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 -- "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!

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.

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.

Christmas -- Responding to WMSCOG comments

I'm back again, still trying to catch up with the many comments posted recently by World Mission Society Church of God members.  Just a reminder, if you would like to have a conversation, you are welcome to email me directly (knowhispeace@gmail.com) or join the forum here.

I have not changed or removed anything in these comments.

On July 31 at 10:40 pm, Anonymous posted on "Mother God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments" in response to my comment --

Genny wrote: Hi again. I assume you are the same person who wrote to ask if I celebrate Christmas and Easter. I think I did not make myself clear. I said nothing about December 25 because that date itself has minimal significance to me. I know full well (as should all Christians) that we do not know the exact date of Jesus' birth.

Anonymous wrote: Genny, so you acknowledged that Dec 25 is not the birthday of Jesus Christ then, and you are making yourself clear that this date has a minimal significance to you, meaning there is still a remaining significance to you so as to say.  

Yes, there is still a remaining significance to me.  If you were going to choose a time of year to celebrate the birth of Jesus, the time of the winter solstice would be meaningful.  The nights get longer and longer, and just when you might lose hope that darkness will win, the season turns.  Daytime begins to lengthen again.  The light triumphs, if you will.

Jesus is the light of the world, and He has triumphed over darkness -- John 8:12 and 12:46; Matthew 4:16.

This was not from a WMSCOG member, but it fits right in with this topic...

On August 6 at 10:47 am, James posted on "Mother God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments" --

The sad thing in all of this is that there is absolutely NO evidence, historically speaking, that December 25 was a pagan holiday before it was a Christian one. This is a bit of sloppy scholarship and old wives tales conflated over the generations.

At most, the Romans had two sun cults. The original, dating back to the centuries before Christ, Sol Indiges, had a feast on December 11 - NOT December 25. The other sun cult was the cult of Sol Invictus, which was actually the importation of Syrian Mythraism into Roman society by the Emperor Aurelian in the late third century AD. December 25 has never been specifically identified as a holiday for Sol Invictus, and the earliest records of a late December celebration of Sol Invictus are no older than the fourth century AD (mid 300's).

So, there's no evidence that there was a holiday for the sun in late December until long after Christ.

What we do have in some evidence, however, is that some Christian groups were celebrating the Nativity in the early to mid-200's. What we also have is the simple reality that December 25 was calculated by the early church by adding 9 months to March 25 - the Annunciation. And March 25 is calculated from Luke's statement in the first chapter of his Gospel that Gabriel came to Mary in "the sixth month" - which in the calendar he most likely observed introduced by Alexander the Great, translates to late March to early April by our Gregorian calendar.

None of this is to say that December 25 is exactly right. It could be off by days, weeks, or months. What's important is that there is no evidence from antiquity that the early church derived its holidays from the pagan calendar.  

Thanks, James.  That was really interesting.  Here is another comment about Christmas...

On July 31 at 10:48 pm, Anonymous posted on "Mother God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments" --

Genny wrote: I happily remember the birth of Jesus all year long. Yes, I sing Christmas hymns with my children even in the summer. I especially celebrate Jesus' birth in December because that's when the world puts a focus on it, and it's especially nice to celebrate in unison.

Anonymous wrote: On this, you clearly remember the birth of Jesus by singing Christmas songs and you believe that celebrating the birth of Jesus with everybody in the whole world because this is the day when the whole world puts their focus on it and it is very nice to celebrate in unison with them. Although you do not know what day is the birthday of Jesus, you simply mean that you can celebrate the birthday of Jesus any day of the year as you want to. So ,do you also mean you can celebrate the birthday of Jesus Christ many times a year as you want too? 

 and (a few minutes later at 10:52 pm) --

Genny wrote: As for the day, though, if you are talking about specific gatherings such as with my family or church, I can honestly say that I celebrate at least 5 or 6 different days. You see, it is the reason for the celebration, not the date of Dec. 25, that is important to me.

Anonymous wrote: So, you acknowledged that you celebrate the birthday of Jesus even 5 or 6x in different days because it is not the date that is important to you but the reason for the celebration. You also know very well that you follow your own thoughts in doing this! 

You believe that it is wrong to celebrate Jesus birth on a date that is not His actual birthday, and that we shouldn't just choose any date.  You also believe it is wrong of me to celebrate Jesus birth on many different days.  Do I understand your objections correctly?

Reflect on this... do you have children?  When do you celebrate their birthdays?  How about the rest of the people in your family?  How about your own birthday?  Do you ever celebrate on a day that is not the actual birthday?

Among my family and friends, we often have birthday celebrations that do not fall on the actual birthday of the person being honored.  This year, my son celebrated his birthday on three different days -- once with friends, and twice with two different parts of the family.  Are you saying that is wrong?  If I can't celebrate my child's birthday with family and friends on his actual birthday, am I prohibited from choosing a different day for us to celebrate in unison?  Would you like to give me a verse from the Bible that forbids my doing this?

I happily remember my children's birthdays all year round too, because I am so thankful to have them a part of my life.  I will gladly tell them stories about their births any time they ask, without making them wait until their actual birthday.  When I hear a particular song or see a particular picture or just have a passing thought about their births, I will praise God once again for the blessings He gave me.  I won't put the thoughts aside simply because it's "not the right day."  It is the same when I think about the birth of Jesus.  You would say this is wrong?

On July 31 at 11:42 pm, Anonymous posted on "Mother God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments" --

Genny, Is this too much for you answer? I understand how you feel! But I will listen to what you say and make a beneficial decision out of it. When you are ready to post all of my comments!! 

No, it's not too much for me to answer.  I'm just limited on time, and working through all the comments as I am able.  If you would put a name on your comments, it would make it easier to know which are yours, and which are from someone else.  You don't have to leave an email address with your name, and I don't mind if you choose a pseudonym.

