Jesus Christ's Kingdom of God

What did Jesus Christ actually teach about the Kingdom of God/Heaven?

First, it is clear that he preached about it Matthew 4:17, Mark 1:14, Luke 4:43, 8:1, 9:11

He taught that the pursuit of the kingdom should be our priority Matthew 6:33, Luke 12:31; and that no second guessing would be tolerated Luke 9:62

He equated himself with the kingdom Matthew 12:28, Mark 1:15, Luke 11:20, Luke 17:20-21

He said that it was hard for wealthy individuals to enter Matthew 19:23-24, Mark 10:23-25, Luke 18:24-25

He said that the kingdom belongs to the poor Luke 6:20, Matthew 5:3 and persecuted Matthew 5:10

Jesus said that the most inconsequential person in the kingdom will be greater than John the Baptist Matthew 11:11, Luke 7:28

He said that it was easier for sinners to enter that kingdom than for religious leaders to do so Matthew 21:31; but that those who adhere to the commandments will be the greatest Matthew 5:19; and that those who wish to be a part of the kingdom must be more righteous than the religious leaders of Christ's day Matthew 5:20

He said that it is not the birthright of the Jews Matthew 21:43; and that people will come from all over the world to be a part of it Matthew 8:11, Luke 13:29

He said that it had been revealed only to those whom God had chosen to reveal it Matthew 13:11, Mark 4:11; and he told a parable about how different people react to the message Mark 4:1-20, Luke 8:10

Jesus compared the kingdom to the growth of a farmer's crop Mark 4:26-29

He also compared the kingdom to a mustard seed - pointing out that it starts out small and grows into something big Matthew 13:31-35, Mark 4:30-34, Luke 13:18-21

He compared the kingdom to a a farmer who planted good seed and an enemy who planted weeds, and that the two would be separated at harvest time Matthew 13:24-30, 36-40

He said that the kingdom will be manifested in power and glory (the transfiguration) Mark 9:1-12, Luke 9:28-35 He also said that the patriarchs and prophets would be in kingdom Luke 13:28

He said that the inhabitants of the kingdom will exhibit the innocence and humility of children Matthew 18:1-4, 19:14, Mark 10:14-15, Luke 18:16-17

He compared the kingdom to a nobleman going to a distant country to be crowned and return and settle accounts with his servants Matthew 25:14-30, Luke 19:11-26

Jesus compared the kingdom to a treasure or priceless pearl Matthew 13:44-46

He compared the kingdom to a fisherman sorting the good fish from the bad Matthew 13:47-50

He compared the kingdom to the owner of a vineyard who employed the people whom he chose to work for him and rewarded them how he wanted to reward them Matthew 20:1-16

He compared the kingdom to a king who prepared a great wedding banquet for his son and invited the guests Matthew 22:1-14

He also compared it to a polygamous marriage ceremony in which 5 of the brides were prepared and five were not, and the ones who were unprepared didn't make it into the marriage/kingdom Matthew 25:1-13

He said that the institution of the kingdom would be preceded by signs Matthew 24, Luke 21

He declared that one must be born again to see the kingdom John 3:1-5

He gave the keys of the kingdom to his disciples Matthew 16:19

Jesus said that the inauguration of the kingdom would involve rewards and punishments Matthew 25:31-46

Finally, Jesus Christ said that those who would overcome in this life would be allowed to share his throne Revelation 3:21; but he also said that it would be God's prerogative to assign positions under him Mark 10:35-40

Now, it is true that his disciples elaborated on these teachings, but it appears that these constitute the actual teachings of Jesus Christ on the subject of the Kingdom of God/Heaven.

Why Don't You Keep Your Mouth Shut?

Whenever I post something related to the Armstrong Churches of God, I'm inevitably asked: "Why must you criticize/challenge/attack your father's religion?" The clear implication being that, out of respect for my father, I should remain quiet. From my perspective, the obvious problem with this line of reasoning is that it completely ignores the fact that it was also MY religion once upon a time!

In times past, I've written about how my brother and I used to lie across our father's bed and listen with him to Garner Ted Armstrong on his little transistor radio in the mid to late 1960's. And, he even took us to Sabbath services on a couple of occasions thereafter. My father's circumstances (he was a divorced man with primary custody of two small boys and living with his parents), however, made him feel that he wasn't really able to make a commitment to the church at that time. Hence, while it was clear to him (and to us) that he had discovered "THE TRUTH," he NEVER formally affiliated himself with the old Worldwide Church of God.

Unfortunately, as an opinionated and sheltered adolescent, I did make the decision to attend the Worldwide Church and was baptized at the tender age of seventeen. I have also discussed in past posts how I was eventually disfellowshipped for dating outside of the church. And, although that was an extremely painful experience, it did force me to embark upon a reevaluation of everything I had believed and taken for granted. However, like many others before me, I made a pit stop in one of the splinters that emerged from the old Worldwide Church before severing all ties with the religion.

