Counter Counter Argument -- "Ahnsahnghong Died"

By special request from a World Mission Society Church of God member, I will be addressing several key points and counterarguments that the WMSCOG uses to respond to objections.

Continuing the counter-counter-argument series...

Let's start with the argument:
Ahnsahnghong cannot be Christ because he died.

Now let's consider the WMSCOG's counter-argument (with quotes from Truth of God the Mother, though the ideas appear on many websites) and responses to each part:

Prophecies about King David...

[Regarding Hosea 3:5, Ezekiel 34:11-24, and Ezekiel 37:24-27]

"Through this, God lets us know that He will come in the name of David. Ezekiel wrote this about 450 years after King David's death. Obviously, these prophecies are not about the physical King David but about the spiritual King David."

Yes, there are Messianic prophecies that relate to King David. And yes, because of the timing of these verses, we know that they are not referring to the actual King David because he had already passed long before. I'm not sure I would use the phrase "spiritual King David," but the verses do speak of the Messiah's characteristics (a shepherd and king) and lineage (from the family of David).

Jesus came as King David...

[Regarding Isaiah 9:6-7 and Luke 1:31-32]

"Through this prophecy, again, God lets us know He will be born in the human form as the spiritual King David...

"Jesus Christ received the throne of David. So it's important to understand the relationship between Jesus and King David."

Yes, Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of reigning on "David's throne." There are multiple verses in the New Testament which show Him being called the "Son of David."

And here is where the WMSCOG takes a wrong turn, when they interpret what "reigning on David's throne" means.

The Relationship between Jesus and King David
30 Years Old...

"David was 30 years old when he became king. And Jesus was 30 years old when He was baptized and began His gospel ministry....

"Jesus could have been baptized at any other age. He was born to preach, then why did He wait until he turned 30 to start preaching? He could've easily started at a much younger age and accomplished much more....

"Christ Ahnsahnghong was born in 1918 and was baptized in 1948 at 30 years old."

They are saying that why else would Jesus wait until He was 30 to be baptized except to match David who became king at age 30. And since Ahnsahnghong was also 30 when he was baptized, then David = Jesus = Ahnsahnghong.

I have previously written about this "prophecy," but regarding the age of 30, the first thing to know is that Luke 3:23 says Jesus was "about thirty years of age." The presence of that word "about" means that the exact age of 30 was not important. He could have been 29, 30, 31, or even 32.

Beyond that, why would Jesus have waited until He was 30? That was the minimum age when priests were eligible to serve in the temple (Num. 4:1-3, 21-23, 29-30; and 1 Chron. 23:2-5). Waiting until the age of 30 would mean no one could argue about His age, that He was too young.

40 Year Reign...

"Additionally, King David reigned forty years. Then what does this mean about Jesus' gospel ministry?"

[The next quote is from the embedded video:]

"Jesus did the gospel work for 3 years and then ascended to heaven while King David reigned for 40 years. Then who will fulfill the gospel work of the remaining 37 years of King David?"

Again, I wrote about this in another article, but regarding 40 years, is there any verse that actually says the Messiah would reign (or preach) for 40 years? No. The prophecy was that Jesus would reign "from that time on and forever" (Isa. 9:7) and "His kingdom will never end" (Luke 1:31-33).

Plus, notice the verse that comes after the one often quoted by the WMSCOG:
"David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned forty years. In Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah thirty-three years." (2 Sam. 5:4-5)

David did not become king of "Israel" until he was about 37, because for the first 7 1/2 years he was only king over his own tribe of Judah. There was "war between the house of Saul and the house of David" about who would be the next king (2 Sam. 3:1).

Also, with the WMSCOG's teaching that everything is "copy and shadow" (Heb. 8:5), if it were truly a prophecy that the Messiah's preaching would be split in a way that equals 40 years like David's reign, that split would have been 7 years and 33 years, NOT 3 years and 37 years.

Ahnsahnghong preached for 37 years...

"At the end of his reign, Kind [sic] David passed away and was buried. In the same way, Christ Ahnsahnghong passed away in 1985 after preaching for 37 years. Christ Ahnsahnghong's death lets us know He is Second Coming Christ who fulfilled prophecy. ... Christ Ahnsahnghong even prophesied about His death in a religious magazine in Korea.... his death is proof that He is Second Coming Christ."

First, from the time Ahnsahnghong was baptized until he died, it was only just over 36 years. To stretch that to 37 years takes more than the usual rounding. And this is assuming he started preaching right away after his baptism.

And what of Ahnsahnghong "prophesying" about his own death? The quote from the article:

"'The Second Coming Jesus has to come to the earth in secret and pass away after preaching the gospel for 37 years...,' says the Church of God."

The article is dated 1981, about four years before Ahnsahnghong died in 1985. They calculate that the time from his baptism in 1948 to his death in 1985 is 37 years (1985-1948=37), so he must have been speaking about himself as the "Second Coming Jesus."

However, he was baptized in Dec. 1948 and died in Feb. 1985--again, just over 36 years. Now, if these dates referred to someone's life, born in Dec. 1948 and died in Feb. 1985, would you say that they lived for 37 years? No, you would say they lived 36 years.

It is the same for Ahnsahnghong. He preached 36 years, not 37 years.

I have shown why the "40 year reign" is not correctly interpreted as a prophecy, but let's say, hypothetically for a moment, that it is correct. When we look for the fulfillment of a prophecy, do we look for something that is close? No, even the WMSCOG agrees that prophecy is fulfilled exactly.

For example, Jesus was prophesied to be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2 and Matt. 2:4-6). If He had been born in Jerusalem, about 10 km away, would we say that He fulfilled the prophecy? No, close is not good enough.

Likewise, Ahnsahnghong's just-over-36 years is close, but not an exact fulfillment of his own "prophesy" of 37 years.

The True Meaning of David's Throne...

Let's go back to the relationship between Jesus and King David. What did the prophecies mean when they said the Messiah would sit on "David's throne"? It simply meant that the Messiah would be born into David's family line, which Jesus fulfilled both through Mary's line (Luke 3) and Joseph's line (Matthew 1).

I'll be examining more of the WMSCOG's counterarguments in the near future. If there is one in particular you'd like me to address, please say so!

Counter Counter Argument -- "There is Only One God"

By special request from a World Mission Society Church of God member, I will be addressing several key points and counterarguments that the WMSCOG uses to respond to objections.

Continuing the counter-counter-argument series...

Let's start with the argument:
The Bible says there is only one God, like in 1 Timothy 2:5, so how can there be two--God the Father and God the Mother?

Now let's consider the WMSCOG's counter-argument (with quotes from Truth of God the Mother, though the ideas appear on many websites) and responses to each part:

Think of Adam and Eve...

"Are Adam and Eve one person or two people? I think most people would agree and say they are two people. However, the Bible says they are one.

"Genesis 2:24 So a man will leave his father and mother and be united with his wife, and the two will become one body.