I hope you'll be back.  There are still many more comments to go.

The Power of God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments

I'm here today to address  a couple more of the comments from World Mission Society Church of God member(s) that have come through in the last several days.  Again, I'll copy the comments exactly as they were written, without adding, removing, or editing anything

On July 28 at 5:55 am, Anonymous posted on "Mother God -- Responding to WMSCOG comments" --

You quoted: ROM 6:9 - Christ cannot die again. Ahnsahnghong is dead.
Who is Christ to you? Isn't He God Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth? In the first place, does God need the flesh to wear? What is the flesh to God. God has no limitations. He can do whatever God wants to do. The flesh, he used in the body of Jesus Christ God does not need. But He used it during His 1st Coming because God CAN. It does not mean that He cannot use any other flesh, it is because GOD CAN!I believe you do not understand the POWER of GOD> 

 On July 29 at 6:34 pm, Anonymous posted on "The name of Jesus," in response to bigcedbeatz's comment --

Bigcedbiatz, You are foolish because of your little faith. Does God needs the flesh? NO!! When God made the heavens and the earth, He was in Spirit. He needs no flesh at all. But it does not mean that he will not use the flesh for his purpose. Do you know why? It is because God CAN! If God plans it, He will do it, and He CAN!!The flesh He used in the body of Jesus Christ is only a flesh. He used it for His purpose and left it. Will God forever use that same flesh again? God will do whatever He plans to do and nobody can stop God in fulfilling HIS plan! If He wants to reveal himself again in the flesh as an American, Russian, African, HE can do it because HE CAN!!!! Why do you question the power of GOD????? Foolish Christian!! 

Your basic point seems to be that it is within God's power to appear (be born) in the flesh again if He wanted to, and in any physical appearance.  You think I do not understand or believe in the power of God to do such a thing.

Yes, I do believe in the great power of God.  I believe He is able to do things that I can't even imagine.  But there are somethings that God will NOT do -- He will not do anything that is contrary to His character, His nature.  He will not lie.  He will not be unjust.  He will not contradict Himself.  (Here is a more detailed summary of what God cannot do.)

God said that He would not die again (Romans 6:9).  God said, multiple times, that there is only one God (see those verses here, here, and here.)  Did God lie when He said those things?

The WMSCOG teaches that Isaac was also God in the flesh.  Yet Isaac lied (Genesis 26), and Isaac was deceived (Genesis 27).

The Bible says God will not lie (Titus 1:2), and that He cannot be deceived by anyone (Hebrews 4:13).  The WMSCOG teaches that God lies and can be deceived.

Are you saying that God is so "powerful" that He can act contrary to His nature?

What do you call a "God" who acts contrary to God's unchanging nature?  A false god!

Evidence for your faith -- A question for WMSCOG members

I don't believe in a completely blind faith.  I know that some people are perfectly happy believing in their religious faith without knowing anything substantial as evidence, and ignoring anything that has a risk of disproving their faith.  That is not in my personality, though.

I have talked with atheists, agnostics, and others who question my faith in Christianity.  Some have said, "How can you believe in Jesus and the Bible when there are inconsistencies, contradictions, and other problems?"

I understand this question.  And so I can also understand the reluctance of World Mission Society Church of God members (and people of other religions) to abandon their faith when they are confronted with problems.

Several things happen when I am confronted with those problems, and I am sure there is a similarity between me and my sister (and other WMSCOG members).  I see that:

1. Some of those 'contradictions' others see really do have logical explanations for them if you just look a little farther.
2. People do sometimes fail to act in a 'Christian' manner, but that is because we are flawed human beings.  We need to look at the teaching of the faith more than the actions of the adherents.
3. Some of those other philosophical problems really do have answers if you will just consider another viewpoint.
4. For the cases that are left over, if there are no explanations or answers, I understand the objection, but it does not bother me enough to abandon my faith.  Why?  Because I trust God enough that He has an answer even if I can't see it.

I'd like to focus on point 4.  In order to trust your faith in God enough to overcome any apparent objections, there MUST be something at the root of it as evidence, proof to build your faith on.-- something solid, like the house built on the rock (Matthew 7:25).

When I am confronted with the toughest questions about what I believe, I have to go back to that root, that rock, and remember the immovable facts my faith is built on.

The evidence can't be something that's a matter of opinion or interpretation--those are not stable or provable.

It can't be something that is entirely within the belief system, because then you get into circular arguments which don't prove anything.  Basically that would be, "Why do you believe in the Bible?  Because it is God's word.  How do you know it is God's word?  Because it tells me so."

No, it needs to be something from the outside that is factually based.

Here are two of the key pieces of evidence of my faith in Jesus and Christianity:

• Support for the Resurrection is profound.  It is the only logical explanation (as strange as it may be) of the events occurring after the Resurrection and the changed lives of the disciples.
• There is an abundance of fulfilled prophecy in the Bible recorded in historical documents. 

Now the question for WMSCOG members... What do you consider evidence for your faith in Ahn Sahng Hong and Zahng Gil Jah and the doctrine of the WMSCOG?  When the WMSCOG tells you that you can't have a faith based on common sense, what evidence do you rely on to know you can trust them?

Remember, this evidence needs to be something outside the WMSCOG that is factual, verifiable.

For example, do not say your evidence is the prophecies that Ahn Sahng Hong fulfilled as the second coming Christ, because that is based on the WMSCOG's own interpretation of those prophecies.

Ok, responses please. :)

Easter -- The WMSCOG's misunderstandings

It's Easter.  A blessed Resurrection Day to you all!

