enter, we are there! Just as we are the temple of God's Spirit and Christ enters into it. It's not a rest for the body. Consider the ant! No, it is a rest for the soul, just as Matthew 11: 29 says it is!

Therefore Paul says:

(COL. 2: 11-17) 11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it. 

16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.

Don't let anyone judge you that you aren't keeping the Sabbath correctly when you keep it in Spirit and truth, as it was intended. They will come after you with their words and condemn you in that you aren't sitting and being useless like they are. But be bold, knowing the work of salvation is complete, and knowing the rest is open to you.

If you take nothing else away from this, then take this one point: make your keeping of the 4th commandment about spending time following Christ as opposed to wasting time resting the flesh. Work on the Sabbath, work your butt off! But work to do good. Do as much good as you can! Don't sit there uselessly wondering if you've been inactive enough to please God. God is not the God of the dead, who are all inactive, but of the living! Do as much good as you possibly can. 

If you read I John 2: 3-4 and see "[Old Covenant] 10 Commandments", this is a mistake. Do a word study on "commandments", you'll see just what I mean. It does not refer to the 10 Commandments at all, but rather all that Jesus commands. You could say that includes the 10 Commandments... if you conveniently set asside all I've said here. Let me show you from John's hand what commandment John was referring to:

(I JOHN 4: 21) And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also.

John spoke a great deal about love. Love! This is the fulfillment of the whole law (ROM. 13: 8).

Galatians Quick Scan

Upon reading Galatians this weekend, I was reminded how I never cease to be amazed at how different my Bible is when I read it on my own as opposed to reading it without Herbert Armstrong telling me what to think.

I would like to write what I've found in my own words.

Things that do not come by the law:

Justification (GAL. 2: 16)

Righteousness (GAL. 2: 21)

The Spirit (GAL. 3: 2)

Perfection (GAL. 3: 3)

Miracles (GAL. 3: 4)

Inheritance (GAL. 3: 18)

Life (GAL. 3: 21)

Grace (GAL. 5: 4)

Quick Scan Overview:

(GAL. 1: 6) Some TROUBLE the Galatians. Anyone who preaches this 'other gospel' is accursed.

**Who? "Trouble" is key to identifying them.  See also GAL. 5: 10 & 12.

(GAL. 2: 4) False brethren were bringing in bondage ..they failed to compel Titus to be circumcised (v. 3).

(GAL. 2: 14) Why compel Gentiles to live as Jews? This is not straightforward to the truth of the gospel (v. 13)! Even the converts who were natural born Jews that keep the law believe that justification is in Christ and not the law (v. 15-16).

Verses 11-13 show something about 'the circumcision' was troubling things between Jew and Gentile. Peter, Barnabas, and the Jewish converts were influenced by men of the circumcision, influencing them to be divided.

**What is 'the circumcision' to Paul?

(GAL. 2: 16) No one is justified by keeping the law [three times this is said].

(GAL. 2: 21) Righteousness is not of the law - if so, Christ died for no reason.

**If someone says 'you avoid sin and I avoid sin, but I keep the Commandments, therefor I am better' they do not understand grace. By faith in Christ we are justified and not by the law at all. Keeping the Sabbath does not justify. If it did, Christ died in vain.

(GAL. 3: 2-4) The Spirit does not come by keeping the law. Perfection does not come by the flesh. It is foolish to think so. Miracles do not come by the law.

(GAL. 3: 10-12) If you start to keep the law, you must keep the WHOLE law - every last bit of it - or you are cursed! Only if you do the law can you benefit. Therefore it isn't faith in God, but our own effort.

**See my other posts on Cherry-Picking the law for more info on how the COGs do not keep the whole law.

(GAL. 3: 15) No man can change the law!

(GAL. 3: 16-18) We receive the gift by a promise by God to Abraham and his Seed, Christ. That comes to us through oneness with Christ (also see v. 26-29 and GAL. 4: 1-7). The law cannot enhance nor annul that promise. (also see v. 21).

(GAL. 3: 19-25) What is the point of the law? to curb our carnal nature until Christ comes, bringing faith with Him. But once Christ and faith came, we no longer need the law.

**We grow up individually, and the world grows up in God's eyes as well.

(GAL. 4: 8-9) The Gentiles were once pagans, then came to Christ, now again they turn to bondage to weak and beggarly elements [the law].

