THE “REAL JESUS”... REALLY?
by Richard Burkard
Even though others preceded him, Herbert Armstrong is considered the founding figure of the modern Sabbath-keeping Church of God. Some groups regularly quote from his books and articles. But another much-publicized book of its time has become rather forgotten in the movement – a book written by his son.
“It's time you knew the real Jesus,” begins the 1977 hardback work of that title by Garner Ted Armstrong (1930-2003). The Real Jesus was aimed at mainstream readers, yet by the author's admissions was not intended to evangelize people. But it analyzed the life of our Lord in a detailed, thought-provoking way that no other work in COGs ever really has.
It was written at a time when “GTA” was at the height of his fame in the old Worldwide Church of God (now Grace Communion International). But it came out one year before Herbert Armstrong disfellowshipped his son out of WCG, leaving Garner Ted to form the Church of God International. (He left CGI under a “sin cloud” as well during the 1990s.)
But how real was the “GTA” approach to our Lord? To help me “grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ (II Peter 3:18, using King James unless noted), I decided to use the book for Bible study. The entire text appears to be posted now by the Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association, so you can do it as well!
Going through all of the author's points took the better part of a year for me, because it's packed with Scriptural references – many of them not directly cited. As we've done with other COG works, we'll quote statements that stood out to us and offer comments on them...
PG. 5: “Jesus was born in the autumn, even though the date is kept carefully concealed.”
DISPUTABLE – in terms of the season of the year. “Look at the eyewitness accounts,” the author goes on to write, but those accounts are more about the exact date than the season. Other people believe Jesus was born during spring.
PG. 7:: “He wold be so newly born that there would have been no opportunity for either the purchase or the making of clothes for Him... not yet moved inside an inn or a private home...”
DISPUTABLE. The United Church of God published an article several years ago maintaining Jesus was born in a home, taken in by Mary's relatives.
PG. 12: “He is also called... the Creator and Author of human life...”
HARD TO FIND. Jesus is called the “author of eternal salvation” in Hebrews 5:9 and the “author... of our faith” in Hebrews 12:2. Only by using a concordance for the Revised Standard Version (which has that phrase) were we led to Acts 3:15: “the “Prince of life...” in KJV, with “Author” in the margin.
PG. 16: "Mary would have had a 'normal' pregnancy... no violent, emotional upsets, or a loud, screaming, unhealthy family environment."
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. Nothing in Scripture indicates EITHER extreme when it comes to Joseph and Mary's family. The author takes a presumptive side.
In truth, Garner Ted Armstrong did this often in the book - putting his own speculation on events surrounding Jesus's life and upbringing. There are too many Biblical embellishments for us to list them all. But we will highlight the most important ones as we come to them.
PG. 18: "A converted person today... is still mostly carnal... The Holy Spirit is there, in the mind, but in a comparatively small amount... [it] however sometimes loses."
PROVABLE? The closest verse we could find to support this claim is I Corinthians 9:11: "IF we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?"
This is a question about how believers "grow in the Spirit." Can the Spirit increase over time - perhaps to "double portion" range, as Dr. Robert Thiel of Continuing Church of God claims was given him? Or does the Spirit dwell in believers fully after the laying on of hands?
PG. 19: "Christ, as a tiny child... [had] the protection of angels to help Him overcome such temptations."
YES, BUT... Isn't this something ALL children in God's Church should have, thanks to the "blessing of children" events during services each year? Was it necessarily a one-time supernatural thing, based on which “Child” it was?
"Jesus was eating whole grain foods, drinking raw milk from domestic cattle and goats..."
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. Certainly there were no supermarkets during Jesus's youth. But these words smack of a WCG "back to natural foods" movement in the 1970s-80s, when ministers occasionally preached against pasteurized or homogenized milk. Even then, there was a distrust of science.
Yet one article we found with a Jewish perspective seems to support the author's view. The first-century Mediterranean diet was bread-heavy, with meats considered a delicacy of the well-to-do.
“...if Jesus had ever ingested spoiled food... there is no doubt whatsoever that a divine miracle was instantly imposed...”
OPEN TO QUESTION. The author cites Mark 16:18 as guidance to a resurrected Lord's disciples: “If they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them...” But the Bible leaves us to wonder if the young Jesus had that same detailed guarantee.
Yet we know from Matthew 2 that an angel intervened to have Joseph and Mary move the baby to Egypt for a time, to protect Him from an enraged King Herod (vs. 13-14, 19-21).
PG. 20: “His play periods... there were never any games of pretense, of sham, of “pretending” to be someone He was not...”
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. The Bible says practically nothing about Jesus's boyhood, as the author himself admits on page 15. Yet he speculates about it for an entire 15-page chapter.
PG. 22: “...imaginative additions and trappings to the Biblical accounts... Jesus never believed them, and never wasted His time on them...”
HYPOCRITICAL?! We've already noted that GTA added many things to the story of Jesus as written in the four Gospels of the New Testament, which you may notice as we go along.
PG. 23: “Families such as Joseph's would have been sufficiently prosperous to have hired a highly skilled private tutor... There were no doubt skilled linguists who came into Jesus's home and taught Him languages...”
PRESUMPTIVE. We found this from a Jewish scholar: “the sage Joshua Ben Gamla (1st century CE) with the institution of formal Jewish education. Prior to this, parents taught their children informally. Ben Gamla instituted schools in every town and made education compulsory from the age of 6 or 7.” But that apparently was not until the 60s A.D.
The deeper question here is how wealthy a man Joseph was. We know he was a carpenter with a large number of children (Mark. 6:3 indicates at least seven). But we're left to guess what Joseph could and could not have afforded.
We should also note Galatians 4:1-2, which says heirs are “under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.” Paul then draws a comparison with Jesus – but was Paul thinking of the young Jesus when he wrote this? We're left to speculate about that.
PG. 24: “Jesus... could lay His head back and roar with laughter over something particularly funny...”
PRESUMPTIVE. Nothing in the Gospels confirms that, or tells us Jesus never did.
PG. 25: “Here was a young lad who, from the time He was six or seven... His mind was constantly busy.”
PERHAPS. Although this is also presumptive, Jesus clearly had a sharp mind at age 12 to have a discourse with religious leaders that left them “astonished” (Luke 2:46-47).
PG. 27: “Jesus was not a totally out-of-the-ordinary child. He did not constantly tell everyone 'who He was,' not even His parents.”