The World Mission Society Church of God's general pastor Kim Joo-Cheol has shared this about the WMSCOG's view of Christian Easter celebrations:

Most Christians celebrate Easter by eating boiled eggs on the first Sunday after the full moon following the vernal equinox. Actually, however, it originated from the pagan custom of serving Easter (Ashtoreth)—the pagan goddess who was associated with the spring sun. Easter is fundamentally different from the Resurrection Day Jesus established. (source)

The WMSCOG has some serious misunderstandings regarding Easter (Resurrection Day).

First, eating boiled eggs on Resurrection Day has nothing to do with serving a pagan goddess.  It has to do with Lent.  Traditionally, during the time of Lent, the people would fast, and among the foods they would not eat were eggs.  What do you do when your chickens keep producing eggs but you are not allowed to eat them?  Do you let them go to waste?  No, you boil them, and keep them until you may eat them again.  [see comments for correction] When is the fasting of Lent over, and when do you get to eat the eggs?  Resurrection Day.  That's how you get lots of eggs on Easter.  Here's more about Lent.

Second, the "first Sunday after the full moon following the vernal equinox" also has nothing to do with serving a pagan goddess.  It has to do with the date of Easter in relation to Passover.  As the early church became disconnected from Judaism, they needed to be able to mark the date of the Resurrection (which happened on the Sunday after Passover) without having to rely on the Jewish priests for the date of Passover every year.

Passover is set for the 14th day of the 1st month of the Hebrew calendar.  Months on the Hebrew calendar begin with the new moon and are 28 or 29 days long, depending on the lunar cycle.  The full moon occurs half way through the month (on the 14th).  The spring equinox is in the first month.  That's how the date is set for the first Sunday after the full moon after the spring equinox.  (That's the simple way to explain it.  If you want to know all the complexities, study the computus.)

While I'm on the subject, I'd like to address a few other accusations against Christians concerning paganism.

Accusation: Crosses were used in ancient pagan worship.  Christians who set up crosses in their churches are following after these pagan practices. (more here)
Truth: Jesus Christ was crucified on a cross.  If you are upset about that, take up your objection with God and tell Him Jesus should have died some other way.

Accusation: Sunday was used by pagans to worship the Sun-god.  Christians who go to church on Sunday are really taking part in pagan Sun-god worship.
Truth: Jesus rose from the dead on a Sunday.  If you are upset about that, take up your objection with God and tell Him that Jesus should have picked another day to rise from the dead.

Accusation: Pagans worshiped the Sun-god, and the sun rises in the east.  Christians who hold sunrise services facing to the east on Easter Sunday morning, are really worshiping the Sun-god.
Truth: The women discovered the empty tomb at sunrise on Sunday morning.  If you are upset about that, take up your objection with God and tell Him that the empty tomb should have been discovered at some other time of day.  You can also tell Him that He should make the sun rise from some other direction on Resurrection Day morning.

Think it's silly to approach God with these objections?  Of course it is.  Likewise, it is silly to accuse Christians of paganism simply because you see some surface similarities.

I think you'll like these two articles by Ralph Woodrow:
Christmas, Easter, and the Cross
Did Sunday Worship Come from Paganism?

You might remember that Ralph Woodrow wrote the book Babylon Mystery Religion which taught that many Christian practices originated from paganism.  Then he realized the research was flawed and he was wrong.  He pulled the book from publication and wrote The Babylon Connection? to correct his errors and set the record straight.  Read more about it here.

I pray you have a blessed celebration of the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus and that all our loved ones who are involved in the WMSCOG will soon see the truth and return wholeheartedly to fellowship with their families.  I also pray that the pastors and leaders of the WMSCOG will be strong enough and noble enough and humble enough to speak out about the errors and seek the truth.  And finally, I pray that Zahng Gil-Jah and Kim Joo-Cheol themselves will seek forgiveness from the true God and turn from the path they have chosen.

"Mother's" Sacrifice of Flesh and Blood...and Death?

Despite the Bible's insistence that Jesus was the one and only perfect sacrifice needed to cleanse us from sin (Heb. 10:1-14), The World Mission Society Church of God claims that "Mother Jerusalem" (Zahng Gil-Ja) is continually being sacrificed to provide cleansing from sin.

This means that they believe Jesus' sacrifice wasn't enough to accomplish our forgiveness.  As a Christian, this stuns me--how can God's own sacrifice of Himself, not be enough?!

Not only that, but "Heavenly Mother" can't sacrifice herself just once, but must continually sacrifice herself twice a week.  What does that tell you about the power of the "gods" of the WMSCOG?

But now let's turn our attention to the Passover, the Last Supper.
Mark 14:22-24

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” Then He took the cup, and when He had given thanks He gave it to them, and they all drank from it. And He said to them, “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many.

Whose body was broken for us?  Whose blood was shed for us?  Whose body and blood do we remember with the bread and cup of the Lord's Supper (Passover)?  Jesus' flesh and blood.

The following quotes show that the WMSCOG claims this sacrifice of flesh and blood was "Mother's" sacrifice as well.

From God Who Has Saved Us:

We should not only rejoice in having received eternal life by eating the Passover bread and drinking the Passover wine, but in them we should find our Father and Mother giving us Their precious flesh and blood and looking upon us continually with eyes full of compassion and pity. God our Father and Mother have been sacrificed for us, like the Passover lamb. They've given us Their flesh to eat and Their blood to drink, and as the result of such a great sacrifice They have saved all of us, Their children.

From The Firstborn of Heaven:

So, in this age, God the Father and God the Mother have come as the Spirit and the Bride and have given us the blood of the covenant—the Passover, the blood of God the Father and God the Mother.

From The Meaning of the Sacrifice of the Passover:

Just as the mother saved her child with the blood flowing from her finger at the critical moment, our Father and Mother gave Their flesh to eat and Their blood to drink in order to save us....  We believe in Mother not just because the Bible testifies about Her, but because She is our heavenly Mother who gave us Her flesh to eat and Her blood to drink to save us from sin.