**We know this "weak and beggarly elements" refers to the law since this is the subject of this and the previous chapters, as well as the following. The key is the word "bondage". What/who is bondage? The Old Covenant (GAL. 4: 21-31)!

(GAL. 4: 11) Paul is so worried about the Galatians turning to the law; he doubts their conversion (see also v. 20).

(GAL. 4: 16) Is Paul an enemy because he tells the truth?

(GAL. 4: 17) Those of the law zealously court the freed Gentiles, but for no good purpose.

**Bringing someone under the law is not a good purpose.

(GAL. 4: 24-25) The Old Covenant gives birth to bondage! The Old Covenant is that which was given at Sinai.

**What was given at Sinai? The 10 Commandments!! (see also EXO. 34: 28 and DEU. 4: 13).

(GAL. 4: 28) We are not children of bondage [the law], but of promise (also see v. 31).

(GAL. 4: 30) Cast out the Old Covenant.

(GAL. 5: 1) Stand fast in the liberty of the New Covenant! Do not be entangled again in bondage [through the law - the 'yoke of bondage']!

(GAL. 5: 2) If you submit to the Old Covenant (even in part) Christ profits you NOTHING!

(GAL. 5: 3) If you submit to one part of the law you are bound to keep the whole thing - ALL of it.

(GAL. 5: 4) The law removes us from Christ's grace.

(GAL. 5: 8) The persuasion to keep the law does not come from Christ.

(GAL. 5: 10) Paul is confident the Galatians will reject this false gospel of the keeping of the law, and the one who teaches such will face God's judgment.

(GAL. 5: 11) Paul did not still preach circumcision [keeping of the law]. If so, then what Christ did on the cross has ceased.

(GAL. 5: 12) Paul wishes those who teach the necessity for circumcision [and thus, the law] would emasculate themselves.

(GAL. 5: 13) We have been called to liberty [not law], but that liberty is no excuse to continue in carnality. 

(GAL. 5: 18) If we are under the Spirit, we are not under the law.

**Remember, the Spirit does not come by the law!

**If there is no law, how do we know what to avoid? (GAL. 5: 19-25) answers this.

(GAL. 5: 12-13) Those who promote circumcision [the keeping of the law] don't keep the law anyhow. They just wish to boast in meaningless flesh.

**And if you start out to keep the law but don't keep the whole law, you fall under the curse of the law.

Summary:

Galatians deals with a controversy of mixing the law of Moses with faith. The claims of these false teachers were not that keeping the law earns justification, but in order to achieve justification one must also be keeping the Old Covenant law. This is identical to Armstrong's teaching. In other words, Paul absolutely contradicts Herbert W. Armstrong in the strongest terms. 

A gospel based on keeping the Old Covenant law is a false gospel. The Old Covenant is the 10 Commandments. The law was never meant to continue past Christ; but to keep man's carnal nature in check until Christ [among other things]. Those false brethren who preach this 'other gospel' are accursed because they teach the keeping of the law, yet they do not themselves keep the whole law. If you start to keep the law,  you are bound to keep the whole thing - ALL of it! No exemptions. Some may attempt to "change the law out of necessity" - but no man can change the law. The false gospel of blending faith with law nullifies all Christ did for us.

Dearly loved of God, is this what you want? As you attend a COG to get close to God, is this really what you want? Do you want to keep a tradition that Paul comes out so strongly against? Do you want a partial keeping of the law? Do you want to nullify what Christ has done for you? Is that honestly what you intend?? The nullification of the cross? I doubt that deeply. I know that you want justification, righteousness, the Spirit, perfection, miracles, inheritance, life, and grace - in other words, salvation. Believe what you read in your Bible; those things will never come from the law. The law cannot be a requirement to receive what can never come from it. Accept that it comes by grace through faith - as a promise made 4,000 years ago that the law cannot nullify. Step into the New Covenant!

Old Covenant vs. New Covenant

Got this from Tentmaker.org. I have seen it elsewhere on the COG blogs, but I thought I would like to have a copy here. (Not that this is an endorsement of everything on Tentmaker.org; I just think they did a fabulous job with this material.)

It gets to the root of what I think the major error of Armstrongism is: that HWA tried to resurrect the Old Covenant, but it cannot be resurrected and shoehorned into the New Covenant. All he accomplished was a cherry-picked version of the law, which is not good for anything. In fact, it could very well be quite harmful to its adherants.