NOT NECESSARY. Mr. Armstrong goes on to admit that Joseph and Mary “surely remembered the unusual nature of His birth.” He suggests their memories of those events were “dulled” over time. But how was one forget a discussion with an angel about what was ahead (Luke 1:28-35)?
PG. 28: “...The Spirit of God cannot tolerate the slightest inkling of racial prejudice or bias.”
EYE-OPENING – Considering that was one of the complaints raised against the Armstrongs over the years. Congregations were segregated in parts of the U.S. (especially in the deep South) with the explanation that it was for keeping peace in the community. Critics today claim the form of “British Israelism” preached by COG groups is Caucasian-centered.
And yet one of the first elders Herbert Armstrong was Harold Jackson - a Black man who talked about visiting Malcolm X in his jail cell. In recent years, some COGs have had more growth in Africa than in North America.
“It is strongly implied that one of Jesus's own disciples was black – Simon the Canaanite...”
NO PROOF. This Simon is mentioned by that name only twice (Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18). He's named “Simon called Zelotes” in Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13 – as in the “Zealot” branch of Judaism. That's not a location, but a group which “rigorously adhered to the Mosaic law and endeavored even by a resort to violence” against Rome (Thayer's Greek Lexicon),
The author never explains his “implication”, and we found nothing in several Bible commentaries to support it.
PG. 31: [Mark 6] “was the very beginning of Jesus's ministry – the Pharisees knew of no disciples yet!”
HUH?! Mark 6:1 says in KJV, “his disciples follow him.” Is this a “thrown-in” clause telling believers what to do for 2,000 years? Or does this relate to the first half of the verse, where Jesus “came into his own country”? (ESV/NASB says He was “followed by His disciples.”)
“Remember, however, that the leaders of the synagogue in Nazareth actually knew the names of Jesus' flesh-and-blood brothers...”
WRONG ATTRIBUTION?! Mark 6:2-3 bases this on “many hearing him” in the synagogue. It does not specify “leaders” though that indeed is possible.
PG. 32: “Jesus's brothers and sisters were no doubt converted following His crucifixion and resurrection (though there is no record that they all were).”
SOME APPARENTLY WERE. Galatians 1:19 speaks of apostles, including “James the Lord's brother”. Mainstream ministers such as the late Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel say this was indeed a sibling of the Savior, as opposed to what some churches call a “brother in Christ.”
Matthew 27:56 mentions “Joses,” James's brother and Mary's son (compare Mark 6:3). Yet he's only mentioned as a relative, not really doing anything after the crucifixion. (A “Joses” in Acts 4:36 must be different, as he was a Levite and not a Jew.)
“Judas the brother of James” appears in Acts 1:13 – yet the King James has “the brother” in italics, added by the translators. New King James calls him “the son of James,” and many other translations agree with that. So this Judas may not be Jesus's half-brother. He's more likely a disciple (Luke 6:16) who wrote the epistle of Jude.
PG. 33: “...Descendants of those families directly related to Jesus Christ through Mary... may still be walking this earth today!”
EYE-OPENING. But it's admittedly very hard to prove through 2,000 years of ancestry.
PG. 35: “The doctrine of the worship of Mary is as nonbiblical as is the fable of the Trinity.”
YES, BUT... – The Bible indeed shows we're not supposed to worship humans, or even angels (Acts 10:25-26; Revelation 19:10). But we have other articles on this website showing the “trinity” doctrine may not be a fable after all.
.
“The fact that Jesus was the 'firstborn' implies a 'secondborn', and so on.”
YES, BUT... - That word (from Luke 2:7) also can refer to a lone child (perhaps in Exodus 13:16). Biblical references don't seem to do that, but it can.
“Joseph was unable to afford anything more than a pair of turtledoves as a dedication sacrifice...
Apparently. he could not afford the price of a lamb.”
APPARENT CONTRADICTION. Didn't Mr. Armstrong say on page 23 that Joseph was successful enough to afford in-home tutors?
PG. 36: “He [Joseph] would not have had a single child more than he could have afforded or provided for.”
PRESUMPTIVE – especially given the note above about the dedication sacrifice.
“The word 'carpenter' relating to Joseph... is far better rendered 'stone mason' or 'artisan.' The Greek word is tekton and most biblical authorities agree it had a far wider application....”
PERHAPS NOT. BlueLetterBible.org (which admittedly wasn't around when the book was written) has Greek definitions showing tekton can refer to a producer of fabric, or even a “planner... author.”
PG. 39: “Jesus would never have entered a loud argument with tradesmen... about alleged mishandling of money or goods.”
OH REALLY?! John 8 contains a lengthy “argument” He had about His personal background. Why would He not take exception to unethical business practices? Perhaps not in the way He twice toppled tables in the temple, but still objecting?
PG. 43: [Numbers 13:23] “Each grape must have been about the size of a plum or a lemon!”
PERHAPS SO. As I write this, the known world record for the largest bunch of grapes weighs more than 22 pounds. A man in Spain still could hold it in one hand – but the scouts of the promised land might have wanted to impress the Israelites.
PG. 43-44: “It is logical to have expected that the largest, and therefore strongest, peoples would populate the richest areas.”
NOT NECESSARILY. Perhaps modern-day sumo wrestlers gather in Tokyo for their “bashos” (tournaments), but muscular U.S. football players can come from places large and small. What about strong and hefty farmers?
.
PG. 45: “Joseph's business took him and his sons into the other cities and towns in the Galilean area.”
SPECULATIVE. Perhaps the business was regional; perhaps not. People knew Jesus's family in “his own country” (Mark 6:1-3), but other translations like NIV and ESV indicate it was only a hometown.
PG. 47: “(Mark 2:1-5)... reveals that Jesus was in a home that was obviously His own.”
OPEN TO QUESTION – The author goes on to admit translations vary. New Living has “back home;” New International has “come home”. The Greek doesn't help in saying exactly whose house Jesus was in. Remember His words in Matthew 8:20: “...the Son of man has not where to lay his head.”
But consider this: If Jesus was in His own home, that means people were tearing up His roof! Perhaps that explains His words, “your sins be forgiven you” (Mark 2:5) – a sin of damaging someone else's property. (But, of course, this led to a bigger issue: see verses 6-11.)
PG. 48: “Jesus going “to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gadarenes” [Mark 5:1]... refers to the Golan Heights of today.”