From The Wages of Sin Is Death:

When we eat the Passover bread, we have to remember that our Parents gave Their precious body and blood for us to eat in order to save us. When we drink the Passover wine, we have to remember that our sin was so great that it couldn't be forgiven without the precious blood of our Parents, and we should give thanks to Them for Their sacrifice.

How did "Mother Jerusalem" give her flesh to eat and her blood to drink?  Has her body been sacrificed and her blood shed as Jesus' was as the Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7)?

Another big problem...
Read this quote from What Kind of God Is Your God?:

In the Bible, we have to find our Father and Mother who have loved us to the point of death; They were rejected by men, took up our infirmities, and bore our iniquities; They were even treated as sinners and died in the place of sinners.

Here we have two contradictions.
1. "Mother" has "loved us to the point of death" and "died in the place of sinners"?  She is still alive in Korea.
2. The WMSCOG teaches that "Mother" will not die at all, but will take her faithful followers directly to heaven alive with her.  Therefore, according to the WMSCOG she will not EVER "die in the place of sinners" or "love us to the point of death."

I am so thankful for the real Jesus was a powerful enough God that it only took Him one sacrifice to accomplish that payment for my sins.  He actually did die for me, and He rose again from the dead!  Ahnsahnghong is still in his grave, and one day Zahng Gil-Ja will be too, as is the destiny of all humans.  (Heb. 9:27)

"Mother's" Sacrifice ... Because One Wasn't Enough?

In Hebrews 10, the Bible tells us that Jesus is the perfect sacrifice for our sins.  His sacrifice was so perfect that it needed to be made only once to cover us all, unlike the sacrifices the priests offered on behalf of the people day after day, year after year.

Heb. 10:10,12-14

"By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all...  But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified."

But what does the World Mission Society Church of God say?  They teach that Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was not enough to keep us clean from sin.

This is evidenced in their sermon, "Mother's Love":

All the sacrifices in the Old Testament represent our Father who was sacrificed as an offering for sin about 2,000 years ago―and also our Mother who is sacrificing Herself to seek and save the children with devotional love for them in this age.
God has given His children the regulations of Third Day worship and the seventh-day Sabbath worship from Old Testament times. Through such regulations, Mother has purified our souls by sacrificing Herself, so that we may not be cut off from the community of God.

Maybe they mean "sacrificing" as in "suffering hardships" but not in the same sense as animal sacrifices and the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross?  And maybe this suffering of hardship is to help and teach her "children"?  No.

They quote Numbers 19:1-21 (in the same sermon) about the sacrifice of the heifer, and they continue on to say:

Every sacrifice in the Old Testament symbolizes God's sacrifice. Then, whom does the heifer represent? By whose and what sacrifice are we now cleansed on the third and seventh days?
The heifer was a sacrifice representing our Mother who's come into this earth as the Bride of the Spirit. The Israelites were cleansed through the sacrifice of a heifer. This shows that God's children are purified through the sacrifice of Mother on the third and seventh days.
Our Mother burns Herself, being sacrificed as a sin offering; through the ashes of Mother, represented as the heifer, we are cleaned from all our impurities, from all our transgressions and sins―on the third day and seventh-day Sabbath. How can we imagine and describe in words our Mother's pain, sacrifice and love?

Keep reading and see that they are clearly talking about "Mother" (Zahng Gil-Ja) being sacrificed for the sins of her "children":

Through the fact that our Mother is continually getting sacrificed on the Third and Sabbath days, we must know how many sins we have committed.
Some may simply think that they are forgiven because they believe God. However, we must know there is God's great sacrifice and love beyond description in the forgiveness of our sins. By God's wounds we are healed; the punishment that has brought us peace is upon God. Through such a sacrifice by God, we are forgiven. We should realize the love of our Father and Mother and give thanks to Them through the Third Day and Sabbath worships.
Without putting on Mother's love, none of us can enter the kingdom of heaven; we are expelled from heaven, and we can never enter by ourselves.
By the sacrifice of Mother, we are purified. Mother is pierced for our transgressions. By Her wounds we are healed and at peace.

This is in direct contradiction to Hebrews 10:14.  Here it is again in the NIV:
"For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy."

Not only that, but if "Mother is continually getting sacrificed on the Third and Sabbath days" for sins to purify her "children," then she is comparable to the repeated sacrifices offered in the Old Testament.  And what does the Bible say about those?

Hebrews 10:1-2

"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins."

What kind of "God" has to keep sacrificing herself over and over again?  Hebrews 10 says once is enough.

Need Encouragement?

Do you need some encouragement today?  I do.  This is a very difficult and sad week for my family.

I get a lot of encouragement from music (which is probably why I listen to K-LOVE so much).  And God regularly touches my heart through the praise and worship at church.  Last night was our midweek service at church, and it seemed like God had picked those songs out especially for me.  The song leader doesn't know what I've been through this week, but God does.

Just thought I would share these songs with you, and maybe they will touch your heart also.
Why So Downcast (from Psalm 42)
I Could Sing of Your Love Forever
Jesus, Lover of My Soul
How Great is Our God
Untitled Hymn by Chris Rice

Rise by Shawn McDonald (lyrics included)

Romans 6:9 -- Christ Cannot Die Again

One contradiction between the World Mission Society Church of God and the Bible concerns Romans 6:9.  Here it is in the NIV --

For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him.

And in the NKJV --

knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him.

Ahn Sahng-Hong died in 1985.  The Bible tells us that Jesus Christ will not die again.  Therefore, Ahn Sahng-Hong cannot be Christ.

I was recently asked by a WMSCOG member if I thought death had power over Jesus to begin with.