Mosaic Covenant	New Covenant
Old covenant II Cor. 3:14	New covenant II Cor. 3:6
First covenant Heb. 8:7, 9:1	Second covenant Heb. 8:7, 10:1-9
Came by Moses John 1:17	Came by Christ Heb. 8:6, 9:15
Law of Moses Acts 13:38-39	Law of Christ Gal. 6:2
Law of sin Rom. 7:5-6	Law of righteousness Rom. 9:30-31
Law of the flesh Rom. 7:5-6	Law of the Spirit Rom. 8:2
Not of faith Gal. 3:2	Law of faith Rom. 3:27
Yoke of bondage Gal. 5:1	Law of liberty Jam. 1:25
Ended by Christ Rom. 10:4	Established by Christ Heb. 8:6, 10:9
Law of death II Cor. 3:7	Law of life Gal. 3:11, 6:8
Entangles Gal. 5:1	Makes free John 8:32, 36
A shadow Col. 2:14-17	The reality Heb. 10:1-18
Fulfilled Mat. 5:17-18	Now in force Heb. 8:6, 10:9
Leaves imperfect Heb. 7:19	Makes perfect Heb. 7:19
Glorious II Cor. 3:7	More glorious II Cor. 3:8-10
Powerless to save Heb. 9:9, 10:4	Saves to uttermost Heb. 7:25
Many sacrifices Heb. 9:12-13	One sacrifice for sin Heb. 10:12
Temporary priest Heb. 7:23	Eternal priest Heb. 7:17
Remembers sins Heb. 10:3	Forgets sins Heb. 8:12, 10:17
Yearly atonement Heb. 10:3	Eternal atonement Heb. 10:14
Priests have sin Heb. 5:1-4	Sinless priest Heb. 7:26
Aaronic priesthood >Heb. 7:11	Melchisedec priesthood Heb. 5:5-10, 7:21
Out of Levi Heb 7:11	Out of Judah Heb. 7:14
Animal sacrifices Heb. 9:12	Human sacrifice Heb. 9:14-28
Earthly tabernacle Heb. 9:2	Heavenly tabernacle Heb. 8:2
Imperfect mediator Gal. 3:19	Sinless mediator I Tim. 2:5
No inheritance Rom. 4:13	Eternal inheritance Heb. 9:15
Instituted upon animal blood Heb. 9:16-22	Instituted upon blood of Christ Mat. 26-28
Law of works Rom. 3:27	Law of grace and faith John 1:17
Works wrath Rom. 4:15	Saves from wrath Rom. 5:9
Non-redeeming Heb. 10:4	Redeems Gal. 3:13, Heb. 9:12-15
Non-pleasing Ps. 40:6	Pleasing to God Heb 10:5-18
Abolishment predicted Is. 51:6	Establishment predicted Heb. 8:7
Circumcision Ex. 12:48	No circumcision Rom. 4:9-12
Made to change Heb. 7:12, Gal. 3:25	Made eternal Heb. 13:20
Faulty Heb. 8:7	Perfect James 1:25
Weak Heb. 7:18	Strong Heb. 7:25
Unprofitable Heb. 7:18	Profitable Heb. 7:19,25
Natural program Heb. 9:10-14	Spiritual program II Cor. 3:6, 18
Daily program Heb. 7:27	Finished program Heb. 10:10-18
Infirm high priests Heb. 5:2, 7:28	Perfect high priest Heb. 7:26
Made priests by law Heb. 7:12, 28	Made priests by an oath Heb. 7:21, 28
No salvation Heb. 10:2-4	Eternal salvation Heb. 5:9, 10:10
Perfected nothing Heb. 7:19	Perfects believers Heb. 7:19, 10:14
Earthly priests Heb. 5:1-4	Heavenly priest Heb. 9:24, 10:12
Repeated inability Heb. 10:11	Glorious success Heb. 10:10-18
Many offerings Heb. 9:7	One offering Heb. 10:10-14
Good promises Dt. 28:1-14	Better promises Heb. 8:6
A good covenant Rom 7:12	A better covenant Heb. 7:22, 8:6
Many high priests Heb. 7:23	One high priest Heb. 7:24-28
Typical tabernacle Heb. 9	True tabernacle Heb. 8:2, 9:11
No mercy Heb. 10:28	Complete mercy Heb. 8:12
Handmade things Heb. 9:1-5, 24	Not handmade Heb. 9:23-24
An old way Heb. 8:13	New and living way Heb. 10:19-20
Unavailing ministers Heb. 7:18	Able ministers II Cor. 3:6
Carnal ministry Heb. 9:9-10	Spiritual ministry II Cor. 3:6
Ministration of condemnation II Cor. 3:9	Ministration of righteousness II Cor. 3:9
Glory covered II Cor. 3:13	Glory uncovered II Cor. 3:18
Brings bondage Gal. 4:24-25	Brings liberty II Cor. 3:17
Cannot justify Gal. 2:16	Does justify Acts 13:38-39
Brings a curse Gal. 3:10	Redeems from the curse Gal. 3:13
Live by works Gal 3:10	Live by faith Gal. 3:11
Cannot give life Gal. 3:21	Does give life John 6:63-68
Exposes sin Gal 3:19	Covers sin Rom. 4:1-8
Under law Rom 6:14-15	Under grace Gal. 3:22-25
Done away II Cor. 3:7-14	Not done away II Cor. 3:11
Abolished II Cor. 3:13	Continues glorious II Cor. 3:11
Ministry of death II Cor. 3:7	Reconciliation ministry II Cor. 5:18
For Israel only Dt. 4:7-8, 5:3	For all men Luke 22:20, Mark 14:24

