Armstrongism's Systematic Theology Project: The Law

Once upon a time, the Worldwide Church of God made an attempt to do a "scholarly" review of all of its doctrines - popularly known as the Systematic Theology Project or STP. However, as the project came to be viewed by Herbert Armstrong (the founder of the church) as an attempt to liberalize church teachings and usurp his authority to set church doctrine, Mr. Armstrong "killed the baby in its crib," and the documents generated as part of that review never saw the light of day (most of the membership never saw them). In this regard, Mr. Armstrong was much like the kings of old. In other words, "the law is in my mouth" - it is whatever I say it is! After all, when something is codified and subjected to review by others, it is harder to make changes in it or to defend some point that hasn't been given sufficient consideration.

The general format of the STP was to make a "Doctrinal Statement," and then follow it up with a more detailed, scripturally based defense. For instance, on the subject of the "Law of God," the "Doctrinal Statement" read as follows: "The law of God as revealed in the Bible is a good, right and perfect system of eternal directives and principles which reflects God's character and serves as a means of expressing His love toward man. God's law teaches man how to properly worship God, how to love his fellowman, how to live life abundantly, and, at the same time, how to prepare for an eternal spiritual life in the Family of God. The law of God is represented in both the Old and the New Testaments and is expressed by both physical actions and spiritual motivations." Now, for anyone reading that statement who didn't know very much about Herbert Armstrong or his church, he/she probably would not find much in this statement with which to disagree. However, it is as they say - "the devil is in the details!" When the WCG "scholars" began to flesh out exactly what that statement meant to them, we find numerous problems with the church's theology related to God's Law. (See WCG Systematic Theology Project)

In the "Doctrinal Overview" which followed the above statement, we read: "The Worldwide Church of God looks to the whole Bible, both Old and New Testaments, as its fundamental source of doctrine and teachings. We accept Christ's statement that 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God' (Mt. 4:4). Jesus plainly accepted the authenticity and inspiration of the entire Old Testament with its three major divisions—the Law, the Prophets and the Writings (Lk. 24:44)—as being relevant for the New Testament ministry of the Church of God. In support of this, the apostle Paul wrote: 'All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine' (2 Tim. 3:16). Therefore, the character, personality and specific teachings of Jesus Christ--both as the Rock that went with Israel in the Old Testament (1 Cor. 10:4; Deut. 32:15, 18) and as the son of man and the son of God in the New Testament—are the foundations of our biblical understanding of man's relationship to the law of God." (See WCG Systematic Theology Project)

Once again, for those who don't know much about the WCG, this statement will appear innocuous at first glance. Even so, the clear implication of that opening statement is that the WCG is unique in its embrace of "the whole Bible, both Old and New Testaments." In other words, other "Christian" churches aren't using the WHOLE Bible. This is followed by a reference to Christ's statement about mankind living by every word that comes out of God's mouth. Once again, implying that most folks aren't doing that. They go on to point out that Jesus embraced the entire Old Testament. Interestingly, in making this point, they do not include Christ's statement that he came to this earth to fulfill the Law and the Prophets of the Hebrew Bible (Matthew 5:17). To be sure, they will use that scripture later in their discourse on the Law to prove that Christ didn't do away with the Law, but they completely ignore here Jesus' numerous statements about representing the fulfillment of God's Law and prophets! Hence, one could make a strong case that "the foundations" of their "biblical understanding of man's relationship to the law of God" begins on very shaky ground (by leaving out that very important understanding).

However, before proceeding with this original attempt to outline Armstrongism's approach to God's Law, we should acknowledge and give credit to the Church of God International for publishing their own slightly modified version of the Systematic Theology Project. Unlike Herbie, they at least had the courage of (and confidence in) their convictions to publish their version of the STP! Moreover, as the two accounts are almost identical in content, hereafter, we will shift our emphasis to CGI's document as an expression of the current thinking of one of the ACOGs on this subject.