"According to God, Adam and Eve are one person, one body. Does this mean that God doesn't know how to count? Of course God knows how to count! But in the eyes of God, Adam and Eve are one."

The response is that since the two people in a married couple are considered "one," so are "Father and Mother" two who can also be considered "one," and therefore there is no contradiction with the verses that insist there is only one God.

First, there is a difference in being numerically one and metaphorically one. My husband and I are numerically two people, though metaphorically you can say that we are "one" in love, teamwork, finances, etc. If I'm going to travel some place exciting, I want to share the experience with my husband because we are deeply connected as "one" couple, but the airline will make us buy two seats, and on a crowded flight, those two seats might not even be next to each other.

Will the airline allow me to purchase just one seat for the two of us because we are "one" in marriage? Absolutely not, even if we could fit in one seat. That's because we are numerically two people.

So how do you know if the verses about "one" God are speaking numerically or metaphorically? You look at the context. The context tells you that there is numerically one God.

Also, considering Gen. 2:24 (and in Mark 10:8), when it says, "the two will become one flesh," this is a euphemism. Can you guess what expression is substituted by this euphemism? Read 1 Corinthians 6:16, "Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, 'The two will become one flesh.'"

Yes, this phrase is talking about sex (please excuse my bluntness). Therefore, we can ask the WMSCOG, "If you insist that 'Father and Mother' are 'one' because in marriage 'two become one flesh,' then you are referring to their sexual union, right?"

Who sinned in the Garden of Eden?...

[Regarding Romans 5:12-17]
"Was it Adam who actually sinned in the Garden of Eden? People know that it was Eve who sinned first. But in these verses, it's Adam who gets blamed for sinning against God, even though God explicitly told both Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil....

"But because Adam and Eve are husband and wife, they are one body, the Bible regards them as one. And so only Adam is referenced here, almost as if Eve wasn't there. But we all know that she was. It's the same with God."

It is true that during the first sin incident with the fruit in the Garden of Eden, Eve sinned first, then Adam. It is also true that Adam takes the blame for the first sin, not only in Rom. 5:12-17 but also 1 Cor. 15:21-22. Is it because Adam and Eve are considered "one"? No.

For one thing, Eve does not escape blame (1 Tim. 2:13-14 and 2 Cor. 11:3). And both Adam and Eve received individual punishment (Gen. 3:16-19).

But why would the blame be given to Adam primarily? Here is a good explanation. Basically, Adam was created first and was put in authority. Adam had the role of leader, while Eve's role was as helper (Gen. 2:18). Adam failed to protect his wife and failed to admit to his sin when God asked him about it. Notice God spoke to Adam before speaking to Eve.

It's interesting that the writer of this counter-argument says God "explicitly told both Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree." Actually, God "explicitly" gave this command before Eve was created, so we only have record of Adam being told not to eat from the tree (Gen. 2:16-18). Eve knew about the command (Gen. 3:2-3), but we are not told specifically if she heard it directly from God or indirectly from Adam.

The example of the temple...

"Take the example of the temple. Most Christians know that the sanctuary has two parts -- the holy place and the most holy place. But to anyone standing outside the sanctuary, it looks like just one sanctuary. However, when you enter the temple, you can clearly see that there are two parts inside.

"I bring up the temple because, in the Bible, the temple represents God (John 2:21). So just as the temple looks like one from the outside, when in reality there are two parts inside, for many, God has existed as being only one. This shows our limited understanding of God, just as if we were standing on the outside of the temple."

The temple represented God's presence with His people. And it was in the Most Holy Place, where the Ark of the Covenant was kept, where God said His presence would appear in the cloud above the Ark (Lev. 16:2). If the WMSCOG's analogy were true, why were there not TWO Arks of the Covenant so that both rooms in the temple would have God's presence in this way? No, there was only ONE.

Also, if the temple represents God because Jesus said, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days," speaking of His body (John 2:19-21), then what about 1 Cor. 6:19, "Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you...?" Does that mean we also have "two parts inside" since the temple represents us as well?

God refers to Himself in the plural...

"How would you explain Genesis 1:26 where God says, "Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us?" Here, God refers to Himself in the plural form, not singular. This is clear testimony that God is not only one, but two. Otherwise, if God were only one, the verse would read, 'Let me make human beings in my image, to be like me.'"

This show a lack of understanding of the Hebrew language. I've already written about the structure and use of the word "Elohim" (read all three parts).

Here's something else to think about. If there were two images of God--a male image and a female image, as the WMSCOG teaches--why doesn't Gen. 1:26 read, "Let us make man in our images..."?

Only one verse...

"Our faith cannot be based only on one verse. We cannot say that there is only one God the Father basing it solely on 1 Timothy....

"As true Christians who claim to believe in God and the Bible, we cannot deny God the Father and God the Mother who referred to Themselves as "us," even if in one verse, God is referred to as being only one."

There are MULTIPLE verses, not just one, that emphasize there is only ONE God. If you'd like to read them, start here or even here.  Do you want a list written by someone else? Try this one, or this one.

I'll be examining more of the WMSCOG's counterarguments in the near future. If there is one in particular you'd like me to address, please say so!

Counter Counter Argument -- "How can Ahnsahnghong be the Christ?"

By special request from a World Mission Society Church of God member, I will be addressing several key points and counterarguments that the WMSCOG uses to respond to objections.

We can call this the counter-counter-argument series.

Let's start with the argument:
Many people, upon hearing the teaching that Ahnsahnghong is the "Second Coming Christ" say something like, "How can this be? He is just a Korean man! It's hard to believe!"

Now let's consider the WMSCOG's counter-argument (with quotes from The True WMSCOG, though the ideas appear on many websites) and responses to each part:

It's just like 2000 years ago...

"Today, 2 billion people in the world easily believe that a 33 year old Jewish carpenter... is the Christ.... When Jesus appeared 2,000 years ago, the people at that time did not see the glory of God, but instead they saw a 'mere man'."

Yes, it is true that when Jesus walked the earth, many people did not believe in Him as the Christ (Messiah), but now we (Christians) believe in Him. Many do not believe in Ahnsahnghong as the "Second Coming Christ," but that has no bearing on whether he actually is or not.

There are numerous people in the world who have claimed to be the Christ. They could say the same thing, "It's like 2000 years ago! People did not believe Jesus then, just like they don't believe me today!" That doesn't mean anything.

But let's look beyond that because their point is that is was possible for people (like the disciples) to know that Jesus was the Christ. They could know because of the Old Testament prophecies and Jesus's teachings.

Apply the same standard...

"Now, the reason I believe that Christ Ahnsahnghong is the second coming Christ, is based on the standards by which the disciples were able to recognize Jesus at His first coming.
1. Christ Ahnsahnghong fulfilled the prophecies of the second coming
2. Christ Ahnsahnghong taught the words of eternal life"

1. The Prophecies
This is a circular argument because the "prophecies" that the WMSCOG use are verses that they themselves interpret in such a way to fit Ahnsahnghong. You will not find these "prophecies" from other established and well-regarded Bible scholars.