The Day of Atonement

I would like to investigate this annual holy day to see if what Herbert Armstrong taught is true or not.

To get a better understanding of what the Day of Atonement is all about, we have to go to those to whom it was given - the Jews.

AskMoses.com answers the question "What is Yom Kippur?" thusly:

"Yom Kippur [aka Day of Atonement] commemorates the day when G-d forgave the Jewish people for the sin of the Golden Calf. Forty days after hearing from G-d at Mount Sinai, "You shall not have the gods of others in My presence; you shall not make for yourself a graven image," Jews transgressed and committed the cardinal sin of idolatry. Moses spent two forty-day stints on top of the mountain pleading with G-d for forgiveness, and on the tenth of Tishrei it was finally granted. From that moment on, this Day of Atonement is observed annually as a commemoration of our special relationship with G-d, a relationship which is strong enough to survive any rocky bumps it might encounter. This is a day when we connect with the very essence of our being, which remains faithful to G-d regardless of our outward behavior."

They add,

"On Yom Kippur, we complete the Teshuvah steps we began in the Hebrew month of Elul—we express regret for last year’s misdeeds, and express resolution to be better this year. Yom Kippur thus comes on the heels of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year; we want to start the year with a clean slate."

In answering the question "How is Yom Kippur Observed?", they say:

"On Yom Kippur we are commanded to "afflict yourselves"2. This is understood to mean we should refrain from animalistic/humanistic pleasures, and instead focus on humanistic/angelic behaviors. We do the things that make us like angels the most and like animals the least. That’s why we refrain from eating, drinking, bathing, wearing leather shoes3, applying creams, perfume or colognes, and marital relations. "

In answer to "How do we fast on Yom Kippur?", they say:

"A. Fasting on Yom Kippur is mandated by the Torah and is Positive Mitzvah #164. The Torah1 commands us to “afflict” ourselves on the “Tenth of Tishrei,” i.e. Yom Kippur. The Mosaic tradition teaches us that “afflict” (in this context) means de-emphasizing the body’s needs in five areas: bathing; using creams, oils, perfumes or other skin accessories; wearing leather shoes; sexual relations; and eating and drinking.

B. What’s the big deal about eating and drinking? Actually, it’s a very big deal. Yom Kippur is G-d’s designated annual day of total spirituality. On Yom Kippur, we get into things that make us like angels the most, and out of things that make us like animals the most: we spend the whole day in Tefillah, and we put our bodily cravings on the back burner. Tefillah is what makes us most like angels, and eating/drinking is what makes us most like animals. On Yom Kippur, we try to soar as high as we can. Not worrying about what’s to eat helps keep that in focus.

On Yom Kippur, a day of Moshiach in microcosm, we divorce ourselves from our needs for physical maintenance and rely on G-d...