In the intervening years, my dad had remarried and had joined Garner Ted's Church of God International. At the time, it made sense to me to associate with a church that had held onto many of the "core" doctrines of my former church, but also seemed to have evolved into a more enlightened and expansive view of individual freedom and responsibility within that framework. It was, nevertheless, almost inevitable that there would come a day when my growth would render untenable any further association with any group which held onto Armstrong's teachings. The immediate cause of my final departure was the fact that CGI didn't appreciate some articles which I had penned for Dixon Cartwright's paper.

Over time, however, I had concluded that Herbert and Garner Ted were very flawed men who had taught many things that simply were not consistent with the "PLAIN TRUTH" which they claimed to be lifting from the pages of the Bible. With my new understanding, I was also made painfully aware of the fact that I had made many great personal sacrifices as a consequence of my association with Armstrongism. In short, my religious beliefs had profoundly and adversely impacted my educational, career, financial and relationship choices.

Hence, my personal awakening forced me to confront my feelings about my former affiliations. Would I allow bitterness and regret to rule my emotions and spoil my future? OR Would I try to keep growing and learning as a person and attempt to make better decisions and move forward with my life? I decided to move forward, but I was also confronted with the reality that I was leaving behind many friends and loved ones who continued to be ensnared by the deceptive teachings which I had escaped. What to do? Do you simply walk away and be thankful that you've saved your own skin? OR Do you attempt to pull the curtain back on what you've experienced and try to help others step into the light?

Unfortunately, I still have family and friends who are steeped in the religion founded by Herbert Armstrong - the religion which I have abandoned. And, I am sure that they and their associates would prefer that I slipped quietly away and not say anything about my own experiences or malign the teachings which they still hold dear. There is something within the psyche of the religion itself that expects those who are banished (or leave of their own accord) to magically disappear and never come to mind again. We are expected to hang our heads in shame and never dare to impugn "God's Church."

Nevertheless, I (like many others who have had similar experiences) feel compelled to share my experiences and help others to shake off the shackles of this flawed and harmful theology. And, while it's unfortunate that people whom I love and respect as individuals continue to choose to associate themselves with my former religion, I will continue to speak about my experiences and what I have learned. I do so in the hope that some of what I have shared may be of some use to others in their quest for peace, truth and fulfillment. I'm sorry that some see this as being disrespectful and hurtful, but that is certainly not my objective.

Christians Sometimes Don't Act Like Christians!

In the post preceding this one (True Christians Stand Against Insurrection), my friend and regular contributor to this blog, Nck, noted that he rejected the implication that the British weren't Christians (because of their actions relative to the American Revolution). I would hope that all of my readers would recognize by now that I am ridiculing the notion of a "TRUE" Christian when I reference such in my remarks. My use of this terminology is meant to acknowledge that many Christians think in these terms - that some or all of the folks who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ really aren't.

In its most basic application, we can say that a Christian is anyone who follows or professes to follow Jesus Christ. In appealing to a more spiritually and biblically based application of the term, we can say that anyone who has accepted Jesus of Nazareth as their Savior and who exhibits some or all of the evidence that he/she has the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is a Christian. Of course, we can and do embellish and refine that definition, but most of the other things we might add could justly be characterized as superfluous or nonessential.

The mistake that both people within and without the Christian community often make is that they judge any failure of individuals to meet/follow the standard of the founder (Jesus Christ) as evidence that the person should be disqualified as being identified as one of his followers. If that were the case, then there wouldn't be a single Christian extant anywhere on the surface of this earth! Moreover, Scripture refutes such a notion about who should or should not be considered to be a Christian.

The Apostle Paul wrote in very personal terms to the saints at Rome about his own daily struggles with sin. He said: "So the trouble is not with the law, for it is spiritual and good. The trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin. I don’t really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do what I hate. But if I know that what I am doing is wrong, this shows that I agree that the law is good. So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. And I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. I want to do what is right, but I can’t. I want to do what is good, but I don’t. I don’t want to do what is wrong, but I do it anyway. But if I do what I don’t want to do, I am not really the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it. I have discovered this principle of life—that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God’s law with all my heart. But there is another power within me that is at war with my mind. This power makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin and death? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God’s law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin." - Romans 7:14-25

Paul knew something that many of us have forgotten: Christians are sinners - sinners who have been forgiven by accepting the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Indeed, we read in the First Epistle of John that those who claim to be without sin are liars, and that they aren't acknowledging the very thing which makes them Christians! He wrote: "If we claim we have no sin, we are only fooling ourselves and not living in the truth. But if we confess our sins to him, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all wickedness. If we claim we have not sinned, we are calling God a liar and showing that his word has no place in our hearts." - I John 1:8-10 It is a hard truth for some of us to acknowledge, but there is abundant evidence over the past two thousand years that Christians do NOT always act like Christians!