TRUE – Confirmed at several online maps, including one posted by The Economist.
PG. 50: “[King David] was shorter in stature than his younger brothers, yet was well-muscled and quite physically strong.”
SPECULATIVE. We found nothing about David's height in Scripture. But we confirmed another detail by the author: David had a beard (I Samuel 21:13).
“Of course in one sense, it is not important what Jesus looked like or what He wore!”
YES, BUT... Some COGs have made it an issue over the years. Herbert Armstrong declared in Mystery of the Ages that Jesus was white, as were Adam and Eve; he left it to the reader to prove it from Scripture.
“God does not honor one skin color, one facial 'look,' one style of clothing.”
YES, BUT... If that's so, why do so many COGs expect men to wear suits and ties at services? And why do ministers have rules that men cannot offer a prayer during a service without them? (I've been in congregations which had such rules.)
Then again, why don't churches make Ephesians 6:13-15 a physical dress code as well as a spiritual one – with armor, a breastplate, etc.?
PG. 51: “Jesus became angry on occasion, though never from the normal human stimuli, never for the normal reasons...”
DEFINE “NORMAL.” He became angry in Mark 3:5 “for the hardness of their hearts,” referring to a crowd waiting to see if He would heal someone on Sabbath. Do others not become angry when they sense hard-heartedness in others?!
“He could never 'fake' a look, masquerading behind a false deceptive expression.”
SEEMINGLY FALSE. Jesus disguised Himself in some way when He encountered disciples on the road to Emmaus (especially Luke 24:28).
PG. 52: “There is no doubt that Jesus wore a full... beard. (It would be almost impossible to argue around the fact that Isaiah's prophecy said He 'gave his cheek to those who pluck his hair...')”
WRONG. The KJV has no such verse! The closest we could find was Lamentations 3:30: “He gives his cheek to him that smites him...”
PG. 53: “Roman soldiers were industriously gambling for even His undergarments at the foot of His crucifixion stake.”
SPECULATIVE, based on John 19:23-24. But we have to ask: who “casts lots” for underwear? Were soldiers of that time that desperate?
PG. 54: “...The Bible speaks of velvets....”
WHERE? Not in the KJV. Nor in the Revised Standard Version, which tends to be the author's “second translation” of choice.
“Jesus's... outer coat was almost surely wool.”
PERHAPS SO. We found a 2015 BBC article confirming this, saying He wore a “mantle” based on Mark 5:27 (Moffatt calls it a robe; NASB “outer garment”).
PG. 56-57: “Consequently, perhaps it was John himself who sent his disciples with a petulant message to Jesus... they said rather chidingly...”
JUDGMENTAL. This is based on Luke 7:18-20 – a section I had never heard called “petulant” before. Mr. Armstrong suggests John the Baptizer was jealous at Jesus's success. But why would he be after saying earlier, “He must increase but I must decrease”? (John 3:30)
I've heard other ministers explain this section by saying John's faith was wavering because he was in prison (Matthew 11:2-3), or perhaps because he was in depression. We're left to speculate about John's thinking and attitude, but at least the latter views give him the benefit of the doubt.
PG. 60: “From this ominous warning of Gehenna fire for rebellious hypocrites came the incredible misunderstanding in the minds of some that a 'baptism with fire' is some strange charismatic experience accompanied by glossolalia...”
HUH?! Isn't this thinking really based in what happened on Pentecost in Acts 2:3-4?
PG. 63: [After Matthew 3:14] “The following day they went all the way to Bethsaida, found Peter, and brought him back to the area where Jesus was staying near John's baptismal site.”
WHERE? We could not find such a reference in any of the Bible verses mentioning Bethsaida. Perhaps the author is referring to John 1:35-42 when he writes before this about “Philip who took another of John's disciples and spent that same evening with Jesus in a nearby home,” but the KJV lacks those specific details.
PG. 65: “Joseph had known Jona closely. Jona's two sons, Peter and Andrew, had grown up in their father's trade, fishing...”
PROOF? The author presents no biblical evidence that Jesus (or His earthly father) knew the family of these original disciples.
PG. 67: “Jesus was now beginning His ministry. He had finished His careful selection of a big group, numbering 120 in all, who were to be His disciples (students).”
PRESUMPTIVE. While Acts 1:15 says “about 120” were present when a successor to Judas Iscariot was chosen, I Corinthians 15:6 says the resurrected Christ was seen by “above 500 brethren at once...”! And this was after some disciples turned away from Him in John 6:66.
“Jesus showed He knew who Peter was: knew His father and family background, prior to this event [Matthew 4:17-20].”
STILL NO PROOF – as John 1:42, where Jesus changes “Simon Peter's” name, does not necessarily mean prior knowledge.
PGS. 69-70: “Mary seems to have a significant role in the [John 2 wedding] feast since she feels responsible enough to ask Jesus to perform a miracle.”
SPECULATIVE. This follows the events of John 1, which the mother of Jesus may have witnessed. His disciples were at this feast (“invited”, 2:2 says in NIV). Could Mary have sensed an “idea” to hold a “coming-out moment” for her special Son?
PG. 71: “Jesus must have known the master of the feast and the young couple, one of whom may have been a member of His family.”
SPECULATIVE. The Bible leaves us to guess how the group was invited.
PG. 72: “Mary's request to the servants, 'Whatsoever he tells you to do - do it!' is as strong a statement of faith as any found in the New Testament...”
IS IT REALLY? Or was John 2:5 a woman “butting in” to a situation without being asked?
“Mary's statement is similar to the statement of the man who had a demon-possessed son who said to Jesus, 'I know you can heal him; all you have to do is just tell me that it is your will.'”
WHERE IS THIS? We plugged in several likely matching words in Blue Letter Bible to find this quote for this situation, yet couldn't find it. The author goes on quote Luke 7:7-8, which is from
a centurion whose servant is near death (verse 2)!
“The miracle of turning the water into wine certainly is the first miracle of Jesus recorded in the Bible. But the strong inference is that it was not the first miracle of His life!”
PERHAPS SO. It would explain what the author goes on to describe as “Mary's certainty of success,” but the Bible cites no specific cases.
PG 74-75: “The Bible... clearly condemns excesses in anything, which would include drinking too much water!”