In CGI's STP, we read: "The New Testament writers clearly express a positive attitude towards God’s law as magnified and given spiritual impact and import by Jesus Christ." (See CGI Systematic Theology Project) Once again, a completely innocuous statement until we find out that they mean for this statement to support the obligation of Christians to observe the Law of Moses! To be fair, they go on to acknowledge that Christ said that the entire Law was "based on the overall principles of love toward God and love toward one’s fellow man (Mt. 22:36–40)." Nevertheless, it must be noted that the positive statements of Jesus Christ and his disciples about God's Law which CGI references in their STP do NOT constitute an endorsement of a Christians obligation to observe the Torah!

CGI's STP continues: "The overall approach to God’s law in the New Testament is summed up in the statement, “He that says, I know Him, and keeps not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 Jn.2:4). (See CGI Systematic Theology Project) The obvious question here is: Which "commandments" was John referring to in his epistle? Was he referring to the entire Torah? Was he referring to the "Ten Commandments"? OR Was John referring to Christ's distillation of the Law into a command for his followers to love each other?

Let's look at some of the language surrounding that verse, and I'll let my readers answer those questions for themselves! In John's first epistle, he talks about the necessity of Christians "living in the light" if they truly want to have fellowship with God and Jesus Christ (1:1-7). He went on to observe that Christians occasionally sin. but that God is faithful to forgive us when we repent of them (1:8-10 and 2:1-2). We then come to the scripture referenced in CGI's STP. This is followed by this statement which clarifies exactly what John was talking about: " Dear friends, I am not writing a new commandment for you; rather it is an old one you have had from the very beginning. This old commandment—to love one another—is the same message you heard before. Yet it is also new. Jesus lived the truth of this commandment, and you also are living it. For the darkness is disappearing, and the true light is already shining. If anyone claims, 'I am living in the light,' but hates a fellow believer, that person is still living in darkness. Anyone who loves a fellow believer is living in the light and does not cause others to stumble. But anyone who hates a fellow believer is still living and walking in darkness. Such a person does not know the way to go, having been blinded by the darkness." (2:7-11)

In the third chapter of his epistle, John wrote about how a Christian's life will reflect the fact "that Jesus came to take away our sins." (Verses 1-6) Indeed, John wrote that this kind of righteous living demonstrates that we are God's children (verses 7-10). He continued: "This is the message you have heard from the beginning: We should love one another. We must not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and killed his brother. And why did he kill him? Because Cain had been doing what was evil, and his brother had been doing what was righteous. So don’t be surprised, dear brothers and sisters, if the world hates you. If we love our brothers and sisters who are believers, it proves that we have passed from death to life. But a person who has no love is still dead. Anyone who hates another brother or sister is really a murderer at heart. And you know that murderers don’t have eternal life within them. We know what real love is because Jesus gave up his life for us. So we also ought to give up our lives for our brothers and sisters. If someone has enough money to live well and sees a brother or sister in need but shows no compassion—how can God’s love be in that person? Dear children, let’s not merely say that we love each other; let us show the truth by our actions. Our actions will show that we belong to the truth, so we will be confident when we stand before God." (Verses 11-19)

Was John suggesting that Christ's distillation of the Law into two great principles (love for God and love for neighbor) is what God expects of Christians? He continued: "Dear friends, if we don’t feel guilty, we can come to God with bold confidence. And we will receive from him whatever we ask because we obey him and do the things that please him. And this is his commandment: We must believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as he commanded us." (I John 3:21-23)

Still not convinced? In the fourth chapter of this epistle, John talked about how to discern between those who belong to God and those who do not - whether or not they acknowledge Jesus Christ (verses 1-6). Then he returns to the overarching theme of the entire epistle. He wrote: "Dear friends, let us continue to love one another, for love comes from God. Anyone who loves is a child of God and knows God. But anyone who does not love does not know God, for God is love. God showed how much he loved us by sending his one and only Son into the world so that we might have eternal life through him. This is real love—not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a sacrifice to take away our sins. Dear friends, since God loved us that much, we surely ought to love each other. No one has ever seen God. But if we love each other, God lives in us, and his love is brought to full expression in us." (Verses 7-12) Next, he ties the two things together - the acknowledgement of Jesus and this love that he keeps talking about (verses 13-16). Then, John declared that "God is love, and all who live in love live in God, and God lives in them. And as we live in God, our love grows more perfect. So we will not be afraid on the day of judgment, but we can face him with confidence because we live like Jesus here in this world. Such love has no fear, because perfect love expels all fear. If we are afraid, it is for fear of punishment, and this shows that we have not fully experienced his perfect love. We love each other because he loved us first. If someone says, “I love God,” but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar; for if we don’t love people we can see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see? And he has given us this command: Those who love God must also love their fellow believers." (Verses 16-21)