Finally, just to head them off at the pass, I know that some folks will insist that some of the folks who claim to be Christians really are NOT Christians. This is undoubtedly true. Christ said that there would be tares among the grain, but it is exclusively his prerogative to determine who is a tare! God knows who is or isn't a Christian - only God can know what's in the other guy's/gal's heart.

TRUE Christians Stand Against Insurrection!

Conservative Christian commentator David French recently posted an article entitled "Only the Church Can Truly Defeat a Christian Insurrection." In the piece, he points out that Christian involvement in (and support for) the recent insurrection against the government of the United States of America is not consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ. That's fairly straightforward - should be self-evident - right? Sure, Christian's have resisted and opposed government throughout the history of this republic when they have felt a moral principle was at stake. We call it protesting and civil disobedience, but most Christians have always shunned engaging in sedition or participating in violence.

However, when Trump's supporters recently stormed the United States Capital building and many folks were injured (and five lost their lives), we had the unfortunate spectacle of a not insignificant number of Christians participating in the melee or supporting it from afar. I've heard "Christian" pastors justify this action by pointing out that Christian pastors led their congregation's participation in the Revolutionary War and the Underground Railroad and Civil War.

In answering such an attempt at justifying this behavior, we should point out that the American Revolution began as an act of civil disobedience which the British government decided to suppress by employing their armed forces against the native civilian population, and that the Underground Railroad was firmly within the tradition of civil disobedience (and the South initiated armed hostilities against the Union). In other words, in none of these instances did Christians initiate violence or attempt to overthrow or overturn anything by violent means - and any attempt to use those instances as a justification for this current insurrection is inconsistent with what actually happened in the past.

So, what has actually motivated Christian participation in this sedition and insurrection? David French succinctly answers that question in the piece referenced at the beginning of this post. According to French, "The problem is that all too many Christians are in the grips of two sets of lies. We’ll call them the enabling lies and the activating lies. And unless you deal with the enabling lies, the activating lies will constantly pollute the body politic and continue to spawn violent unrest."

French then goes on to explain exactly what he's talking about and give concrete examples of how these lies apply to the current crisis. He wrote: "What’s the difference between the two kinds of lies? The enabling lie is the lie that makes you fertile ground for the activating lie that actually motivates a person to charge a thin blue line at the Capitol or take a rifle to a pizza parlor. Here’s an enabling lie: America will end if Trump loses. That was the essence of the Flight 93 essay in 2016. That was the core of Eric Metaxas’s argument in our debates this spring and fall. Here’s another enabling lie: The fate of the church is at stake if Joe Biden wins. And here’s yet another: The left hates you (this sentence sometimes concludes with the phrase “and wants you dead.”)"

As French points out, it is the belief/acceptance of these lies that motivates and allows Christians to forget the clear teachings of Jesus Christ about loving one's neighbor and turning the other cheek and embrace violence. French wrote: "when the stakes are deemed to be that high, the moral limitations on your response start to fall away. After all, when people believe our national destiny hangs in the balance, they often respond accordingly. Or, as I said in a December 4 newsletter warning about potential violence, “if you argue that the very existence of the country is at stake, don’t be surprised if people start to act as if the very existence of the country is at stake.”"

Unfortunately, French is absolutely correct in his assessment of this phenomenon within the Christian community. Too many Christians have gotten swept up into believing the partisan political propaganda of Trump and his supporters and have forgotten the very fundamental principles which are supposed to be motivating their thoughts and actions: love, peace, patience, kindness, humility and meekness. They have forgotten Christ's and Paul's admonitions to submit oneself to the governing authorities and to live peaceably with all men (even ones whom you believe to be evil, or who are actively persecuting you and your faith).

This is not complicated. Christians should not be supporting or participating in insurrection. Even if you believe the lie that the election was stolen from Trump - Even if you believe that all Democrats are evil pedophiles - As a Christian, YOU ARE NOT JUSTIFIED/AUTHORIZED TO ENGAGE IN VIOLENCE - period! 

God, We Need YOU NOW!

Almighty God,

Please help our nation in its time of extreme need. Please help us in this hour of danger. Please frustrate the efforts of those who seek to hurt, harm and impose their will on others. Please quiet the voices of those who would provoke hatred and violence. Please protect our public servants from hurt and harm and strengthen them to do the work which your people have placed in their hands. Please intervene in this moment of excess and foolhardiness and restore sanity and common sense. Please protect this republic from its enemies - both foreign and domestic.