I've written extensively about these "prophecies," but please let me know if you think there's one I've missed or need to give more attention. You can find these posts on my index page. In short, the "prophecies" do not work.

2. The Teachings
Ahnsahnghong's teachings are flawed, which shows that he is not God. I've written multiple articles about different problems in WMSCOG doctrine (see the index), not to mention this list of mistakes.

But when the WMSCOG says Ahnsahnghong "taught the words of eternal life," they really mean that he "restored the Passover." This is also incorrect because a) the Passover did not "disappear from the world" or need to be restored, and b) it's not the act of eating a bit of bread and drinking a bit of wine that saves us.

I'll be examining more of the WMSCOG's counterarguments in the near future. If there is one in particular you'd like me to address, please say so!

Unanswered Questions for WMSCOG Members

As another year comes to a close and I reflect back, I recall a World Mission Society Church of God member who asked me to make a list of questions I thought the WMSCOG had "failed to answer or ran away from."

Unfortunately, I have not yet heard back from this person, and these questions remain.

Are there any members who would like to respond? I really would like to know how the WMSCOG explains these issues. Are there any acceptable answers? If so, please share as it will only help people understand the WMSCOG better.

Here are five of my "unanswered questions"...

1. The WMSCOG teaches that everyone who takes the Passover with them will be protected from disasters/plagues and will not die (source and example). Ahnsahnghong taught that only a literal 144,000 will go to heaven alive (see chapter 6 in The Mystery of God and the Spring of the Water of Life). There are more than 2 million WMSCOG members who have taken the Passover and are supposedly protected from death. What will happen to all the people who will not die (because they took the Passover), but also will not go to heaven alive (because they are not part of the 144,000)?

2. Why does the WMSCOG sometimes keep the 7th month feasts in the 8th month? Click here for a detailed chart. Please do not answer that it is because of leap years. That is not a valid reason. In the sacred calendar, when leap months are required, they are added at the end of the year to keep the integrity of the 7th month feasts. There must be a different answer.

3. In their teaching about the Antichrist, the WMSCOG makes statements about 10 kingdoms that came out of the Roman Empire, 3 of which were destroyed by the Papacy. They also claim the Ostrogoths were destroyed in AD 538. Why does this not match up with the historical record? Click here for details.

4. In Rev. 5 and 6, the "Lamb" opens the scroll with the seven seals. The WMSCOG teaches that this is Ahnsahnghong revealing the Bible. In order to fully open the scroll, all seven seals must be opened. I've heard the WMSCOG explain that the 6th seal was World War II. What were the historical fulfillments of the other six seals? Click here for more info.

5. Regarding Joseph's dream in Gen. 37 involving the sun and the moon and the stars, the WMSCOG teaches that the sun represents "Father God" and the moon represents "Mother God" (source). In the dream, the sun and the moon are bowing to Joseph. Who does Joseph represent, and why are "Father and Mother" bowing to him?

"Which church should I go to?"

"Which church is the True Church?"
"Where do I go for salvation?"
"I know I should leave, but if the WMSCOG is not true, then no church can be true. What will I do?"
"Meeting WMSCOG members made me want to go back to church, but how do I find one?"

I hear questions like these regularly.
Sometimes it's from a World Mission Society Church of God member trying to make their point.
Sometimes it's from a member who realizes something is wrong, but they are afraid to leave.
Sometimes it's from a person whose encounter with the WMSCOG makes them want to get closer to the true God.

No matter the reason or what form the question takes, it's a good question, and one that deserves attention.

First, let's define "church." For our purpose here, there are three basic definitions:
1. The worldwide group of people who truly believe in Jesus (God), not confined to a building or location
2. A denomination of Christianity, example: the Baptist church
3. A local congregation, example: First Baptist Church on Main Street

Which church is the True Church?

That is definition #1, the body of true believers worldwide. (John 10:27)
Here is a good article about it.

Where do I go for salvation?

It is not a church of any kind that can give you salvation, it is Jesus Himself. Go to Jesus for salvation. (John 14:6; Acts 16:31)

Then what about denominations and local congregations?

Local congregations (most of which are part of a larger denomination) can help you with your walk of faith. They can help you get to know Jesus better and have a closer relationship with God. But your salvation is about your relationship with God, not your relationship with a particular church (definition #2 or 3).

I know I should leave, but if the WMSCOG is not true, then no church can be true. What will I do?

Here's a question for you to think about--If your particular church is teaching you to worship a false god, should you stay there? Of course not! There are good churches that teach truth out there, but you won't find one until you leave and search for one, even if leaving is emotionally difficult.

I've heard from members who know that Ahnsahnghong and Zahng Gil-jah are false gods, but are hesitant to leave the WMSCOG because they agree with other teachings like Sabbath and the Feasts. Which do you think is more important? Who you worship or how you worship? Isn't it better to leave the church that worships false gods? Then you will see more clearly to find a better place to worship the true God.

I want to go back to church (or I'm leaving the WMSCOG), but how to I find a good church?

You can start by asking friends or relatives for suggestions, looking for local churches on the internet, or noticing what churches are in your town. But once you find some, how do you know if they are good ones?

The next step is to look at their statement of beliefs. You can usually find this on their website or in a pamphlet at the church. If they don't have one, that's a red flag--try a different church.

While denominations have some differences, all Christian churches that preach the truth about the Bible will share these same fundamental beliefs:

• The Bible is the inspired word of God.
• There is one true God, creator of heaven and earth, who has been revealed as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
• Jesus is God. He lived a sinless life, was crucified for our sins, and was bodily resurrected.
• All humans have sinned and can only be saved by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
• Salvation is received by God's grace, through faith in Jesus, not by any works of our own.

If you see anything in the statement of beliefs that contradicts these things, such as that Jesus was not God or that people must perform certain tasks for their salvation, that's a red flag--try a different church.

If their beliefs look good, try visiting the church several times. Observe how the people interact with each other and with guests. See if they have programs and classes to help you study your Bible, grow in your faith, and connect with others. If it doesn't feel like the right fit, don't lose hope, just try a different church. You can also go back in a few months and see if you feel differently about it.

Don't be afraid to ask the leadership of the church if you have questions about what they do and what they believe and why. Remember that the WMSCOG is wrong about many of of their teachings. Don't dismiss a new church simply because they do and believe things the WMSCOG taught you were wrong.

Beware of local churches or denominations that might sound good at first, but actually teach falsehood (like the WMSCOG). Here is a list of points that will help you check if the church falls into this category. Sometimes you won't realize these teachings until you've been attending for a while. If that happens, just realize it's time to try a different church.

Here are two excellent articles with more advice about finding a good church:
"Looking for the 'Right' Church?"

"Choosing a Church After a Painful Experience"

The Queen's Award and the WMSCOG -- Fact and Fiction

Foreword...
The World Mission Society Church of God has been pursuing a reputation for volunteer activity and community service in the locations of its various branches. Members participate in events such as blood drives, community clean up, family events, and the like. (See examples here.)