C. Ultimately, fasting on Yom Kippur is an expression of pure faith in G-d. Yom Kippur is compared to Shabbat [Sabbath], and Shabbat is compared to the Era of Moshiach [Moshiach=Messiah] In the Era of Moshiach, G-d will obliterate hunger, starvation, need and blight from mankind. On Yom Kippur, a day of Moshiach in microcosm, we divorce ourselves from our needs for physical maintenance and rely on G-d, as we will when Moshiach comes."

Now, notice that these things only slightly resemble what Herbert Armstrong instituted for the Day of Atonement. Today the COGs will read a few verses about affliction and repentance, talk about how the sacrifices relate to Jesus Christ, and ask for "holy day offerings" contrary to Deuteronomy 16. 

But what really was the Day of Atonement? 

We have to start in Exodus 30 where the Atonement rituals begin to be relayed. We also get a great deal of information from Hebrews which explains how the first covenant was merely a shadow of the second covenant. It is important to know those things were merely copies of the true (HEB. 9: 23-24).

In EXO. 30: 10, God sets the yearly ritual for the High Priest to cleanse the altar. According to HEB. 9: 24-28, Jesus has once and permenantly fulfilled that in His own blood. Doesn't that in itself say it all? Once a year at Atonement the High Priest performed a ritual that in no way could grant atonement (HEB. 9: 9-10), but now, once and for all time, we have attained that very thing?!

According to LEV. 16: 11-14, the High Priest had to make a blood offering for himself before he could enter. Hebrews 9: 6-10 deals with this. But Jesus has fulfilled that and needs no annual sacrifice.

(HEB. 9: 25-26) 25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Exodus 30: 11-16 speaks of ransom money for the atonement of the people. Acts 20: 28 tells us the ransom was paid in Jesus' blood. He gave His life as a ransom for us (MATT. 20: 28; I TIM. 2: 6). We were all ransomed for a great price (I COR. 6: 20; I COR. 7: 23).

According to LEV. 16: 2, even the very High Priest was not to come before God at just any time. HEB. 10: 19-23 says we all may now boldly go before God at any time. We know we should pray as often as possible (ROM. 12: 12). 

And why was all of that necessary? Because the way through the veil and direct access to God was not yet made available to mankind. It has been, however (MATT. 27: 51; 2 COR. 3: 16). The time of reformation is not future, as HWA would have us believe, it is clearly past; fulfilled by Christ at His death. Christ paid the price already; He is High Priest now. The rituals and sacrifices of the Day of Atonement are clearly no longer needed. The driving force of Hebrews is to make this very thing clear. If it wasn't so, then we are not only in our sins to this very day, but exceedinly so!!

A root reason why HWA believes the fulfllment of Atonement is yet future is because he interprets the identity of the scapegoat (Azazel goat) of Leviticus 16 as Satan, and he explains how Satan will not be punished until far in the future (REV. 20: 7-11). And thus he says the meaning of the Day is in the putting away of Satan forever and that is why the day is still to be kept. But I ask, why is the day picturing the putting away of Satan when it so clearly points to what Christ did for us at His death?

Are these things HWA taught so self-evident in the Bible? Why, then, does a person need to understand the plan of God in order to know the Holy Days must be kept; while at the same time the Holy Days must be kept in order to understand the plan of God?

The meaning of the scapegoat has been argued for millennia. But to throw my 2 cents in, the two goats were for a sin offering (LEV. 16: 5). It is no stretch to say that all of the offerings pictured Christ in some way. That is the very claim that the COGs make. So why this exception? In recent times, the idea of a scapegoat became one of a person wrongly blamed for something. Doesn't that description perfectly fit Christ? The sins of Israel were laid on the scapegoat, and it bore their sins (LEV. 16: 21-22). Does that description not perfectly fit Christ (I PET. 2: 24)? Hebrews 9, a chapter dealing with the Day of Atonement, even directly associates the bearing of sins, which the scapegoat did, to Christ (HEB. 9: 28). I propose (as many of you in the COGs also believe) the scapegoat also pictured Christ and not Satan at all. But this undoes HWA's theories because, once again, this fulfilment is already past.

(HEB. 9: 8-10) "8 the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing. 9 It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience— 10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation."