NO ATTRIBUTION – But we think the author is referring to Philippians 4:5 in the KJV. Overhydration actually can be fatal. It happened several years ago with a soldier training at Fort Benning, Georgia, in the area where I once lived. And as this article was prepared, it emerged as a theory for the death of martial arts legend Bruce Lee.
PG. 76: “His encounter with Satan... It was to be the supreme battle, and the enemy had all the weapons.”
FALSE. In this spiritual battle, Jesus showed up with “the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God” (Ephesians 6:17) – and He used it three times!
PGS. 76-77: “Anyone who wants to take the Bible literally... would see the results of Satan's rebellion and battle against God in... the desolate, lifeless waste of Mars...”
NOT NECESSARILY. Scientists studying Mars since this book was written have found evidence of liquid water. Whether that water harbored life in tiny forms remains a mystery.
But this reference raises a big question: Are other planets (and even galaxies) part of the “Kingdom of God” now? We asked one COG Pastor who called it a “trick question” - but he answered it by saying since those realms beyond Earth are part of “creation,” they are not part of God's Kingdom. So if humans colonize Mars, they would not be “stealing” godly territory.
PG. 84: “Not only did Jesus believe He was the Son of God through His mother's teaching...”
PROOF? “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature,” Luke 2:52 says – but how? Scripture does not really tell us. The author speculates about Mary here (after referring to private tutors on page 23). But did Mary teach that detail? Perhaps so, repeating Luke 1:35 to Him. If so, this could explain Mary's actions at the wedding feast (pgs. 69-72).
“When Peter walked on water... To Peter, this was another novel 'trick' of some sort...”
JUDGMENTAL. The author is trying to get inside Peter's head, when Matthew 14:27-31 doesn't say what his thinking was.
(Sometimes, though, we don't give Peter credit here for daring to walk on the water. The other disciples stayed in the boat!)
PG. 85: “He did have both the insight and the ability to read the thoughts and minds of human beings by a combination of body language, the looks in their eyes, as well as a very great amount of spiritual perception...”
OPEN TO INTERPRETATION. For decades, I read verses such as “He knew their thoughts...” (Matthew 12:25/Luke 6:8) and concluded it was some supernatural skill that the “Son of God” was inspired to have on Earth. Then the late Worldwide Church of God Pastor Allan Barr blew up that idea in a Bible study, by claiming the knowledge was simply on a physical level.
PG. 87: “Therefore, it is utterly impossible that the brief two-word verse, 'Jesus wept' [John 11:35] could imply either sorrow for Lazarus, or for his loved ones.
”
WHY NOT? Mr. Armstrong goes on to note an occasion
where Jesus was “grieved at the hardness of their heats”
(Mark 3:5) – and Luke 19:41 says He wept over Jerusalem and its
lack of spiritual knowledge (even though that was part of God's plan,
most COG's would say).
“He knew that His disciples were spending nowhere near as much time in prayer as they should...”
PRESUMPTIVE, BUT... That sentence really applies to all of us. Could we benefit from more time in prayer?
PG. 88: “God is never going to honor a request either in private or in public for miraculous events or for the healing of the sick merely to satiate ego and vanity.”
PRESUMPTIVE. “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” Romans 9:15 says. While the author's point is logical, who are we to set rules for when God will say yes or no to a “miracle?”
PGS. 93-94: “Never at any time... has the real Jesus set His hand to save the world!”
FALSE. Jesus says so in John 12:47: “I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.” As in His first appearance on Earth! (See also 3:17.)
PG. 94: “Anyone who believes in the childish beddy-bye concept [above]... must automatically believe, at the same time, that Satan's efforts are infinitely more powerful; that Jesus is weak and inept...”
NOT NECESSARILY – Not if you take the “whole-Bible” view that Jesus will come again and conquer Satan, as Revelation describes.
PG. 95: “Jesus never took any credit for 'performing miracles'...”
FALSE. “I have done one work, and you all marvel,” He said in John 7:21 (KJV). What was this work? New Living translates this verse: “I did one miracle on the Sabbath...” - perhaps referring to 5:1-15.
PG: 99:”His escape to the top of a nearby mountain where the 'Sermon on the Mount' was delivered was perhaps a sermon of convenience, as He sought to outdistance the crowd below. Jesus had to scramble to a high place...”
NOT NECESSARILY. The author goes on to mention the places in the Gospels where that message appears. Matthew 5, described above, is one.
But Luke's version says Jesus “came down from the mountain” to the crowd and spoke (Luke 6:17-19, especially New Living). The Christian radio program Focal Point called this the “sermon on the plain.” So this may not have been a “getaway” message. Christian teacher David Guzik notes Jesus was “an itinerant preacher,” so perhaps He gave the same message several times.
PG. 100: “Jesus did not enter into the internal politics of the land at the time by loudly condemning slavery...”
YES, BUT... Jesus did bring up the topic, only in a different way. “Whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave...” (Matthew 20:27, NJKV) And He came to free people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34-36).
PG. 102: “On the occasion of praying so hard to select each of His 12 disciples... His brow was running with rivulets of sweat s if they were like 'drops of blood splashing on the ground.'”
FALSE. The description of sweat and blood comes from Luke 22:44 – when Jesus was in the garden, about to be arrested! The KJV has no such reference, when it comes to Jesus choosing disciples.
PG. 104: “'Don't worry about it, she is only deeply asleep.” Jesus no doubt said that [Luke 8:52] because He still wanted there to be sufficient room for doubt later on when they learned the girl was alive.”
REALLY?! Jesus had performed public healing miracles by this point, including the healing of a man with several demons earlier in Luke 8.
PG. 106: “Thus, healing was never performed as a sensational act, never done in public before milling throngs and crowds to aggrandize Christ's position...”
FALSE. We've already noted the healing in Mark 2, in our comment on page 47 – a healing before a large group (perhaps an entire town). But Mr. Armstrong is correct on page 110 to note that Jesus didn't hold “healing revival meetings” to our knowledge.
PG. 117: As they listened [at the transfiguration], they heard a discussion of Jesus's impending death and many of the events that would yet transpire in Jerusalem...”
SPECULATIVE. Luke 9:31 in KJV says Moses, Elias and Jesus did spake of his decease which he should accomplish...” “Decease,” as in death (NLT spiritualizes this into the word “exodus”). But none of the three accounts in the gospels says that they talked about other events; in fact, only Luke has the death detail.
PG. 118: “Evil supernatural spirits... will exist in perpetuity. The Bible reveals Satan is 'eternal,' and will not be 'destroyed' in the sense of human or physical destruction...”