Now that's a good question, but when asked in this way by the WMSCOG it can be a tricky question.  If you answer yes, they can return with, "So you don't believe Jesus was all powerful?"  If you answer no, they can return with, "Death did not have power over Him yet He willingly came and died.  It is the same with Ahn Sahng-Hong."

The question needs to be more specific for a proper answer.

For the question, did Jesus have the power to avoid dying on the cross?  Yes, He did.
Matthew 26:53 says "Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?"

For the question, did Jesus have an invincible human body?  No.  His body died on the cross.
Philippians 2:7-8 says "but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross."

Jesus willingly came in a human body so He could satisfy our debt for our sins.  In order for that sacrifice to take place, He had to allow death to have power over that body.  If it had not been a perishable, human body, how could it have been a substitute for us?

But death could not maintain power over Him.  He rose from the dead with a glorified, imperishable body.
1 Corinthians 15:42-43 "So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power"

Death cannot have any power over an imperishable body.
1 Corinthians 15:54 "When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.”"

Jesus ascended to heaven with that imperishable body (Acts 1:9-11) and there is no reason to think that His imperishable body has expired or is no longer available to Him.
"... This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven."

The difference here is that the World Mission Society Church of God teaches that Jesus needed a new human body to be born into (which would then have to die again), while mainstream Christianity teaches that Jesus doesn't need to be born into a new human body because He still has His imperishable, resurrection body, which will never need to die again.

Is the Cross an Idol? - Part 5 - The Cross in the Bible

A continuing look at why the cross is not an idol...

Just to review, so far, we've seen that the World Mission Society Church of God distorts their sources and misrepresents the history of the cross in Christianity (Part 1 and Part 2).  In Part 3 we saw that the way the WMSCOG represents the cross as a symbol of death shows an incomplete understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus.  Then in Part 4, we saw that God does in fact encourage and command religious symbols and imagery in the Bible.

The Bible is full of God-directed symbolism and imagery, but is there evidence in the Bible to support using the cross as a symbol?  How is the cross significant?

The Cross Reminds Us...

...that we are reconciled and have peace with God--Col. 1:20-22; Eph. 2:15-18.
...that our debt is cancelled and we are no longer condemned--Col. 2:13-15.
...of the power of God, power to save sinners and power over death--1 Cor. 1:17-18, 23-24.
...that we are new creations, set free from sin and living a new life for God--Rom. 6:6; Gal. 2:20; Gal. 5:24.
...that we are redeemed from the curse of the law--Gal. 3:13.

About That Curse...

The World Mission Society Church of God video about the cross says, "The early Christians regarded the cross as an instrument of the capital punishment 'shame' (Heb. 12:2) and 'a cursed tree.'" (at minute 3:10)  What does the Bible say about that?  Did the early Christians despise the cross because it brought shame and a curse on Jesus?  No, they were thankful that Jesus removed the curse from them (Gal. 3:10-15).

God mentioned back in Deut. 21:23, "anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse."  And there is a curse upon us because we cannot be saved by our own works (Deut. 27:26; Gal. 3:10).

We are not to think, "It's so awful Jesus had to die as a criminal hung on a tree since that is such a shameful and accursed death."  NO. There's more to it than that.

We were under a curse.  Jesus took the curse for us.
God used the cross because it was a curse.

Here it is again, because it is so important, Gal. 3:13 -- "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.'"

Going back to our analogy from Part 3, and the WMSCOG's question, what if Jesus had been killed by a gun?  If God meant for Jesus to take our curse away by being killed by a gun (or sword, etc.) then He could have accommodated that in Deuteronomy.  But no, God used "hung on a tree."  He gave us that image Himself, fulfilling it through Jesus.

It parallels 2 Corinthians 5:21 -- "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."
Here's a good commentary you might like regarding Gal. 3:13.

More Images of the Cross

We're not just looking for references to Jesus' atoning sacrifice (there are plenty of those in the Bible), but for references to His manner of death--the crucifixion.  Besides Deuteronomy 21:23 with Galatians 3:13, are there other indications that God meant the cross to be associated with Jesus? Yes!  Here are a few: 

The Bronze Snake
Jesus said, "Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him." (John 3:14-15)  Jesus was referring to Numbers 21:4-9, comparing His "lifting up" to the way "Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness."  How did Moses lift up the snake in the desert?  On a pole.  (Num. 21:8). 

Psalm 22
When Jesus cried out on the cross, He quoted Psalm 22:1.  "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matt. 27:46 and Mark 15:34)  Read Psalm 22 and you'll see a description of the crucifixion.  It's especially apparent in verse 16, "they pierce my hands and feet." 

Ezekiel 9
In chapter 9, Ezekiel saw a vision of judgment being executed on the city of Jerusalem.  God told the angel, "Go throughout the city of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of those who grieve and lament over all the detestable things that are done in it.” (Eze. 9:4)  Those with this mark of God were spared in the judgment.

Although we do not know what exactly that mark looked like, it is interesting to note that the Hebrew word used here is "tav"--"mark 'tav' on the foreheads".  "Tav" (also written "taw" or "tau" or "taf") meaning "mark" is actually the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet.  It corresponds with our English letter "T," and in ancient scripts it did look like a cross.

So you see, God did foreshadow the cross in the Old Testament.  Here's another article you might like to read about images of the cross in the Old Testament.

God's View of the Cross

We might also ask, does God despise the cross shunning it for being the instrument of Jesus' death?  We can answer that by observing Jesus' resurrected body.

God is all powerful.  He did not have to bear the marks of the crucifixion on His resurrected body, but He chose to keep them.
John 20:20 -- "After he said this, he showed them his hands and side...."
John 20:27 -- "Then he said to Thomas, 'Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.'"

This tells us God wanted the manner of Jesus' sacrifice remembered.  And He wanted us to have a physical reminder.  God thought this physical reminder of the cross so important that Jesus bore it on His own flesh.