Community service itself is wonderful. It is admirable for people to invest their time and effort to improve the world around us and to help people in need. My family and I have done it. Most people who do this are sincere and loving about it, and I believe that most members of the WMSCOG who participate in these activities do so genuinely.

Because volunteer community services are so commendable, it's a very unpleasant and sensitive thing to have to criticize any part of it, and I do so reluctantly. My message here is in no way intended to denigrate the volunteers or detract from the valuable work they have done in their communities. Please know that the following criticisms are not directed at the members who do the volunteer work, but at the leaders who use the results of this work to make misrepresentations about the WMSCOG.
______________________________
Update July 2021 -- The WMSCOG has taken down many of the videos and pages I linked to in this article. You can still find a few out there, like this article, this presentation, and this video.

______________________________

Last summer the WMSCOG was awarded the Queen's Award for Voluntary Services. The WMSCOG and its members have been very excited and have published articles, videos, and comments about it around the web. If you have had anything to do with the WMSCOG, surely you have already heard about it. After all, it is prominently displayed on their main website's front page. Here's a screen shot...

I greatly admire Queen Elizabeth II, and so this interested me a lot. Over the last months I've been researching and watching -- What is this award? How is it earned? Is it everything the WMSCOG says? Are they representing it correctly to their members and the public?
Here is what I discovered...

The United Kingdom's government sites will tell you all about this award and how groups are nominated and selected and also a list of recipients. There is contact information available as well, for those of us who want more information about the award.

This is a legitimate and prestigious award. It is well-earned and an honor for those groups who receive it. However, there are numerous problems with the way the WMSCOG has represented this award.

Did the WMSCOG earn this award?
The award was earned by the "UK Zion," which is the specific local branch of the WMSCOG in Manchester, UK. This award was NOT given to the larger, corporate WMSCOG or any of their other local branches. For that to be stated or implied is inappropriate and against the nature of the award.

Think of Bob Dylan, who won the Nobel Prize for Literature last year for his songwriting. It would be improper for his record label to claim that they won the prize, or for other artists sharing that record label or singing with Bob Dylan to claim that they also won the prize.

This was clarified for me by a representative of the Queen's Award who told me, "It is possible for a group affiliated to a wider group to be given the award, however, it only applies to the local group." She went on to say that it "does not apply to the wider organisation and any mention of the Award on websites or marketing information should reflect this."

Do their websites reflect this? Well, read for yourself...
This article at award.watv.org,
This article at english.watv.org,
An article about their celebration event in Korea,
This video from the WMSCOG,
Another video from the WMSCOG.

How about these news articles or these ones that show local branches in the USA appropriating this award for themselves (see screen shot)? All of these articles (like this one) state "News provided by World Mission Society Church of God."

Even if they have not directly applied the award to "the wider organisation," they have implied it to enough of an extent that the casual reader would easily think that the entire worldwide church earned the award. Even their own members can easily misunderstand this if the WMSCOG does not specifically clarify it.

Are WMSCOG members now MBEs?
No. I wondered this because of the WMSCOG's statement:

"The Queen's Award for Voluntary Service recipients are made the Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire [MBE]. Just like individuals, groups that were recognized with an MBE can use this British honor with their names. They are also entitled to use the Queen's Award emblem on their website, stationery, and other printed material."

I was confused because I couldn't quite tell if the WMSCOG was saying that individual members could now use MBE with their names. Also, the UK's official information online did not explain for me if that was how this honor worked, so I asked the Queen's Award for more information.

The representative answered that although the award is equivalent in status for a group as an MBE is for an individual, "The Award is given to the overall group and it does not apply to individuals and therefore, it is not possible for individuals to use the title behind their name."

She also clarified for me the meaning of "MBE." She said, "The MBE title you have used 'Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire' is not recognised by us and the correct title is 'Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE).'" There is more information about the honors system online.

I can see how the WMSCOG might be confused about the title since I have seen it used with "the Most Excellent" phrase elsewhere online. Perhaps it is an outdated phrase, but in any case it is not used on the official government websites.

What about the wording on the certificate?
The certificate, signed by the Queen, says,

Elizabeth the Second,

By the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,

and of Our other Realms and Territories, Queen, Defender of the Faith, to

UK ZION,

a group of volunteers from the World Mission Society Church of God,

share Mother's love through a range of initiatives.

Greeting!

We being cognisant of the said group's voluntary work in the community,

and being desirous of showing Our Royal Favour do hereby confer upon it:

The Queen's Golden Jubilee Award...

When the WMSCOG states, "The Queen praises the Church of God for performing the role of salt and light" (in this article), and "The award certificate signed by Queen Elizabeth II herself states its purpose and meaning clearly" (in this article, and similarly in this video), it gave me the impression that the Queen knows and approves of the message of "Mother God."

However, the phrase "UK ZION, a group of volunteers from the World Mission Society Church of God, share Mother's love through a range of initiatives" did not come from the Queen or the award committee. That "citation" part of the certificate is provided by either the organisation itself or the person nominating it. We can tell this because of the guidance notes for the award.

How long did it take for the UK Zion to be approved for this award?
According to a WMSCOG article and two videos (this one and this one, see screen shot), the local branch "has carried out volunteer services constantly for four years" and has been through a "rigorous assessment procedure for three years."

I understand those statements to mean that the Manchester branch did such a wonderful job of community work the first year that they were then nominated for the award and spent the next three years continuing their work while the "rigorous assessment procedure" was taking place. (If that's not what was meant, they might want to reword it.)

Well, the assessment is "thorough and rigorous" as described on the Queen's Award website, but it seems the WMSCOG's timeline is a bit off.

A group must have been doing their volunteer work for at least three years in order to be nominated, and it can be approved for the award in as quickly as one year (or less--nominations close in September for awards given the following June, see here for more information), or it may take as long as three years for a group to be approved for the award (info here).

The dates were also off on the Manchester branch's annual report submitted to the Charity Commission of the UK. The report was to cover the time period from August 2014 to August 2015, yet in Section D when it asks for a "summary of the main achievements of the charity during the year," they wrote "Queen's Award for Voluntary Service," even though they did not get the award until June 2016.

Was Kim Joo-cheol invited to Buckingham Palace by the Queen?
There is a picture of Kim Joo-cheol receiving the award, and the WMSCOG article says, "Before the award ceremony was held, General Pastor Kim Joo-cheol was invited by the [sic] Queen Elizabeth II as the representative of the Church of God to Buckingham Palace." I wondered if the General Pastor from Korea was actually personally invited by the Queen. That would be a prestigious invitation indeed.

The answer is no. The award notes tell us that each successful group is "allocated 2 places at the annual royal garden party at Buckingham Palace in London or the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh." It was the WMSCOG who chose to send Kim Joo-cheol, not the Queen.

Was the WMSCOG the only religious organization to receive the award this year?
In this article and this video (see screen shot), the WMSCOG states, "among a total of 193 invited charities, social enterprises, and voluntary groups, the only religious organization is the World Mission Society Church of God."