OPEN TO INTERPRETATION. The author is stating the common COG position. But this is another case where the former WCG considered other possibilities during the early 1990s.
Pastor Allan Barr said at one Bible study in metro Atlanta that instead of “death,” Satan could “cease to exist” somehow. As I remember the study, Mr. Barr admitted that nothing exact is mentioned in Scripture about that.
PG. 119: “Never once did Jesus 'advertise' to the general public that He was coming to that village or this town...”
OTHERS DID. Matthew 10:7 and 11:1 suggest the disciples went out as “advance teams” preaching the gospel.
PG. 123: [In Matthew 15:21-29] “...the real Jesus did refuse to even listen to the woman initially...”
SPECULATIVE. “He answered her not a word,” verse 23 says. Was that “refusal” - or was He waiting for something? Perhaps waiting to see if the woman “worshiped him,” as she did in verse 25? Sometimes Jesus's silence spoke volumes; recall the woman taken in adultery in John 8.
PG. 124: “This [Mark 5:7] was spoken in sarcasm – saucily and contemptuously – even though the demons were forced to admit Christ's true identity.... implication that Jesus would 'torment' them...”
PROOF?! Perhaps the author bases this conclusion on the “man with an unclean spirit” (verse 2) saying, “I adjure thee by God...” This man worshiped Jesus upon seeing Him (verse 6). so how can we be sure of his attitude?
PG. 129: “That retort [John 3:4] was perhaps a little laden with sarcasm... Nicodemus had already compromised his position with the Pharisees by coming to Jesus in the first place.”
PRESUMPTIVE. It's easy to look for disbelief in every person that Jesus met. But as the author points out, Nicodemus had acknowledged Jesus's abilities to some extent (verse 2) and later helped bury Jesus (19:39). Exactly when he came to understand everything is left for us to speculate.
PG. 139: “Let's understand from this analogy [Matthew 20:1-16] that Jesus ratifies and supports the principle of private ownership of property...”
DOES HE?! Keep in mind that the analogy is a parable. So is the tale of “Lazarus and the rich man” (Luke 16:19-31), which could be interpreted as an endorsement of poverty over riches. Turning fictional stories into endorsements of their details seems like a major stretch.
PG. 144: “You can forget the childish story of a harsh God... He can crash His gavel down on the judgment bench, looking almost through you with piercing, ice-blue eyes, and say 'Guilty!'”
UNBIBLICAL?! The author surprisingly calls the
“Great White Throne Judgment” a “process”
which
takes place throughout our lives – perhaps from I Peter 4:17:
“God has already begun judging his own people...” (CEV)
Yet Revelation 20:12-13 shows a final judgment, especially
beyond the millennium.
PG. 148: [From Luke 19:12-27] “Jesus answered, 'I am telling you that to everyone that has shall be given [and the only reason he “has” is because he has diligently overcome, grown, developed, improved, and increased...]'”
INCOMPLETE. This reasoning leaves “the God factor” out of human spiritual development. “But you shall remember the Lord your God: for it is he that gives the power to get wealth...” (Deuteronomy 8:18)
PG. 156: “Jesus also implied that [the Pharisees] were plotting His own murder, and that some of them would remain alive to be involved, no doubt, in the murder of James, Zebedee's son; of Steven; and the attempts on the life of Paul!”
PARTLY PRESUMPTIVE. Acts 12:1-2 says “Herod the king” killed James by sword. The king was a Roman, not a Pharisee!
There may be a Pharisaical connection to the death of the apostle Stephen (how did the author misspell that name?), based on the presence of “Pharisee of Pharisees” Saul as it occurred (7:48, 8:1, 23:6).
PG. 157: “'If you believe – you shall be saved!' is the popular belief.”
IT'S BIBLICAL. It's what Paul and Silas told the keeper of a prison: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved...” (Acts 16:31) COGs have long said you must “truly believe”, as opposed to “easy belief-ism.” They have their verses for it, yet verses such as Acts 16:31 also exist.
“But the demons believe, James said – and demons aren't 'saved.””
YES, BUT... - James 2:19 talks about belief “that there is one God.” But note the difference in wording from Acts 16 above. Paul and Silas called for a specific belief in Jesus – as that is the only name by which humans can be saved (Acts 4:12).
“...There was no doubt in these religious leaders' minds [in Mark 3:1-2] whether Jesus had the power to heal – they knew He had that power!”
SPECULATIVE. The verses cited here say “they watched him, whether he would heal... on the sabbath day...” The “they” is not specified. Perhaps they had witnessed the healing in Mark 2; perhaps not.
PG. 175: “...Jesus upheld the original law against adultery [in Matthew 5:28], but vastly magnified and made more binding the implication of the law... The religious leadership of the time had taken every single point of the Ten Commandments, and added dozens of legalistic addenda.”
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? Critics might say Jesus added His own “legalistic addenda” by warning against lustful looks.
PG. 176: “Millions of good 'Christian' folk who would never think of 'cussing'... nevertheless use, quite freely and liberally, expressions which Jesus condemned.”
APPARENTLY SO. Mr. Armstrong is opposing “by-word” or “euphemism” phrases here, citing examples such as “Good heavens.” His proof of this is Matthew 5:34-37: “Swear not at all...” Jesus doesn't condemn such language any further in the Gospels.
Some COG's seem to take this matter more seriously than others. I've heard Pastors say four-letter substitutes for “hell” in conversations (assuming that kind of mild “cussing” is the same thing). Yet James 5:12 advises believers: “Swear not... neither by any other oath...”
PG. 182: “During the persecutions of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), one group of devout Jews refused to defend themselves on the Sabbath and was slaughtered (I Macc. 2:33 ff.)”
SURPRISING – that the author would turn twice on this page to the apocrypha books, which are outside the standard “66 books” of the Bible but accepted by many Catholics. It opens the question of whether COG's should consider them legitimate and factual,
PG. 186: “Jesus pointed up once again the ridiculousness of religious ceremony which so perverted true
religion that it became a legal system of do's and don'ts...”
REPEATED NOW?! The New Testament seems to have several do-don't lists. Consider Galatians 5:19-23, for example.
PG. 188: “[In John 8] Jesus was not condoning sin; he was offering forgiveness for sin, and the opportunity to repent and 'sin no more.'”