Conclusion

I can already hear the WMSCOG's response, "You say the cross is a reminder of Jesus, but how did Jesus tell us to remember Him?  Luke 22:19 says, 'And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”'  We are supposed to remember Jesus with the Passover bread and wine, not the cross."

Christians do remember Jesus' sacrifice when we take the bread and the cup of the Lord's Supper.  But communion is not something we do everyday (some churches, like the WMSCOG, only celebrate it once a year).  We often need a reminder that's right there with us.  When you get the call that your loved one has died, or when you hear the doctor say you have cancer, or when you've just been in a car wreck with your family and you are all being rushed to the hospital...  That's when you might need something to remind you of God's great power and love, without waiting until the next time you can partake in the Lord's Supper.

God knows we need physical symbols and images to help us remember and understand.  The Bible is full of symbols and imagery--not just to picture in our minds, but also to touch with our hands and see with our eyes (Part 4).

You could make a little figure of the bread and cup to put on a chain or hang on a wall if you'd like.  But as for me, I'll gladly look to the cross.  There's plenty of support for it in the Bible.

Some final thoughts:
"May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world." (Gal. 6:14)
"but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles" (1 Cor. 1:23)
That's unfortunate, but even more so, "... many live as enemies of the cross of Christ." (Phil. 3:18)

Is the Cross an Idol? - Part 4 - Symbols in the Bible

A continuing look at why the cross is not an idol...

There's a beautiful song that's been playing on K-LOVE (my favorite radio station) lately, called "Glorious Day (Living He Loved Me)" by Casting Crowns.  The chorus of the song says this:

Living, He loved me
Dying, He saved me
Buried, He carried my sins far away
Rising, He justified freely forever
One day He's coming, Oh glorious day

It reminds me of my last post, Part 3 -- that if the cross of Jesus only reminds you of death, you are lacking the deeper experience of life and freedom that comes through that cross.  It's as if you sang, "Living, He loved me; Dying," and stopped right there.

But even with this deep meaning and feeling associated with the symbol of the cross, another question surfaces.  Does God forbid this type of symbol or image as idolatry?  If so, then we must not use it, no matter the meaning we may ascribe to it.  If not, then we are free to use such symbols or images to help our faith.  That's what I'll explore today...

Do you remember in Part 1 we examined one of the World Mission Society Church of God's videos about the cross? The video starts with a quote of Exodus 20:4.  (It actually includes part of verse 5, though the video only references verse 4.)

"You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.  You shall not bow down to them or worship them.  (Exodus 20:4)"

And at minute 3:54, the video tells us,

"God forbids us to make any kind of religious image."

Obviously, God forbids us to make any form or image as an idol, worshiping it instead of God.  But does God actually "forbid us to make any kind of religious image"?  Does the Bible allow us to use symbols to help us in our faith, to remind us of spiritual truths or things God has done?  Yes!

Here are just a few of the images God has given us.  Whenever we see these things, whether in real life or in art, we can remember the lessons God gave through the symbols.

Rainbow (Gen. 9:12-17) -- The Noahic Covenant
Dove (Matt. 3:16) -- The Holy Spirit
Rock (1 Cor. 10:4; Matt. 16:18) -- Christ
Vine and Branches (John 15:1-8) -- The relationship between Jesus and the believer
Potter and Clay (Is. 64:8; Jer. 18:6) -- God's sovereignty in our lives
Arrows (Psalm 127:3-5) -- Children as a blessing from God
A Torn Curtain (Mark 15:38; Heb. 10:20) -- We can draw near to God because of Jesus
Water (John 4:1-14) -- Eternal life through Jesus
Fish (Matt. 4:19) -- Making disciples as fishers of men
Lion (Rev. 5:5) --  Jesus, who has triumphed
Shepherd and Sheep (John 10:14) -- Jesus takes care of us
The Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7) -- Christ who saves us from death by His sacrifice
Gate or Door (John 10:9) -- Jesus as the only way to heaven

There are so many!  God liked to give us symbolic imagery.  We find it all through the Bible.  But it wasn't for us to only visualize in our heads--God told people to make concrete symbols they could look at and hold.  Here's a list of some of God's concrete symbols and what they were meant to remind us...

Cherubim (Ex. 25:18-22; 26:1) -- God's presence
Jar of Manna (Ex. 16:32) -- God's provision through the wilderness
Pillar of Stones (Josh. 4:19-24) -- The miracle of entering the Promised Land on dry land through the Jordan
Fringes on Garments (Num. 15:38-39) -- The commandments of the Lord
Bronze Snake on a Pole (Num. 21:8) -- The healing power of God

So as you can see, God does NOT "forbid us to making any kind of religious images," as the WMSCOG claims.  He commands and encourages us to use symbolism and imagery!

What is forbidden is worshiping those images and symbols, but we must let God Himself be the judge.  Only He knows the true heart of the person kneeling before a statue or a cross.

Next time--Biblical support for the symbol of the cross.

Click here to go on to Part 5.

Is the Cross an Idol? - Part 3 - What About a Gun?

A continuing look at why the cross is not an idol...

In Part 1 and Part 2 we saw how the World Mission Society Church of God misuses its sources in an attempt to prove that the Christian symbol of the cross is in reality a pagan idol, and that history shows the symbol of the cross connected with Christianity centuries earlier than the WMSCOG claims.
 
However, art and images of the cross are less commonly found in the early church than they are in later centuries.  Why is that?

The WMSCOG's quote from History of the Christian Church (see Part 1) implies that the early Christians despised the cross because of its use as a cruel tool of execution.  We saw that History of the Christian Church actually says that the cross was "despised by the heathen Romans" not by the early Christians.  Even though the WMSCOG distorted its source, is there evidence that that's why the cross image is less commonly found in the early centuries?