That is false. The UK has published a list of award recipients for 2016. I did not look up all 193 of them, but here are some of the ones that are definitely religion-based:
Open Hands Trust, Christian
Federation of Jewish Services, Jewish
Urban Outreach, Christian
Inter Madrassah Organisation, Muslim
The Boy's Brigade, Christian
Mary's Meals, Catholic
Paisley Wynd Centre, Christian
Southend-on-Sea Street Pastors, Christian
Masjid-E-Zeenat-Ul-Islam, Muslim
Salisbury Cathedral Volunteers, Christian
Manna House, Christian
Carriers of Hope, Christian
Good Shepherd Ministry, Catholic
Radio Plus, Christian
Sikh Union Coventry, Sikh

The value of fact-checking
How many times after a presidential speech or debate between candidates have you seen the media fact-checking? It's an important part of keeping our leaders accountable to speak the truth and avoid misrepresentations.

Fact-checking the WMSCOG's publicity of the Queen's Award has revealed several areas where they have made mistakes.

This is an esteemed award, and those who do the work to earn it deserve the honor of being recognized by the Queen. When it is misrepresented, as the WMSCOG leadership has done, it detracts from the honor.

For a previous post about WMSCOG awards, click here.

Rebecca's full interview with Today, Part 2

I'm still grateful to the Today Show for bringing exposure to the World Mission Society Church of God with the segment they broadcast about it earlier this year. And I'm thankful they posted their full interview with Rebecca, the member who was featured in the segment.

Again, for your convenience, you can view the full interview by clicking here.

I've watched the interview several times and found it thought provoking. Last time I wrote about thoughts it brought up regarding mainstream Christianity. Now I'll focus on comments specific to the WMSCOG.

The End of the World?

There has been controversy about if and when the WMSCOG had made predictions about the end of the world. Rebecca was asked about this and responded that she had not been taught a specific date. She said that in fact it would be wrong for the church to teach a specific date because the Bible says no one knows the day. That part is true (see Matthew 24:36), though other ex-members and family of members report that they were indeed taught at least an end year.

Beyond that, I was struck by something she said at about 14:36,

"It could happen whenever. For, individually it could happen tomorrow. We don’t know… I could get in a car accident when I leave this place. No one knows that, that time frame when this is going to happen."

She was talking about how any of us should be ready at any time because we don't know when our time will be up here on this earth. The part that confused me was her implication that she could die in a car accident that day.

The reason this confused me is that the WMSCOG teaches that those members who take the Passover are protected from disasters. They even have a video about it, which shows people claiming they were protected from fire, earthquake, accident, and more, all because they had taken the Passover. Accordingly, I would expect no fear or even thought in a member's mind about dying in a car accident.

Preaching to Your Family

Several times Rebecca made comments like this, at 20:50,

"I never told my family to change their beliefs. I never asked them to believe what I believe."

Perhaps she never phrased it in just that way, but I have a hard time believing that she never preached to her family hoping for them to join the WMSCOG with her. This does not ring true for me for two reasons.

First, if her new faith truly was her "absolute happiness," if she had found her "true purpose" and "all the answers," and if she loved her family, why would she not share with them about it and want them to find all that too? It is only natural to want your family to join you in this new faith.

Second, the WMSCOG teaches that salvation is based on obedience, and obedience includes preaching. If she did not at least try to preach to her family, then she would not be obeying the requirement to preach. I wonder if Rebecca would like to go back and rephrase that.

The Intervention

Apparently Rebecca's family tried an intervention that did not go well, and it seems the effect was more traumatic than helpful.

At about 19:50, she was asked why her family would say that after joining the WMSCOG, she began "slipping away," was "sleep deprived," seemed not herself, and "talked to them less." Rebecca paused for a long time, and then rather than answering the question directly, began to describe what they did to her,

"I want you to imagine being locked in a hotel room against your own free will, and your entire family is there and tells you you cannot leave the hotel room until you see a cult counselor."

She came back to this incident several times during the interview, frequently using the phrase "locked in a hotel room."

I have been in numerous hotel rooms around the world and have never seen one where a person can get locked in. Locked out, yes, but never locked in. The door will always open from the inside. It's a safety measure. I wonder if this is another occasion where Rebecca would like to rephrase herself.

After describing this failed intervention, Rebecca then gave the reason for her pulling away from her family. She said,

"Tell me that it's easy to trust your family after they do that to you.... They have discriminated against me from the beginning.... Every word that comes out of my mouth they consider it a lie.... How can you have a relationship with someone who thinks your brainwashed?... Their intolerance for what I want to believe is what has caused me to step away."

This can be a vicious cycle. Family is concerned by changes in their loved one after they become involved with the WMSCOG. Member perceives this concern as an offense and responds with anger, withdrawal, etc. Family becomes even more concerned....

Later at 25:05, she said about her family, "They don't see how their own actions are affecting me."

It is true that our actions affect others' responses. I remember in the first year of my sister's involvement with the WMSCOG, I was completely unprepared with how to handle the situation. I'm certain I said and did things that were counter-productive because I didn't know the extent of what I was dealing with. But I was motivated out of love for my sister. Perhaps it was that way with Rebecca's family.

But it's important for Rebecca (and other members) to realize the same thing is true for them. Their actions affect their family's responses too.

Missing the Wedding

At about 30:00, Rebecca was asked about missing her brother's wedding. Arrangements were made, and she was expected to be there, and then she left a message that she would not be attending. The family was under the impression that it was because of the WMSCOG. Rebecca responded,

"“I chose not to go to the wedding based on personal circumstances at that time, having nothing to do with the church."

I know other members have also missed significant family events such as weddings and funerals. These events are extremely important markers in a family's history and identity. They are experiences that connect the family together.

Unless you have a compelling and unavoidable reason, you can't miss these events without causing hurt feelings. And it's not like your nephew's birthday party that happens every year. Weddings, funerals, and that type of event happen just once. Miss it, and you don't get a do-over. Just read the advice columns. Letters about this kind of thing come up regularly.

That one sentence was all the explanation she gave. If it really had nothing to do with the church, she should have just explained the personal circumstances. She says she did visit her brother and his new wife later to offer congratulations, and it was after that that the intervention attempt happened.

Thinking back to how our actions affect others.... Rebecca would be fooling herself if she thought missing her brother's wedding would not cause a rift in the family relationship.

The "Arranged" Marriage

Rebecca's family believed she was part of an arranged marriage. I've heard other families worry about this for their loved one too, so I was very interested to listen to Rebecca's comment about it. It's at about 25:35 when she answered,

"It’s absolutely wrong. I fell in love with James, and people fall out of love. So, it was not a forced marriage by any means at all. We fell in love with each other; we met, and decided not to continue the, our relationship."

That was... confusing. Does that mean they were married and then divorced, or decided to call it off before getting married? If it's not "forced," does that mean it was arranged but she was happy to do it? Her comment leaves me with more questions than answers. I wish she could have another chance to answer that and clarify herself.