NOT SO FAST. Where in the account of the “woman taken in adultery” does Jesus forgive her? He helped her escape a potential stoning, but that physical escape is different from spiritual forgiveness. Didn't the paralytic in Mark 2 (mentioned above) show that?
PG. 189: “But giving, serving, sharing, forgiving, healing, helping – that's what Jesus said God's true religion is all about.”
INCOMPLETE. The New Testament defines “pure and genuine religion” (NLT wording) in James 1:27: visiting afflicted orphans and widows while staying “unspotted from the world.” The second requirement isn't quite on the author's list.
PG. 191: “Judas's covetousness for money, his betrayal of Jesus, the thirty pieces of silver, and Judas's burial in the potter's field were all known to Jesus well in advance.”
PERHAPS SO. The author claims the Holy Spirit revealed this “deep character flaw” to Jesus. John 6:64 indicates Jesus “knew from the beginning.. who should betray him.” And some of the details mentioned here fulfilled prophecy (e.g. Zechariah 11:12-13). But did He know about Judas Iscariot's covetous nature, other than the suggestion in John 12:4-8?
“Was there anything to the story that Judas came from the south of Palestine, from the area of 'Kerioth,' hence the derivation of 'Judas Iscariot...' There is no personal eyewitness testimony from any of the four gospel writers as to Judas's origins...”
YES, BUT... The classic Smith's Bible Dictionary says his name most likely means “man of Kerioth,” based on Joshua 15:25.
Notes in the NIV Study Bible say the name “probably means 'the man from Kerioth.'” (1995 ed., p. 1582) The NLT Study Bible says in its “profile” notes that his name “might refer to a village named Kerioth.” Yet it admits the meaning is “uncertain” (1996 ed., p. 1685)
PG. 193: “Judas... who knows, may have been used in performing miracles.”
LIKELY SO. Jesus sent out all 12 disciples with special powers (Matthew 10:1, etc.)
PG. 195: “...When one became truly converted... he immediately became the 'adopted son' of every other member of the body of Christ...”
AWKWARD WORDING. Matthew 19:29 is the apparent reference: “Every one that has forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my names sake, shall receive an hundredfold...”
But is the author biblically accurate? We talk in COG “churchspeak” about being “brethren” (Acts 6:3, I Corinthians 6:6, etc.) with Jesus as our “elder brother” (implied in Romans 8:29). Early church leaders appealed to “brethren and fathers” in Acts 7:2 and 22:1 – but Thayer's Greek Lexicon indicates a “father” there referred to a member of the Sanhedrin.
Paul referred to the “father of us all” in Romans 4:16 – but that was not a church member in Rome. It was fore-father Abraham.
I Corinthians 4:15 says the church has “not many fathers” (KJV) – or “not more than one father” (Moffatt) or “only one spiritual father” (NLT). John seems to specify an age range for “fathers” by referring at the same time to “young men,” perhaps too young to be fathers (I John 2:13-14).
But there can be “fathers” in the ministry. Paul drew that comparison to Timothy in Philippians 2:19, 22. And Paul says elders in a congregation should be treated like fathers (I Timothy 5:1).
What about mothers? Paul sent a greeting to Rufus “and his mother and mine” (Romans 16:13) – and NLT translates this as saying Rufus's “dear mother... has been a mother to me. He added that “elder women ” should be treated as mothers (I Timothy 5:2).
“Judas became Jesus's chief critic. Jesus knew it... Not only did Jesus know Judas was stealing...”
PRESUMPTIVE. Jesus declared well before Calvary that one of the disciples “is a devil,” speaking of Judas Iscariot (John 6:70-71). The only context given for that comment is that Judas eventually betrayed the Lord; it says nothing about any sort of theft. This may come down to how omniscient you believe Jesus was while on Earth.
The author goes on to make several negative claims about Judas Iscariot on pages 197-200 – that he dreamed of being Messiah, tried to overthrow Him for more than a year and engaged in “constant murmuring.” At the risk of defending the man who plotted to kill Jesus, none of those claims have Biblical support!
PG. 206: “The disciples were no doubt puzzled... they no doubt were expecting that Jesus would be eating the regular Passover supper with them either here or in some other place the following evening.”
OPEN TO INTERPRETATION. COG's have presented two schools of thought on this through the years. One is the author's view: Jesus “moved up” His “last supper” because He was about to die at the time when Passover lambs were sacrificed (pages 215, 245-249 go dramatically into the effects of this on regular Jews).
But the other view is that Jesus and the disciples knew what they were doing – and they did Passover right on the proper evening, following Leviticus 23:5-6. All the other Jews did it wrong, somehow shifting the start of “Passover season” from Nisan 14 to Nisan 15. We have an article examining this issue.
PG. 208: “Judas... knew Peter had secretly stashed away a couple of swords...”
PRESUMPTIVE – as in the account in Page 207 of how Peter obtained the swords which he mentioned to Jesus in Luke 22:38. The Biblical backing simply isn't there.
PG. 209: “Judas watched Jesus wash the feet of Thaddeus... When Jesus came to Judas, he probably rolled his eyes, winked significantly at a couple of people nearby...”
PRESUMPTIVE. This “attitude” (not detailed in Scripture) depends on exactly how strongly “the devil entered” into Judas. Luke 22:3-4 indicates it happened before the supper, when Judas went to the high priests with his “30 pieces of silver” offer. Yet Jesus said to His chosen 12, “One of you is a devil” (John 6:70-71; CEV “demon”) - seemingly much earlier.
PG. 214: “They had all commenced to eat again, when Jesus took a loaf of the flat bread, began to break it...”
INCORRECT – based on the Greek words used in the New Testament for “bread.” One is used exclusively for “a raised loaf”, while the other refers to the unleavened kind. Here', it's artos – raised! Our “Passover Puzzle” article (link above) has more on this.
PG. 217: “...Knowing that He had conquered and overcome Satan the devil and could have commanded him to come out of Judas, Jesus allowed the furious tide of onrushing events to carry Him along...”
EYE-OPENING. Jesus removed demons from people throughout His earthly ministry (Mary Magdalene was one example; see Luke 8:1-2)– yet Scripture shows nothing to indicate He ever attempted that with Judas! It's safe to assume that's because Jesus knew the plan for His life and death, as well as Judas's role in it.
PG. 219: “They filed out of the room, and... after thanking the householder and the servants, went their way out into the streets of Jerusalem...”