We have to remember, however, that the chapter and verse designations were added much later. In other words, John's thought carries over into chapter five. We read there: "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has become a child of God. And everyone who loves the Father loves his children, too. We know we love God’s children if we love God and obey his commandments. Loving God means keeping his commandments, and his commandments are not burdensome. For every child of God defeats this evil world, and we achieve this victory through our faith. And who can win this battle against the world? Only those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God." (Verses 1-5) How's that for context? We went through almost the entire epistle!

Isn't that interesting? In John's first epistle, he came to the conclusion that even our love for God is demonstrated by our love for each other! And, just in case anyone thinks that this is a novel conclusion to reach, he/she should read what Paul wrote to the Christians at Rome. He told them: "Owe nothing to anyone—except for your obligation to love one another. If you love your neighbor, you will fulfill the requirements of God’s law. For the commandments say, 'You must not commit adultery. You must not murder. You must not steal. You must not covet.' These—and other such commandments—are summed up in this one commandment: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no wrong to others, so love fulfills the requirements of God’s law." (Romans 13:8-10) And where did these disciples of Christ get this idea? That's right - they got it from their teacher!

Interestingly, in the gospel attributed to a disciple named John, we read that Jesus told his disciples that "I have loved you even as the Father has loved me. Remain in my love. When you obey my commandments, you remain in my love, just as I obey my Father’s commandments and remain in his love. I have told you these things so that you will be filled with my joy. Yes, your joy will overflow! This is my commandment: Love each other in the same way I have loved you. There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my friends if you do what I command. I no longer call you slaves, because a master doesn’t confide in his slaves. Now you are my friends, since I have told you everything the Father told me. You didn’t choose me. I chose you. I appointed you to go and produce lasting fruit, so that the Father will give you whatever you ask for, using my name. This is my command: Love each other." (John 15:9-17) Indeed, a little earlier in this same account, he had told his disciples: "So now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other. Your love for one another will prove to the world that you are my disciples." (John 13:34-35) Christ obeyed his Father's commandments perfectly, so that he could be a sacrifice "without blemish and without spot." Nevertheless, these statements by Jesus also make plain that he expected his disciples to follow HIS commandments (which were, of course, a distillation of the ten)!

Unfortunately, CGI and other ACOGs don't seem to have fully comprehended that the New Covenant is distinct from the Old Covenant. In other words, there is a reason why one is referred to as old, and the other one is designated as new! Sure, CGI's STP admits that "Jesus stated that 'all the law and the prophets'—the entire Old Testament—were based on the overall principles of love toward God and love toward one’s fellow man (Mt. 22:36–40)." But, a few paragraphs later, they are stating that "The concept of 'law' in the Bible is complex and cannot be defined or summarized in any brief way without danger of oversimplification." Really? Then why, after distilling the Law into two great principles (love of God and love of neighbor), did Christ say: "The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments"? (Matthew 22:40)

Moreover, after pointing out that anyone who claims to be a Christian and doesn't keep his commandments is a liar, they do go on to say: "However, in fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy of magnifying the law and making it honorable (Is.42:21), Christ instituted certain changes. Christ Himself specifically abrogated certain statements in the law, in relation to swearing and to marriage, thereby bringing the laws given at Sinai into conformity with the original intent of the commandments upon which they were based. Moreover, Acts 15 makes clear that the law in regard to circumcision—which had antedated the covenant at Sinai was not binding upon gentile Christians." (See CGI Systematic Theology Project)