I've done some reading and the conclusion seems to be evenly split.  Some say it was the severe persecutions of the early church that made it dangerous for them to display images of the cross openly.  Others say (agreeing with the WMSCOG) that it was too much of a reminder of the brutal death of Jesus for them to associate it with anything good.  This brings me to questions the WMSCOG often poses...

The WMSCOG says since the cross was used to kill Jesus, why would people who loved Jesus use this execution tool as a symbol, hanging it around their necks and placing it in their churches?  If Jesus were killed by a gun, would you hang a gun around your neck or put a gun on the top of your church?

At first, it sounds disgusting--a gun as a symbol of something as good as Jesus?!  In our society, death by a gun happens primarily in the course of a crime or by accident.  That's why the idea brings up such feelings in us.  Let's think a little deeper, get past those initial emotions, set up a more modern analogy, and see how we feel then...

First, the story of Jesus' sacrifice:

All of us are sinners.  We can't seem to avoid it--even when we try to be good, we end up sinning in attitude, thought, or deed.  Even the Apostle Paul had this problem (Romans 7).  The price of our sin is death, not just bodily death but eternal separation from God, and we all owe it (Romans 6).  How will we ever escape this debt we owe?

God is a just God.  The debt must be paid.  But He is also a loving God.  He loves us dearly.  God made a way to pay the price for us through Jesus Christ.  Jesus willingly suffered and died on the cross and rose again so that we could have eternal life with God (Romans 4).  When we accept that payment of Jesus on our behalf, we have crossed over from certain death to eternal life (Romans 5).

So because of Jesus' death on the cross and resurrection we have life instead of death.

Now an analogy we can relate to:

I've heard some use an analogy like this, "If your son (mother, brother, etc.) were killed by a gun, would you hang a gun around your neck to remember him?"  The WMSCOG video we saw in Part 1 used the analogy of a helicopter accident and a daughter who hated helicopters because they reminded her of her father's death.  Those are incomplete analogies, showing no depth in understanding the sacrifice of Jesus.

We need something that incorporates as many elements of the story as possible.  Also, the instrument of death doesn't have to be a gun.  We should be able to replace "gun" with anything suitable in order to get a good analogy for our purpose.  Here we go...

Imagine you and your family (parents, spouse, children, grandchildren if you have them) are all sentenced to die.  Whatever it was that caused the sentence of execution doesn't matter, but because of the law of the land there is no possibility of changing it.  You all will die soon.

You can imagine this scenario in different times and places.  You could be headed for the guillotine, or the executioner's axe, or the hangman's noose, or the firing squad, or the lethal injection table, or the stake for burning, etc.  As you all are waiting for your turn for execution, along comes a man--a free man, a man who has done absolutely nothing wrong.  He looks at you and your family, and then you see him talking with the governor, who is watching over the day's executions.

After a few minutes, a guard comes over and takes off your chains.  You and your whole family have been set free, and you will never have to fear being brought back for execution again.  You were all as good as dead.  Now you have life!

As you leave, you notice the man.  He's tied up and about to be beheaded, or hanged, or shot, or injected, or burned at the stake.  You ask the governor what's happening, and he tells you the man agreed to take the punishment instead of you and your family.  He accepted the trade because of the rank and position of the man.  You can't help but watch in awe as the man is executed.

The governor says, "Your sentence has been paid.  You are free to go.  Of course, if you still wish to pay the sentence yourselves, you are welcome to do so."  You and your family walk out to freedom, but the image of the man being executed in your place stays with you.  It is because of his sacrifice you have life and not death.

Reconsidering how we feel:

Keep imagining that scenario.  Every time you and your family see a guillotine, or an executioner's axe, or a hangman's noose, or a gun (from the firing squad), or a bonfire, etc.--how will you feel?  What will you remember?  Will that become a symbol of death or a symbol of life for you?

When I think about it, I find that any disgust that rises in me regarding the instrument of execution is soon overshadowed by the memory of how my family and I have life and freedom now.  Every time I see that particular execution tool, I'll remember what that man did for us.

Disgust is overshadowed by reverent awe and thankfulness.

So would I wear a guillotine, or axe, or noose, or injection needle, or flame, etc., around my neck or put one up in my church?  Yes, I would.  How about you?

As a mere decoration, it means nothing.  But as a symbol of the great sacrifice that's been made for us, it's rich with meaning.

If the cross only makes you think of death, you are missing the most important aspect of it--life and freedom.  Perhaps that's what's missing in the World Mission Society Church of God?

More about the cross and symbolism next time....

Click here to go on to Part 4.

Is the Cross an Idol? - Part 2 - Claims vs. Truth

Continuing with a look at why the cross is not an idol...
In "Is the Cross an Idol? - Part 1", I examined how the World Mission Society Church of God misuses and misquotes their sources in an attempt to prove that the Christian cross is an idol.  But they are not the only ones that object to the use of the cross as a Christian symbol.  Beyond the WMSCOG's highly questionable practices, is there any substance to their argument?  Let's take their points in turn...

The WMSCOG says the cross was not introduced into Christianity until the 5th century.

Truth: The cross was a symbol of Christianity as early as the 2nd century.
Yes, the cross became the prominent symbol in the 5th century, but that's not when it was introduced.  The cross was already associated with Christians hundreds of years earlier.  Also, during the time when Christians were severely persecuted they used other symbols, such as anchors, which are considered as disguised crosses.  The anchor is found as early as the 1st century (in the cemetery of St. Domitilla).
Resources:
Wikipedia - Christian cross
Cross as an Early Christian Symbol
Anchor as an Early Christian Symbol
Harper's Book of Facts

The WMSCOG says the cross was a pagan symbol adopted by the Christian church because the new Christians couldn't let go of their pagan ties.  It really honors pagan gods like the Egyptian god Tammuz.