UNSCRIPTURAL. No verse says the “regulars” at the home ever were thanked. But we're left to wonder: did they see any of this Passover meal at all? Did it have an impact on them in some way? These questions apparently await the resurrection.
PG. 221: “It was well known among the Gentiles that Jesus resorted to the area of Gethsemane...”
NO PROOF. The location is named only twice in the Bible: Matthew 26:36 and Mark 14:22. Yes, Judas and the arresting officers found Jesus there, but the Bible does not tell us what led to that. (Perhaps the rest of Jerusalem had gone to bed?!)
PG. 224: “One after another they whispered their stories into the high priest's ears, only to have them rejected...”
EMBELLISHMENT. Matthew 26:57-59 and Mark 14:55-56 mention discussions, but nothing about a whisper.
PG. 228: “The chief priests gathered up the silver, and terribly careful to make sure they complied with Deuteronomy 23:18 said, 'It isn't awful to put this into the treasury, since it is the price of blood.'”
HUH?! This section refers to Matthew 27:6 – but where is the Old Testament connection? That verse in Deuteronomy mentions “the hire of a whore... the price of a dog...” taken into “the house of the Lord their God...”
The Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge agrees with the reference, because the priests did not want to “bring any filthy or iniquitous gain into the temple.” The KJV margin says “dog” can refer to “an infamous man”, or even a Sodomite. Matthew Henry's commentary says the priests considered it “the price of a malefactor (such a one they made Christ to be) equivalent to the price of a dog.”
PG. 234: “Pilate sighed... and went through the ceremony of handwashing...”
HUH?! Was what happened in Matthew 27:24 a “ceremony”? Mark 7:3-4 tells us the Jews washed their hands over a lot of things.
Henry's commentary explains this as well: “He borrowed the ceremony from that law which appointed it to be used for the clearing of the country from the guilt of an undiscovered murder (Deu. 21:6, 7)” - even though there;'s no record of anyone accusing Jesus of murder.
PG. 237: “So they hurried along the street, urging Jesus along when He stumbled and fell... But He prayed to God, utilizing all His mental efforts, and God gave Him the strength to continue.”
EYE-OPENING. This would indicate God was with our Lord even through the abuse, even through the walk toward Golgotha/Calvary – turning away only when Jesus was on the stake,
“They grabbed a man... who happened to be Simon of Cyrene, a well-known older man, the father of Alexander and Rufus.”
QUESTIONABLE – as in the “older” part. The Ray Boltz song Watch the Lamb depicts Simon as having “small sons,” which could mean he wasn't THAT old.
PG. 238: “A scream of sheer agony spasmodically burst forth from Jesus as the soldiers labored with shovels to insure that the stake was propped upright.”
PRESUMPTIVE. The Gospels record Jesus crying “with a loud voice” at the moment of death (Mark 15:37). Wouldn't a scream such as this be recorded as well? Yet it isn't.
PG. 241: “Jesus opened His swollen eyes... knowing that their homes and properties would be seized by the leaders, that His brothers would be hunted and possible even killed if they did not escape...“
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. The reference here is to John the disciple taking Jesus's mother Mary as “your mother” (John 19:26-27). But where in the Bible do we see Roman soldiers (or even Pharisees) seizing homes in the wake of the crucifixion? Especially if not all of Jesus's brothers believed in Him as Lord at that time (Mark 6:4, referenced by the author at page 32)?
.
PGS. 241-242: “During that time, Jesus prayed as hard as He could in His mind... From time to time, He saw visions of angels...”
PRESUMPTIVE. No verse says Jesus had any such vision during the crucifixion. He referred to angels during His arrest (Matthew 26:53), but never said He saw any. Stephen didn't even have that as he was being stoned to death in Acts 7:56, although he saw the resurrected Jesus.
PG. 243: “...The sponge was
pulled away from His mouth and the soldier who had affixed it to the
tip of his spear, reversed his spear, and, with a derisive laugh,
thrust it into Jesus's side!”
DEPENDS ON TRANSLATION. The King James Version of Matthew 27:48-49 only mentions the vinegar.
I vaguely recalled ministers saying years ago that the Revised Standard Version and “better Greek manuscripts” added these words: “...and another took a spear and pierced his side, and there came out water and blood” (compare John 19:33-34, which says He “was dead already”). Notes in one of my KJV Bibles say this.
The online RSV Bible checked online for this article did NOT have those added words! BUT Robertson's Harmony of the Gospels (cited by Church of the Eternal God) says: “The Revised Standard Version, and the New Revised Standard Version, add the following footnote: 'Other ancient authorities insert...'” So it was a footnote, not in the actual RSV text
The Moffatt paraphrase says in parenthesis in verse 49: “Seizing a lance, another pricked his side, and out came water and blood.” CEG says the Fenton translation added that as well. And the Church of God, a Worldwide Association claims it's cited in a footnote to the New English Translation.
PGS. 245, 250: “The moment Jesus died, a great earthquake rocked the land... and caused thousands upon thousands to drop to their knees, believing it was the 'day of the Lord' that Joel had prophesied!... Thousands were thrown violently to the ground. Many were injured, some died.”
PRESUMPTIVE. No Gospel says this about reactions to the earthquake.
PG. 250: “Even the three stakes on the hill were swaying gently back and forth...”
YES, BUT... Can we be sure there were only three? This admittedly is not an issue in the book, but the late WCG evangelist Dean Blackwell spread the claim based on the King James Version that at least FIVE people died that day on Golgotha: Jesus, two “thieves” (Matthew 27:38) and two “malefactors” (Luke 23:32-33). John simply refers to “two other with him” (19:18).
Yet we must note NO Gospel puts the total on the hill above three. “Malefactor” in the Greek refers to an “evil doer;” the word only appears outside Luke 23 in II Timothy 2:9. While this idea had a following among ministers in the past, this strikes me as a case where WCG looked for anything that might appear wrong with mainstream Christian teaching.
PG. 254: “...they could only assist the servants of Nicodemus in the spreading of the myrrh and the aloes they had brought.”
QUESTIONABLE. While nearly all preachers overlook this latter appearance of Nicodemus, apparently the same person who went to Jesus in John 3 (see notes on page 129), John 19:9 does NOT mention any servants joining him at the grave site.
PG. 256: “At roughly three o'clock, some 72 hours after His death and burial, the tomb was suddenly filled with the brightest light!”