In yet another Doctrinal Statement, they admit that: "Both testaments record that God made certain promises to man in the form of specific contracts or agreements with him. These are called 'covenants' and define the terms of God’s relationship with individuals or groups in various circumstances and eras. Of these covenants the best known are the covenants made with the nation Israel and the New Covenant established on 'better promises,' which will be fully confirmed with spiritual Israel (the Church of God) after the return of Jesus Christ." But, once again, in the same breath: "The New Covenant, which also applies to the New Testament Church from the time of the original apostles, makes God’s law even more relevant by magnifying it to include one’s mental attitude and spiritual intent." (See CGI Systematic Theology Project)

Hence, we are NOT arguing about whether or not Christ made changes to the Law which Christians would be expected to obey under the terms of the New Covenant. The Armstrongites clearly admit in their STP that Jesus did make changes, and that the terms of the Old Covenant were clearly different from those featured as part of the New Covenant. Instead, we are arguing over the EXTENT of the changes!

So, you're probably wondering how these Armstrongites justify their cherry-picking of God's Law! In other words, how do they justify obeying certain provisions of the Torah while ignoring others? This question is made even more pressing because of repeated instances in Scripture where the Law is portrayed as a whole - inseverable. In the book of Deuteronomy, we read: "Cursed is anyone who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out." (27:26) Indeed, that book is literally full of injunctions to keep all of the commandments, statutes, and judgements contained therein (Deuteronomy 4:40, 5:31, 6:1-2, 7:11, 8:11, 11:1, 26:17, 27:10, 28:15, 45, 30:10, 16). In the New Testament epistle of James, we read: "For the person who keeps all of the laws except one is as guilty as a person who has broken all of God’s laws. For the same God who said, 'You must not commit adultery,' also said, 'You must not murder.' So if you murder someone but do not commit adultery, you have still broken the law." (James 2:10-11) Indeed, in one of the favorite prooftexts of Armstrongites, Christ himself said that: "whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:19) Paul wrote to the saints of Galatia: "For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law and do them.'" And he also told them that anyone who gets circumcised is obligated to keep the whole law (Galatians 5:3).

The STP gets around all of this by muddying the water in terms of what Scripture actually means when it is talking about the "Law." The CGI Systematic Theology Project states that: "An important term in the Old Testament and later Judaism is the well-known Hebrew word torah. It may refer to law as a legal system; it may refer to specific regulations and statutes. Yet torah is often used in the broad sense of anything considered traditional, customary, and authoritative. Perhaps the best English equivalent is 'teachings,' though even that may not be broad enough in meaning." The STP goes on to state that: "Thus, the occurrence of 'law' in an English translation may imply—depending on the original Hebrew or Greek and the context—'legal system,' 'regulation,' 'sacrificial ritual,' 'Ten Commandments,' 'principle,' 'natural law,' 'the Pentateuch,' 'customary tradition,' 'belief,' etc. It is therefore impossible to give a simple definition of 'law.'" Nevertheless, as has already been pointed out, this view clearly contradicts the widespread scriptural perspective which portrays the Law as a whole.

Moreover, it also clearly contradicts the Jewish perspective on the Torah. In their article entitled What is Torah? by Tzvi Freeman, Chabad.org states that: "The word Torah literally means “instruction”—meaning some sort of guidance in life. But when Jews say “Torah,” they’re most likely speaking of the Five Books of Moses, the foundation of all Jewish instruction and guidance. We also call it the Chumash, from the Hebrew chamesh, which means five—just like the not-so-Jewish and somewhat archaic title Pentateuch comes from the Greek prefix penta, also meaning five. Often, when people talk about 'a Torah,' they are referring to a parchment scroll version of the Five Books of Moses that is kept in the ark of the synagogue and taken out to be read during services." Although they go on to explain that the Tanach is a combination of Torah or Chumash (the 5 books attributed to Moses), Nevi'im (the Prophets), and Ketuvim (the Writings), they note that "There is a distinction, however. Although all the books of the Tanach are revered as divine works, the Chumash holds a unique place." Hence, from a Jewish perspective, it is clear that everything else in their Scriptures flows from the Torah!