The "time of reformation" was the time of the giving of the New Covenant. We are in that time now, but some resist it. I want to emphasize what a risk it is to misinterpret what Christ has done. To cling to the Old Covenant, especially only in part, may perhaps bring an undesirable result.

(2 COR. 4: 3-4) 3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.

The good news of what Jesus did is indeed veiled when we reject it.

HWA has made it a point to emphasize Leviticus 16: 29-34 and Leviticus 23: 26-32.

Notice how those verses state the Day of Atonement is eternal. Yet, few have stopped to ask "what does that mean?" I will get deeper into that in another post, but I just want to point out a couple things in that direction since it relates to this topic. First, the temple, the Aaronic priesthood, the sacrifices both in these verses that we've covered and in Numbers 29, and all else, are no longer.. they are gone, kaput, fulfilled, removed. Those things were "eternal" as well. So, how do we understand this?

We must understand that there was a changing of ages when Jesus died and was resurrected. Those things instituted at that time were never intended to be truly eternal, meaning on into all eternity, but were only meant until the end of that Old Covenant period. They were passing away from the time Moses gave them (2 COR. 3: 7-13). Instead, it is the reality that they pointed to, which is Christ and His priesthood, that is truly eternal. Read through Hebrews 9 and see how the Day of Atonement was kept with things that were temporary, but what Christ did in fulfillment of those things is truly eternal.

(2 COR. 4: 18) 18 while we do not look at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen. For the things which are seen are temporary, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Truly, you who are still there in the COGs see clearly that those things were fulfilled, or else you would be doing all of them. So I ask you, why do you allow someone to teach you that all those things were fulfilled yet you must still go on partially keeping the day? Why do you assign a meaning to the day that is nowhere laid out in scripture nor in the Jewish interpretation? Why do you allow a day that so completely pictured Christ's death be transformed into a day that pictures Satan's death? 

I will tell you something - HWA, in misunderstanding the New Covenant in Christ, looked at all of the things that were taken away and decided to salvage what he could of the day. That is why the COGs only fast on this day and do none of the other rituals. But Paul and James say if you set out to keep the law then you are bound to keep it all (GAL. 5: 1-4; JAS. 2: 10). In no way do you keep it all! If you wish to fast on this day in remembrance, I cannot find a reason why you shouldn't, unless you intend to keep it as a law (which the COGs do), then you take the risk of falling from grace! Is that really what you want? Is that really the end to which you labor? You think you're obeying the law and teaching the truth, but you know you only keep a fraction of the law. I know that you don't see it that way; but that is because you weren't ever taught it that way. Yet the reality of Paul's clear words remains. And what's more is this: Jesus Christ alone - not the law, not the prophets, not the Apostles, not the human leaders of this age - is the only way to God the Father (JOHN 14: 6), He is the only door by which we may enter (JOHN 10: 1-7), and He is the only salvation (ACTS 4: 12). Have we heard nothing that is said in Hebrews? Christ is the reality! Christ is the fulfillment! Those shadowy things were taken away that the reality could come in! The Day of Atonement is all about foreshadowing Christ!

I emplore you who are in the COGs, pray about this and ask God to open your mind to whether this is true or not. God loves you and cares deeply about you. He has done so much for you. This day pictures those things He has accomplished. He has extended an invitation to the New Covenant in His blood - for the love of God, walk in through that door!

By This All Will Know

As a member of the COGs, I believed that God had revealed certain knowledge to me. This is pretty much the case for all religions. But I felt God had specifically opened my mind to receive certain hidden and encoded knowledge which no man can naturally accept because God is not opening their minds to accept it at this time. It was this knowledge (gnosis) that we believed set us apart. The understanding of this special, secret knowledge is what made us unique and proved God is in us. I felt that I had won the universe's greatest lotto!

An unusual thing occurred to me one day while listening to a message about exactly what it is that God had revealed to the COGs which He had not revealed to anyone else. So many people have been trying to pin it down. It had never occurred to me that rarely would two people agree, nor would those things mentioned be unique to the COGs. So I asked, how on earth could special knowledge set us apart if we didn't even know exactly what that knowledge was? And how on earth could anything be specially revealed and make make us unique if other churches also knew?