Listening to Strangers

At about 23:06, when Rebecca was asked why she thought her family was attacking her faith, she said,

"I think it’s because they’ve talked to outside sources who have a negative view of the church. And they’ve chosen to believe those sources rather than their own daughter, their own flesh and blood."

And later at 29:50, her message to her brother included this,

"I wish that you would believe me and trust me and not listen to complete strangers rather than your own sister."

I've heard this type of comment before from other WMSCOG sources. The idea is that the family should believe their loved one's report and opinion about the WMSCOG, instead of believing information from "strangers"--other sources, such as the website you are currently reading. (However, I'm sure they wouldn't mind if the family listened to "strangers" who supported the WMSCOG, right?)

This works both ways. I hear from many families who are upset that their loved one is refusing to listen to "their own flesh and blood" and instead listening to "strangers"--the WMSCOG evangelists they just recently met. Rebecca's family would probably echo the sentiment back to her.

Conclusion

Once more, I say thank you to Today for bringing attention to this group, and thank you to both Rebecca and her parents for sharing their story. I pray for them and other families in the same struggle that they would find peace and restoration.

Rebecca's full interview with Today, Part 1

Even though Rebecca's own response videos have been removed, the Today Show still has available her full interview, from which they used clips to make the segment that was broadcast. (I don't know how long they keep old videos available online, but I'm sure it's not forever. So if you haven't seen it yet, you should check it out soon.)

Here's the link for Rebecca's full interview. As I watched, it brought many thoughts to my mind.

First, I was very thankful that Rebecca took the time to do the interview and that she was willing to share some of her personal life on national television. It would not be easy to be so exposed, especially knowing that it would likely invite criticism and judgment. Not everyone would be brave enough to do that. Also, I see enough clues in the interview to tell me that Rebecca is hurt by the broken relationship with her family, just as they are. I pray that their relationship can be healed and restored.

Now on to the interview, beginning with thoughts that specifically deal with mainstream Christianity.

Experiences in the Christian Faith

At about 2:17, Rebecca is talking about her experience with mainstream Christianity. She says,

"I had left church because I felt like no church could provide me with answers to questions I had about the Bible. No church was able to provide a community even though my whole life I grew up under my parents’ nurturing and care and love, and they promoted Christianity, but I never felt satisfied in any of the other churches that I attended."

And then a bit later at 3:00, she says,

"The Church of God is what became my home of faith where all the answers to my questions to the Bible were given, and I was able to realize truly my purpose. It was my absolute happiness."

I have heard feelings like this from others who have left the Christian church, and not just World Mission Society Church of God members. Sometimes they find answers in another religion, or sometimes they leave religion entirely.

I did not grow up in a church environment, but I have visited a great many churches as an adult Christian. Denominations and particular congregations have personalities, like people do. Some focus on heavily on Bible study and application, others not so much. Some are good at fostering community and connections, others not so much. Some have approachable leadership, others not so much. There are fantastic Christian churches out there who will answer your questions and provide a community. You only have to find them.

It's also up to the individual to do their part. I love the church I'm at now where there are available in-depth Bible studies and activities that help us feel connected to each other and the larger community. However, if a person did not make the effort to get involved, but just showed up to service once a week, they might not feel spiritually satisfied. They should step up and take responsibility for their walk of faith.

Comments like Rebecca's should also make us Christians examine our own church congregations. Is your church a "not so much" church? If so, help fix it. Is there someone at your church who seems to need a deeper connection to God and the church community? Encourage them and show them how they can get involved. Don't wait for them to find community and "answers" (false ones) at a place like the WMSCOG.

Raising Children in the Christian Faith

Related to experiences in the Christian faith, I was interested in Rebecca's response to the question about if she had "a religious childhood" at about 15:58,

"They took us to church. They, my parents they took me and my brothers to church. I know for my mom, she grew up Catholic but decided not to follow that as she became an adult even though her parents continued in Catholicism. And I’m not sure my dad’s upbringing, but they decided to bring us up together just going to the community church. I don’t, I don’t think it really had a denomination. It was just a Christian church that worshiped on Sunday."

I don't know Rebecca's family personally, so I am not placing any judgment or blame on them with the following comments. I only know that these few words sparked thoughts in me about my own family. I took this as a warning to myself as a Christian parent. I want to raise my children to have a deep and meaningful relationship with God. To do that takes purposeful communication and action.

If my children grow up and don't know the denomination of the church they have been attending all their young lives (even if it is "non-denominational"), something is wrong. Deuteronomy 11:19 tells us to teach our children and make our faith an everyday part of our conversations. If we consider our faith important, we should be teaching it to our children. Granted the teachings of Christianity are more important than the specific denomination name, but they should still know it.

If they grow up not knowing the faith history of their own mom and dad, whom they have lived with all their young lives, something is wrong. Good communication in our family includes sharing our family history because that is important to our identity. I know about my parents' faith histories because it is part of my own faith history. My children are learning the faith histories of their parents and their grandparents. If they grow up and aren't sure about it or can't remember, I hope they ask.

If they grow up only being "taken" to church on Sundays (or even less, on occasional Sundays like for Easter and Christmas), something is wrong. How will they feel connected to God and to the family of Christian believers unless they get involved enough to feel comfortable and familiar there? I want church to be an integral part of my children's lives, not just a place they are "taken" sometimes. Even better is for them to understand that the church is who we are, not just a place we go.

Parent Reaction to a Child's Change of Faith

When asked what her parents' reaction was to Rebecca joining the WMSCOG, she described it like this, at about 19:00,

"They were not supportive of my own choice of faith. They were actually upset and seemed angry because I wasn’t going along with what they had raised me to believe. So I can assure you that that was not easy, and I’m sure that I’m not the only one in this world that has a difference of belief as she gets older and decides for herself as an adult to believe something different. I’m sure there’s many similar situations and maybe someone watching now that also has a disagreement with their parents based on their choice of faith."

I realize that as a parent, I can only do so much to raise my children to have that deep and meaningful relationship with God. Eventually they must choose to continue that walk of faith on their own or not. I've known wonderful Christian parents whose children grew up and still decided not to follow. It is their own freedom and responsibility to choose their faith.

My experience with the WMSCOG has shown me the anguish that a parent (or family or loved one) can go through when that choice is made. And Rebecca is true that it happens to many people. Sometimes the parent's anguish comes when the child choose (mainstream) Christianity rather than the Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, etc., faith that they grew up with.

One thing I've learned is to have compassion, especially on the parent, in that situation, whichever the direction of change. It's understandable for the parent to be upset. If a parent is very connected to their faith, if it is an integral part of them (like my Christianity is with me), then having a child reject that can be heartbreaking.

And if you are part of that equation (as either the parent or the child), it's important to be compassionate and patient, and to ask for and offer forgiveness for the inevitable emotional outbursts. Even though it can be extremely hard to do!

(It might even be the parent who makes the choice to change after raising their child in their original faith! Then the roles are reversed.)