The STP, however, wants us to dissect the Torah and look at it as a mosaic of instructions with varying degrees of relevance or importance for Christians. In the CGI Systematic Theology Project, we read: "Some laws in the Old Testament clearly encompass broad principles while others are quite specific, minute regulations. The biblical text does not itself always clearly distinguish between the more important and the less important...Thus, even though these were all laws originating with God, some are more permanent and spiritual in nature than are others." The STP goes on to suggest that these "Old Testament laws can be broken down into various categories." According to the STP, the categories are: 1) broad spiritual principles, 2) civil regulations, 3) laws of cleanliness and ritual purity, and 4) laws relating to the sacrificial system. Thus, by breaking the Law down into these categories, the STP makes it easier to formulate a rationale for accepting some laws and rejecting others. However, we should not be fooled by these artificial distinctions (which they admit that the biblical text doesn't do). This is still cherry-picking - we're still deciding which laws to obey and which ones to ignore!

What is the alternative to this confusing and arbitrary picking and choosing? We have already discussed Christ's clear distillation of the law into two great principles: Love for God, and Love for each other. This is the Spirit of the Law, and this is what applies to Christians. Christ commanded his followers to love each other, and he told them that this would identify them as his followers!

Although Jesus and his earliest disciples were all Jewish, Christ made very clear that he did NOT intend for things to remain that way! In what is often referred to as the Great Commission, we read that Christ told his disciples to: " Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:19-20) To be clear, God made a covenant with Israel, and its terms and provisions are clearly spelled out in the Torah. Christ came along later and established a NEW Covenant with everyone who would accept him as their Savior (that is accepting his sacrifice for their sins). Christ fulfilled the Torah and the Prophets, and they are now interpreted THROUGH HIM - PERIOD! Hence, Christians are obligated to obey Christ's commandments (which are clearly based on the Torah) as a way of demonstrating our acceptance of and belief in him (not as a way of achieving our own salvation - which, once again, is accomplished exclusively through him)!

The fact that Christians are NOT obligated to participate in God's covenant with Israel is made very clear in the fifteenth chapter of the book of Acts. What began as an argument over whether or not Christians should be forced to be circumcised (the sign of one's participation in the Old Covenant) quickly evolved into a more comprehensive question about a Christian's obligation to the Torah. (Acts 15:1-2) However, when Paul and Barnabas reached Jerusalem (the mother church), some of the Jewish Christians who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees insisted that "“It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.” (Verses 4-5) This was followed by an intense discussion and debate about whether or not it was appropriate to force Gentile Christians to observe the provisions of the Law (verses 6-21). Notice too, as part of that discussion, the very pertinent question which Peter raised (which could also be asked of Armstrongites in the present): "why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?" And, we must not forget James' dramatic summary of the debate: "Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues." (Verses 19-21) In other words, this is a new religion and a new covenant! Moreover, as part of the letter which related the council's conclusions, we read: "For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well." (Verses 28-29)

Now, one would have thought that this had settled the question of a Christian's obligation to the Torah for all times, but that apparently was not the case! Paul had to write to the saints at Galatia and remind them that: "a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." (2:16-21) Likewise, he wrote to the saints at Rome that Gentiles had attained a righteousness that was NOT based on the works of the Law, and that the Jews had failed because they had pursued a righteousness based on those works! (Romans 9:30-33)

Thus, we see that Armstrongites have fallen into a very old theological trap. We can readily see why so many Armstrongites have been reluctant to propose a theological justification for their beliefs about a Christian's obligation to Torah - it is subject to many scriptural challenges from the other side. Nevertheless, CGI and a few others are, once again, to be commended for having enough faith in their convictions to offer a justification for them (STP). Nevertheless, it is also clear that their apologetics relative to the necessity of Christian observance of the Torah (or, more accurately, PARTS of the Torah) has been found to be scripturally deficient and flawed. In short, their rationale for a Christian's obligation to observe the tenets of the Old Covenant do NOT stand up to scrutiny - the Scriptures simply do NOT support their view!

***The New Living Translation, New International Version and English Standard Version of the Bible were used in the scriptural citations contained in this post.