In one of my last conversations with my former minister (who I love and respect even now), he mentioned to me that what we were right - meaning other religions had missed the mark. I replied, "That's not proof. EVERYONE thinks they're right. Or else they wouldn't be doing what they do." Can everyone be right? Of course not. Not when so many people believe so many things that are completely at odds. Who is right? I think all Christians would agree God is right. So the question becomes 'what does the God of the Bible have to say about this?' I would like to investigate what the Bible says that sets a person apart and what is real proof of the in-dwelling of the Spirit.

Let's look in to what the situation is. 

Truths had been hidden by God since the fall of Adam that needed to be revealed to mankind (I COR. 2: 7; EPH. 3: 9; COL. 1: 26). Jesus came with the task of doing that (MATT. 13: 10-17) This privilege was given mainly to the 12 Apostles, and they were commanded to go into all the world and spread this message (MARK 16: 15). They did not fail at that. 

God gives us now what He gave them then, and He did not give to either of us what He did not give to the other. The faith was delivered once, and for all time (JUDE 1: 3). All of those who claim God is giving them special knowledge that He did not give to the Apostles are certainly greatly suspect of being false prophets, hungry wolves, roaring lions, and deceivers. God has revealed these same truths continually from the time of the Apostles to those who reciprocate to His calling. If the gates of death will not prevail over His Church, then there was no time when that truth was not being made continually available to men. Specifically it says that those who believe Jesus is coming [continually coming; present tense] in the flesh, are of God (I JOHN 4: 2-3).

No man can find word one in the Bible of a predicted 1,900 year gap in God's work as Herbert Armstrong has claimed in his book 'Mystery of the Ages' (and indeed in many other places). Even so, there is certainly predicted by God to be those who do not receive the message. Take for example the prophecies of deceivers existing at the return of Christ. When Christ returns, He will call the Jews to Himself, so there will yet be Jews. And there is certainly predicted to be a time where there is a famine of the word. When that is, how long, who is involved, and other such questions cannot be answered with confidence because the details are not there. It could already be past for all we know.

I find it an odd thing that the Churches of God claim mankind lost God's truth in a 1,900 year famine and this is the time when God is re-revealing His truth in full again to a select group of mankind before the return of Christ. We know what is believed and taught in the COGs, and we know nothing in 1,900 years exactly matches it, so it is indeed unique (although not nearly as unique as people would like to believe), therefore it is reasoned God must have specially re-revealed it to HWA at this time. It's the only thing that makes sense to a faithful member. The alternative is to see the uniqueness as evidence of error. But if the vast majority of those things were not kept by what the COGs claim are their ancestor churches, then how can those things be that important to salvation?

As far as errors go, they are not unique to any group. No one has the whole truth. Is the whole of what Christ gave not made available to us? Sure it is. However, we are human and have our own weaknesses to deal with. We have pride, prejudice, tradition, laziness, assumptions, conformity, complacency, stubbornness, respect of persons, fear, etc that distracts us from the whole of what Christ gave. Not to mention the revealed secrets were only partially revealed. (I COR. 13: 9-10) "For we know in part and we prophesy in part." It would appear that many groups have varying degrees of the revealed message. Is it then the possession of the 'whole truth' that sets a person apart? How can it be? The whole truth is not given. Nor would I believe a human being can accept the whole truth were it given. OK then, is what sets a person apart the acceptance of the whole of what Christ did reveal? How can it be? Even the COGs commonly say 'no one has the whole truth'. Who among the COGs would be so bold as to say you understand entirely what Christ was given to reveal? *chirping crickets* That settles that.

We've looked in to what it isn't. Any idea on what it is?

**I am going to post a LOT of Bible verses here, so please either follow along with a Bible, or follow along with Bible Gateway. Actually, I highly recommend downloading e-sword, the add-ons are fantastic.

Short answer: sanctification is by the Spirit and belief in the truth (2 THS. 2: 13). Even some in the Churches of God readily admit that "the truth" consists of who Jesus Christ is and what He is doing. So what is this truth?

It is Jesus who saves, and everyone that faithfully believes in the Son and acknowledges their belief to others will be saved (JOHN 6: 47; ROM. 10: 9-13; JOHN 3: 16-17; JOHN 10: 9, ACTS 4: 12; ACTS 16: 31; I THS. 5: 9); such faith comes by exposure to the word of God (ROM. 10: 14-16); it involves knowing He died and has risen (I COR. 15: 1-8); it involves God's grace through Christ (ACTS 15: 11; EPH. 2: 5, 8; TIT. 2: 11; 2 PET. 3: 15); along with that comes baptism (MARK 16: 16). Certainly there is more to being a Christian than this, like holding fast to the end, but we have to stop somewhere.