PRESUMPTIVE. No Bible verse says this happened on Saturday afternoon. Even though the Lord's tomb was sealed (Matthew 27:66/John 20:1), wouldn't a light this bright have seeped through in some way to get the attention of the guards?
PG. 257: “Standing by were two powerful angels, dressed in shimmering white!... Jesus prayed to His father in Heaven...”
PRESUMPTIVE. No translation provides ANY details of what happened in the hours immediately after the presumed 3 p.m. resurrection time (the late James Malm speculated it was really closer to sundown).
Did Jesus pray at this moment for the Father to provide “another Comforter,” as He promised in John 14:16? We're really left to guess; the Holy Spirit would not enter the apostles until seven weeks later.
PGS. 260-261: “Mary Magdalene... found her way partially barred by a terribly disfigured man whom she supposed had to be the keeper of the garden... the other [eye] seemed to be almost closed with terrible bruises and livid wounds...”
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. The question arising from John 20 is what sort of body Jesus had immediately after the resurrection – and might still have in heaven today..
When Jesus appeared to His disciples on Sunday evening, entering Day 5 of Unleavened Bread, “He shewed to them his hands and his side” (John 20:20). Those wounds were still present when Thomas saw the Savior a week later (verses 25-27). Nothing is said in Scripture about any other wounds or injuries – likely because the nail and spear wounds are sufficient proof of His crucifixion.
(The author writes on page 266 that Jesus could step “out of His spiritual dimension,” assuming “the flesh and bone of His disfigured state.”)
Yet if Jesus arose with a “new body,” as mainstream churches put it, would it not have been a healed body save for those wounds? It's a body “sown in dishonor... raised in glory... sown in weakness... raised in power” (I Corinthians 15:43; see also Philippians 3:21). If the new Jerusalem promised in Revelation 21 has “no more pain” (verse 4, CEV), would that not mean the pains of our physical injuries and sufferings will be gone when we are resurrected?
PG. 263: “From that late Wednesday... these men had stood faithfully, until two or three of them had even fainted in the blazing sun.”
NO SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE. We're not told anything about the weather after the death of Jesus, much less how the soldiers took care of themselves at the tomb. Any “fainting” apparently resulted from the shock of the resurrection events (Matthew 28:4).
PG. 266: “As a Spirit Being... Jesus approached His Father and reported that the work He had been given to do was finished.”
HUH?! Why would Jesus have to give this “report” in heaven when He already gave it on Earth in a prayer in John !7:4? Not to mention declaring, “It is finished,” in 19:30?
The author goes on to declare what happened when Jesus first ascended to the Father (implied by 20:17) was a “heavenly coronation ceremony.” Perhaps this is described in Revelation 5, but that chapter is part of a longer “vision” (Rev. 9:17) . How much of that vision should we take as historically accurate?
PG. 268: “When the eleven were all gathered together... Jesus said quietly, 'Shalom!””
WHICH LANGUAGE? Mr. Armstrong indicates Jesus addressed them in Hebrew in Luke 24:36 and similar places. Yet some of His last words at Golgotha were in Aramaic (Mark 15:34). So this strikes me as a guess.
PG. 270: “Thomas fell to his knees and with tears filling his eyes...”
UNSCRIPTURAL. John 20:26-29 adds no such details.
PG. 273: “They all sat down and, after Jesus prayed briefly, began to eat.”
NOT NECESSARILY. Jesus gave the disciples bread and fish in John 21:13, which is the reference here, yet nothing is said about a prayer. But Jesus DID set the example for that at other times (Matthew 26:26, Mark 6:41, etc.)
PG. 274: “Following this meeting... Jesus vanished out of their sight again!”
UNSCRIPTURAL. This statement is made in light of John 21:22 – the last words of Jesus in the Gospel of John. It nowhere says He vanished.
PG. 276: “...In Jerusalem, they had been assembled behind huge locked doors...”
HOW BIG WERE THEY?.John 20:19 only says, “The doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews...” They were eating (Mark 16:14), but we're not told how big the doors were.
PG. 277: “The most carefully concealed secret in all of history was kept until the last instant when Jesus suddenly realized He was left alone – that God the Father had totally forsaken Him!”
PRESUMPTIVE. The crucified Lord indeed cried, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34) But can we be sure the Father never told the Son about what He would do at this precise moment? We're not told much about the discussions which happened in heaven leading to Jesus's earthly life.
PGS. 277-278: “When we read the words of Paul, are we able to comprehend its overwhelming significance?... Hebrews 1:3”
PRESUMPTIVE – that Paul wrote the book of Hebrews. The heading of my King James Bibles says he did. But no verse says he did, and many modern scholars don't think he did.
PG. 279: “Jesus the Man... who could appreciate the supple beauty of Israelitish girls, and never lust..”
HUH?! This seems to have been part of the marketing of the book. The inside front jacket in my copy says Jesus “knew moments of temptation, and was attracted to beautiful girls.” Yet the words “girl” or “girls” appears only twice in the KJV – in the Old Testament!
Indeed, Jesus had a following among females, all the way to the cross (Mark 15:40-41/Luke 8:2-3). The only two people recorded as washing His feet while on Earth were women. The Bible indicates women were first to encounter the resurrected Savior (Luke 23:55 and 24:10).
But does that mean He appreciated their beauty and “was attracted” to them? This seems like a stretch to me. I suspect the author's goal was to show Jesus was a “man's man” and not effeminate. (Cynics say Garner Ted Armstrong DID lust after “beautiful girls” and disgraced his ministry as a result.)
CONCLUSIONS: As we noted in the early pages, we've cited many examples (and could have cited more) where Garner Ted Armstrong played fast and loose with the Bible in The Real Jesus. The book has a lot of added “color” and embellishment, which critics might call a violation of “shalt not add thereto” (Deuteronomy 12:32) – although that verse really applies to things God commands.
GTA makes plenty of points which seem refutable if we turn to other Bible passages. But he also makes several points which are thought-provoking, because scarcely any modern COG teaches them.
Perhaps that's why the Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association adds these words at the end of the online text, words you may not see in any other church booklet: “Please know it is not wise to take any man’s word for anything, so prove all things for yourself from the pages of your own Bible.” That's always a good idea, with ANY teacher of ANY Christian group – dead or alive.
To reply to this article, e-mail the author directly
© 2022, Richard Burkard, All Rights Reserved.