I didn't expect to write so much, but there's been a lot on my mind. Next time I'll focus on WMSCOG specific thoughts from the interview.

Click here to go on to Part 2.

Rebecca's Response to the WMSCOG Today Show Segment

Earlier this year, the Today Show aired a segment highlighting the World Mission Society Church of God (you can watch it here).

If you are familiar with the WMSCOG, you will not be surprised to hear that they came out with their own videos in response, showing Rebecca Gardner's side of the story in three parts. You may have seen them yourself. I have seen them too and believe they deserve comment here.

I spent some time over the summer reviewing Rebecca's videos and the full videos of her interview and John Power's interview which the Today Show made available.

Well, you know how life goes... some seasons are busier than others. Now that I'm sitting down to write a response, guess what... Rebecca's videos have disappeared!

They are no longer available on youtube or on vimeo due to "privacy settings." Numerous pro-WMSCOG blogs and websites had posted about these videos, but now many of those posts are hard to find, with "page not found" errors. There is one still available at truthofgodthemother, but look quick in case it disappears too.

WHY did Rebecca's videos disappear?

Was she or the WMSCOG afraid of being scrutinized for their videos, perhaps in the same way they were scrutinizing the Today Show's video? Did they have legal issues with the videos? It is mysterious, and the speculations abound in my head.

Honestly, I thought it was good that Rebecca was able to tell her side of things. Her videos showed that both the member and their family struggle. The Today Show segment seemed to highlight the family's hurt and sadness with the situation, but with Rebecca's videos I saw that she was also hurt by the broken relationship.

Also, on the plus side for Rebecca, she was able to explain how part of the Today Show video was not quite as it appeared. I'm sure we all realize that the media can edit and skew their reporting, taking things out of context, to support the perspective they wish to portray. Rebecca was able to explain places where this had happened. (Of course, the WMSCOG does this type of thing too when it benefits themselves.)

It is honorable that the Today Show made available their full interviews with Rebecca Gardner and John Power. I believe the interview portions were not taken out of context, though you can check that out for yourself.

I hope that Rebecca and the WMSCOG will repost (or even remake) the videos for the simple reason that they promote dialogue, and I would like to open a dialogue here about them. There is a lot to say.

NBC's Today Show covers WMSCOG controversy

The Today Show on NBC did a segment on the World Mission Society Church of God.
Here's a screen shot.  Click here to see the video on the Today Show's website.

Christmas Resources for a Balanced View

"But the angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid.  I bring you good news that will cause great joy to all the people.  Today in the town of David, a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord.  This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.'  Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying, 'Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.'" -- Luke 2:10-14

To a Christian, Christmas is not about presents (though generosity is good) and trees with ornaments and lights (though they are pretty).

It's not about Santa and his reindeer and elves (though it can be a fun game for some).

It's not about snow (though it would be beautiful, it never snows at my house).

It's really not even about being with family (some do not have any) or the date of December 25 (we can't even be sure when exactly Jesus was born).

Why?  It's a time to remember the birth of Jesus Christ.  Without His birth, there would have been no crucifixion, no resurrection, no triumph over sin and death, no salvation for us.

Those other things can be nice, but you can celebrate the birth of Jesus without any of them.  All you really need is a heart that remembers the great wonder of God, being born as a baby so He could pay the price for our sins because He loves us so much.

The World Mission Society Church of God is not the only anti-Christmas group.  When we are confronted by those who wish to condemn Christmas for being pagan, a product of Satan, and a holiday that has no place in a Christian's life, there are three paths we might take:

1.  Believe it all, and become scared that we have fallen for Satan's trap, and abandon Christmas altogether.
2.  Ignore it all, and staunchly maintain the Christmas traditions we've always followed, though are unable to say why.
or
3.  Do some balanced research, become educated, and view Christmas from a new perspective.

Since my sister has been with the WMSCOG, and anti-Christmas for 8 Christmases now, I have been doing my research.  I still believe in celebrating Christmas, but now I do it from a new and more balanced perspective.

If you also have been put in the position to be researching Christmas, you've probably already been inundated with anti-Christmas arguments.  Here are some resources you might like that will help you with a balanced view:

The Catholic Encyclopedia on Christmas (very balanced)
Christmas Reconsidered
A Critique of Hislop's The Two Babylons (a common source of arguments for the pagan connection)
Message from the author of Babylon Mystery Religion (another source for pagan arguments)
Silly Reasons to Abandon Christmas
Origins of Christmas Traditions
The Star of Bethlehem Documentary (youtube video)

My previous posts about Christmas:
Christmas Thoughts
Christmas -- Repsonding to WMSCOG Comments

By the way, did you know God said this in the Bible?
"The glory of Lebanon will come to you, the juniper, the fir, and the cypress together, to adorn my sanctuary; and I will glorify the place for my feet." -- Isaiah 60:13

During the physically dark time around the winter solstice, these verses show very meaningful symbolism that would point people to the true God.  Consider:
"because of the tender mercy of our God, by which the rising sun will come to us from heaven to shine on those living in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the path of peace." -- Luke 1:78-79
and
"the people living in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the shadow of death a light has dawned." -- Matthew 4:16 (Jesus fulfilling what was said in Isaiah 9:2)

May you have a blessed and meaningful season.

Heavenly Mother - Conversation with Paul

In my post about Galatians 4:26, "Paul Francis" wanted to discuss the meaning of "Jerusalem."  (It's an important question for the World Mission Society Church of God, or WMSCOG.)  For ease of discussion, and so others can follow along, we'll continue that conversation here in the comment section (similar to my previous conversation with Cyrus).

Because this is specifically a conversation with Paul, to avoid confusion and complication, I respectfully request that anyone else refrain from adding questions and comments here.  You are welcome to email me, though, and I will save your responses for a later post (similar to the responses to Cyrus).

Ok, Paul.  First of all, some guidelines for us both:

• Each comment should be made in two parts, a response to the previous point and the raising of a question.
• Response -- We should respond to the question that was last put forth, keeping in mind the purpose of explaining and encouraging understanding and not simply fighting.  Also, please avoid using phrases such as "You don't understand because you are not one of God's chosen" (more examples here).  We can also respond to the previous response, as long as it doesn't include an additional question that needs an answer.
• Question -- We should ask a question, either to further pursue the issue, or raise a different point.  For the ease of following the conversation, please limit the question to one point.  Do not ask a question related to your response and ask a new question as well.  Though it is understandable to ask a couple questions if they are all very closely related.
• If we think the other's response is incomplete, inadequate, or needs to be clarified, first we should answer their question (give our response), then our question should concern the previous response.  In other words, don't avoid their question in order to focus on their response.  In this way, we should never be talking about more than two topics at once.
• Timeliness is nice, but life is busy.  A delay in answering should not be taken negatively or cause concern, unless there has been silence for more than two weeks.