It IS a calling. 

(JOHN 6: 44-45) "44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me."

It doesn't say "will come to Herbert Armstrong", but to Christ. It doesn't say "will come to the Old Covenant", but to Christ, along with His gospel (ROM. 1: 6; EPH. 1: 13), and the New Covenant (JER. 31: 31; MATT. 26: 28). After hearing the word of truth, and believing in Christ Jesus, then a person is sealed with the Holy Spirit (EPH. 1: 13).

By the very nature of that, it is not in Herbert Armstrong  or any man (I COR. 1: 12; I COR. 3: 4), and not in the Old Covenant law. But the COGs counter "I need the law and holy days to understand what Christ is doing." I partly disagree with that. Take for example the sacrifices and offerings that we know pictured Christ. Do we need to do those things in order to understand them? No. But they indeed hold much value if we do look into them. 

The difference is in keeping the Old Covenant (more importantly, keeping it partially). Many in the COGs read Romans 8: 14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.", but they skip the next verse "For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption". Do those who aspire to keep the Old Covenant understand this? Galatians 4: 21-31 clearly represents those who attempt to keep the Old Covenant laws as being in bondage, and those who attempt to keep the New Covenant as being sons. The COGs believe one of the signs of the Spirit working in a person's life is that they will keep the Old Covenant laws. I could not disagree more! I think one of the main failings of Armstrongism is that it gets tripped up with the Old Covenant.  (GAL 5: 8) "This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you."

The Old Covenant is profitable only to those who keep it in its entirety (GAL. 5: 3; JAS. 2: 10). Keeping the laws of Moses is NOT necessary in order to be saved (ACTS 15: 1-2; 2 TIM. 1: 9; TIT. 3: 5). To say such a thing means it is no longer by grace. And not just no longer by grace, but to say so means one has fallen from grace (GAL. 5: 4). The Old Covenant is the Ten Commandments (EXO. 34: 28). And the Ten Commandments are NOT Spirit and they are NOT life, they are quite the opposite (2 COR. 3: 6-7). It is not by anything that we do that we are saved. God is not looking for us to have our own righteousness, which is from the law (PHP. 3: 9). It must be His righteousness (JOHN 6: 63). It MUST be by faith, and cannot be by the Old Covenant law (ROM. 3: 21; ROM. 4: 13; ROM. 9: 30-31; GAL. 2: 16). 

(GAL. 2: 21) "for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain." 

Am I saying the Old Testament is useless? Certainly not (2 TIM. 3: 15; I PET. 1: 10)! They are two parts of one book, and both very good for us to read and know (2 TIM. 3: 16-17; I COR. 10: 11). 

We've looked at what it is. Now, is there anything, any indicator, which may help us know who is being saved?

Yes. That indicator is our conduct (PHP. 1: 27-28; PHP 2: 12-13; HEB. 5: 9). I do not say that you must have works of faith and righteousness and therefore you will be saved. I say that if you have heard the truth, believed, and received the Spirit, then by that Spirit in you there will be works of faith and righteousness. It can be no other way. Works do not produce salvation, but they are evidence of it (JAS. 2: 17-18). Do not confuse "works" with "law"; they most certainly are not the same! We've already discussed the works of law. These are the works of faith James is talking about here. James is talking about the result of the faith, hope, and love inside you, through which you fulfill the whole law if you do these things (ROM. 13: 8-10; GAL. 5: 14; JAS 2: 8). Just as you will know a false prophet by his fruits (MATT. 7: 16, 20), those who have God's Spirit will be known by their fruits (MATT. 21: 43; PHP. 1: 11; JAS. 3: 17)

So it is not just in what you know. It is not in what man you follow. It's not in what law you keep, or Sabbath, or Holy Day. It's not in your flesh at all - but it is entirely about God and Christ (I COR. 12: 6; I COR. 15: 28; EPH. 1: 22-23; EPH. 4: 15-16; COL. 1: 18). These things are straight from the Bible and true, and need no speculation.

But if you really want a summation of the entire matter, here it is:

(JOHN 13: 35) By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.