Amen

Armstrongism VS Traditional Christianity

In past posts on this blog, I have discussed the disdain/contempt of Herbert Armstrong and his followers for the values and teachings of mainstream Christianity and left-leaning political ideologies. We have discussed Mr. Armstrong's often stated belief that Traditional Christianity represents the "diametric opposite" of Christ's teachings or "TRUE" Christianity. Likewise, we have pointed out the aversion that many Armstrongites have for all things left of the political center. And, in both realms (religious and political), one can detect a blatant scornfulness for anyone who might lay claim to a scholarly or intellectually based expertise.

Why? What's behind this phenomenon? Is their thinking merely a clear-eyed reflection of the "truth" which has been revealed to them by Almighty God? OR Is something more sinister and human behind such reasoning?

I believe this phenomenon can best be explained by two types of HUMAN THINKING: two-dimensional thinking and oppositional thinking. Folks who engage in two-dimensional thinking see a world of only two polarities. They think in terms of black and white - good and evil. Moreover, this dualistic thinking gives rise to oppositional thinking. Different views must be adversarial in nature - one must be right and true and the other must be false!

Hence, if traditional Christianity believes such and such, the opposite must be true. If they celebrate "pagan" holidays, we must celebrate God's Holy Days. If they believe in the immortality of the soul, the soul must be mortal. They may say that they baptize, but they're not doing it the right way. They may say that they partake of the bread and the wine, but they're doing it too often (and some of them are using grape juice)! They say that they believe and follow the Scriptures, but they really don't.

Now, to be fair, Armstrongites do generally make an exception when it comes to questions of personal morality. For instance, like their evangelical counterparts, they tend to oppose abortion and homosexual marriage. Even so, for most Armstrongites, even in areas where they find themselves in some agreement with the traditionalists, they tend to view their counterparts on the other side as hypocritical, insincere or too tolerant and "worldly."

In similar fashion, Armstrongites display these same kinds of thinking when they elucidate their political views. The left is seen as godless and bad, and Democrats are the party of the left. Hence, anything that Democrat politicians say MUST be wrong. Indeed, if Nancy Pelosi or Barack Obama say something, it has to be a lie. In fact, the correct posture/view/policy MUST be the exact opposite of whatever the left has proposed!

Unfortunately, two-dimensional and oppositional thinkers tend to twist facts/truths to make them fit their worldview. In short, they have a hard time arriving at the truth, and their thinking tends to engender feelings of indifference, hatred or rage against folks outside of their circle. And, as I've also suggested in past posts, this type of thinking tends to lead to a posture of willful ignorance - a refusal to entertain or accept any view which contradicts their own (irrespective of whatever evidence is presented). In other words, we have the TRUTH - you are deceived and in error! 

The Lessons of 2020

A friend sent me an article today entitled "1,273 People Share Their Best Life Lessons from 2020." And, as this is the last day of what has been widely acknowledged as a very rough year, it seemed appropriate to me to share a little bit of my own personal inventory for 2020.

Whatever one believes about God's involvement in (or detachment from) the events of 2020, most of us could probably come to some agreement that such an extraordinary time is ripe for gleaning a few life lessons from such a period. At any rate, the year just past has been such a time for me.

However, before proceeding, I wish to clarify what I mean by "life lessons." I'm talking about wisdom, insights and self-awareness gleaned from my experiences of 2020 that will make me a better person going forward, and I don't mean to suggest that many of these "life lessons" are new revelations (most of them have merely served to underscore/reinforce things that I already knew on some level). Having said all of that, what are the life lessons that I'm taking with me from the year ending in less than two hours?

I have been reminded of just how little control we exert over events and the world around us - of the very limited nature of our own personal resources. I'm reminded of how fragile this life of ours really is - of how susceptible we all are to disaster. It has brought into sharp focus for me how quickly things/people which/whom we take for granted can be lost or whisked away. Hence, I believe that I will be more appreciative and thankful for those things and people in 2021 (absence does make the heart grow fonder).

And, although it would seem to contradict the points just made, 2020 has also reminded me about just how resilient and tenacious we humans really are. God has given us an enormous capacity to improvise, heal and bounce back (what doesn't kill us really does make us stronger). And, finally, 2020 has taught me what a truly valuable commodity empathy for our fellow humans really is - In fact, the ability to try to see what other people see and feel what other folks feel is priceless!

Anyway, that's a few of the things that I'm taking away from 2020. What about you? Any life lessons you'd like to share in the comments section (remember posts and comments are shared with the hope that they may be of use to someone else)? At any rate, I'd like to take this opportunity to wish my readers a Happy New Year with God's blessings in the year ahead!