I hope that is all clear.  Thank you for your cooperation, and now let's get started.  First I'll recap the last part of conversation on the Galatians 4:26 page:

Paul:  
Yes it is highly figurative. The apostle when it came to explain the new covenant did not mention Sarah or new law but just mentioned about the heavenly Jerusalem. To get a better understanding about the heavenly Jerusalem we must find related verses in the bible and read them together to understand and not in parts.

Genny:
He didn't say much about it probably because this passage was focused on showing how we are free from slavery to the law, and not focused on the "heavenly Jerusalem."

If you were wanting a "better understanding about the heavenly Jerusalem" as you say, I would not start with this verse at all. I would look first (and mainly) at Heb. 12:22-24 and Rev. 21.

Paul:
Understanding the heavenly Jerusalem properly does include the verse Gal 4:26. And the apostle did focus a lot and thereby described Jerusalem as our Mother.

And now I'll take the first turn here in the response/question format:

Genny:
If you read the whole passage (Galatians 4:21-31), there are 10 verses.  Only two of them mention Jerusalem.  Six of them directly mention Sarah and/or Hagar (two more if you count verses 26-27).  Five of them directly mention the sons Isaac and/or Ishmael (who was not named, but we know who he was).  Therefore, I would say his metaphors were focused on the women and the sons, not on Jerusalem.  That's why, if you were wondering about a "heavenly Jerusalem" I would not start with those verses.

My question for you... You had asked me before what I thought of when I heard the word "Jerusalem."  You agreed with my response that it was a city.  When you think of Jerusalem the city, what specifically do you think of?  Do you include all the people (inhabitants) in that thought picture, just see the buildings (like empty shells), or maybe just the physical location (as a dot on the map), or...?

Now it's your turn.  Please remember the two parts, response and question.

Summary of WMSCOG points -- Responding to comments

Thank you, everyone, for sending your comments.  I regret that because of various reasons it's not practical for me to post them all, but I do read them all.

This one from Anonymous (a popular name around here) gave such a concise summary of what I often hear from World Mission Society Church of God members, I thought it deserved a point by point response.  I hope its author returns to continue the conversation.

I haven't edited anything out of the comment, just corrected a few spelling mistakes...

On April 21, 2014, Anonymous wrote:

Everything on this site is false. 

I hope that means you've read everything on this site. Otherwise you couldn't say such a thing with certainty.  :)  I suggest you start here, if you haven't already.

For one, if God were to come IN THE FLESH as the bible clearly and jesus said HE WOULD a second time.. then as a man in the flesh, HE HAS TO GO THROUGH A PHYSICAL DEATH AGAIN! Doesn't mean that SPIRITUALLY he's going to die! Two DIFFERENT deaths! 

Yes, Jesus said He would return, but there is no reason to assume, as you have, that it means He must be born again as a baby, grow up, and die.  He was bodily resurrected.  That means His body did not decay.  That means He does not need a new body to be born into.  He does NOT have to go through a physical death again.

Two, Jesus said that when he came again that he would also bear a NEW NAME. It's the same concept now as then! When jesus was here, it had already been prophesied that God would come in the flesh as a man and would bear a new name. 

All of God's names in the Bible describe His character in one way or another.  Even the name Jesus means "the Lord saves."  Any 'new name' of Jesus is going to describe His character in a way that hasn't yet been done.  Do you know what the name "Ahn Sahng Hong" means?

And by the way, please direct me to the Old Testament prophecy that tells that God would "bear a new name" when He came in the flesh.  That one's not jumping out at me at the moment.

Who were the only people to recognize Jesus?? His disciples! How? Not from miracles, but BIBLE PROPHECY! Only God can fulfill His own prophecy!! 

By 'disciples' you must mean all of those who followed Him (there were more than just the 12 apostles).  But take a look at how they came to follow Jesus.  For example, read John 1:29-51 to see how John the Baptist, James, John, Andrew, Peter, Philip, and Nathanael recognized Jesus.  Bible prophecy was not the first reason.  Prophecy confirmed it later for them (which it should for us also), but your statement seems a bit misleading.

It predicted through scripture where he'd come again which was south korea. 

No, the WMSCOG interprets the scripture to say that he will be born as a baby in Korea, and then they show you that Ahnsahnghong fulfills that interpretation.  It's a self-fulfilling circle.  Read more about the "from the east" prophecy here, here, and here.

He fulfilled the remaining years to preach the gospel which JESUS DIDNT FULFILL! It was supposed to had been 40 years! Jesus preached 3 before he was crucified! Ahn Sahng Hong fulfilled ALL of the prophesies on second coming christ and preached the remaining 37 years!! 

No, this is another self-fulfilling prophecy.  The 40 years is the WMSCOG's own interpretation and does not hold up to examination.  Read more about it here, here, and here.

And just like jesus never proclaimed to be god, neither did he!! 

Yes, Jesus did proclaim that He is God.  His saying, "I am God," may not be recorded, but what he did say made it clear enough to the people around Him.  Read John 10:30-33; 8:58-59.

He wanted us to recognize him through his word! Its a test of our faith and belief in his PROPHECIES! The bible is a literal blue map [blueprint?] on how to receive our salvation and recognize christ in the flesh and that's how you recognize the true christs from the false people CLAIMING to be him in the last days!

Yes, you are definitely right that we must be able to recognize false christs in these last days, and that the Bible will help us do that.  It's very important not to worship a false christ, isn't it?  Please use the Bible, the historical records, and common logic to help you to not fall in that trap.

Clearly whoever made this site was SPIRITUALLY blind!! 

We could argue back and forth about who is spiritually blind, but let's stick to looking at the facts we can find instead. :)

I read about this church before really going and decided to see what's so bad and false, but have found nothing but truth! They teach SCRIPTURE AND PROPHECY RIGHT OUT OF THE BIBLE IN FRONT OF YOU as you read yourself. 

I have studied with them in person, and I have to say that at first it seems impressive.  BUT that is only superficial.  It doesn't hold up to examination, and have you tried to correct them or gave them an alternate (valid) interpretation?  Have you done some research and gone back to tell them where there is a mistake? 

If you do, then like me, you will likely be accused of not believing the Bible (by which they mean not believing in their interpretation), or accused of not believing God (by which they mean not believing them).  That could be very intimidating to the average person.

If you went and tested the waters you'd see! No false person could make this up and use god's words to glorify himself because the bible would contradict their words. HOWEVER, nothing I've learned can contradict itself!

Yes, both the Bible and the historical record contradict the WMSCOG.  They even contradict themselves sometimes.  Please read my summary of key verses, summary of internal evidence, and summary of mistakes.

Scripture BACKS UP OTHER SCRIPTURES THEN SO DOES HISTORY! 

I'll point out these contradictions in particular...

History does not back up the WMSCOG.  Please read about the historical mistakes in their Antichrist doctrine.

And Scripture does not back up the WMSCOG, which is especially clear when you look at their feast calendar.  Did you know that if you kept the fall feasts with the WMSCOG last October (2013) you kept them in the 8th month instead of the 7th month?

I am glad that you visited my website and took the time to comment.  I hope to hear back from you again.