Truth:  Jesus died on an actual cross, which has no relation to the Egyptian god Tammuz.
A cross is a very basic shape that has been used since ancient times in many areas and religions.  That does NOT mean that Christians copied it from paganism.  The cross is an extremely meaningful symbol for Christians because it was the instrument of Jesus' sacrifice and because it has a history of Biblical significance.  If you wish to say that the Christian cross is pagan because other pagan religions also use a cross, you can use the same argument to say that kneeling in prayer is a pagan act because pagans knelt in prayer to their gods.  (Thanks to Ralph Woodrow for this example.)
Resources:
Ralph Woodrow on Babylon Mystery Religion and The Cross
Wikipedia - Cross and Crucifixion
Spotlight Ministries

The WMSCOG says that people worship the cross, thinking that the cross itself is something sacred that has the power of God, treating it like a charm, bowing down to it and kissing it in worship.

Truth: Christians respect the symbol of the cross, but we do not worship the cross itself; we worship Jesus who died on it.
It's not surprising that some may think all Christians will hold up their little cross to ward off evil as a magic charm since that's what they see in Hollywood movies--but those are movies, not reality.  Of course we know that the little piece of shaped wood or metal is not powerful in itself.  And some may view a Christian's actions on the outside (such as kneeling before a cross) and draw the conclusion of cross worship by mere appearances--but God sees what is in the heart.  Let God be the Judge of whether that person is worshiping the cross or worshiping the God who hung on the cross.

Any symbol can turn into an idol for someone when they care more for the symbol itself than the meaning behind it.  But that doesn't mean the symbol itself is evil, only the attitude toward it.  Unfortunately the symbol of the cross is not immune to such abuse, and there are people who have crossed the line from respect to worship.  But that should not diminish the true symbolism of the cross.
"Yet both the superstitious abuse and the puritanic protest bear a like testimony to the significance of the great fact of which it reminds us." (from History of the Christian Church)
Resources:
History of the Christian Church
Should a Christian wear religious jewelry?
Is the Cross a Pagan Symbol? 

There's still more to examine.  Coming soon: symbolism and Biblical references to the cross...

Click here to go on to Part 3.

The name of Jesus

When I previously wrote about Ahn Sahng-Hong stating that Jesus is the only name for salvation, a reader expressed trouble in finding that reference.  Well, here is it so you can see for yourself.  This is from the book The Mystery of God and the Spring of the Water of Life, page 181 (Chapter 12).


He says, "salvation is found in no other name than Jesus, not only at His first coming but even in the last days."

Compare this to what the WMSCOG teaches: "Today, salvation is only given through the name of Christ Ahnsahnghong...."  (from The Savior of Each Age and the New Name) 

I've heard World Mission Society members defend this by saying that since (they believe) Ahnsahnghong and Jesus are the same person, there is no contradiction here.  But it's the name that is important.

They claim that the name of Jesus has expired in this "new age," and the name of Ahnsahnghong is the only one through which salvation is found in these last days.

That is in direct contradiction to their own founder who said that even in the last days, salvation is given only in the name of Jesus.

What does the Bible say?
"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved."  (Acts 4:12)

The Trinity...but Not the Trinity

In my last post, there was a comment left by "Anonymous" which leads me to talk today about the Trinity.

Anonymous pointed out that the WMSCOG calls Ahnsahnghong "Father Ahnsahnghong," and "Christ Ahnsahnghong," and also the "Holy Spirit."  Yet as Christians, we do not call Jesus "Father Jesus."

This is because WMSCOG's interpretation of the Trinity is different than the mainstream Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

I asked a teacher at my sister's church about the Trinity during one of my study sessions with her.  I was wondering how "Mother" fit into the Trinity--does she actually make the 3-in-1 God a 4-in-1 God?  No they believe she is an entirely separate female "God."  It is the male "God" (Ahnsahnghong) who has shown himself through the Trinity.

She described the Trinity as similar to water.  Water can appear as a liquid, solid, or gas, but it's still water.  Likewise, God has shown Himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but all of those are still one God.  Or, she said, you could imagine an actor playing different roles on the stage.

Then she went on to say that because of this, you can interchange the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit throughout the Bible and not have a problem.  You could say that God the Son gave Moses the 10 Commandments, or you could say that the God the Father died on the cross, or the disciples were baptized in God the Son on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter 2.  That's when I knew something was not quite right, but I couldn't put my finger on it until another of my readers here referred me to the term "Modalism."

The mainstream Christian doctrine of the Trinity is one God in three eternal, coexistent Persons, each distinct from the other yet all together one God.

But the WMSCOG interpretation sounds more like Modalism, which is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are different "modes" of one God, but not distinct Persons.

Modalism is apparently one of the most common errors in regards to the Trinity, and it's easy to fall into.  I've noticed this myself after researching it.  In trying to explain the Trinity to my own children, I found that I sometimes used examples that actually show Modalism rather than the Trinity.  So it's something for us all to be aware of.

There are resources around the web about Modalism.  Here are a couple links that you might use to get started if you wanted more info:
at basictheology.com
and at gotquestions.org

-----------------------
I just need to add a little note to this post...

The WMSCOG has a problem with the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. They think it's confusing that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit would be different yet the same.

The Trinity is a very difficult concept to understand. Here are two very good pages from gotquestions.org that help explain and put it in perspective:
What does the Bible teach about the Trinity?
and What is Trinitarianism?  Is Trinititarianism Biblical?
They also include a different picture illustrating the Trinity than my example of a Venn diagramm in the comments below.  No picture will explain the Trinity fully--it's just meant to help.

My purpose of this post is not to argue Modalism vs. the Trinity.  I believe in the Trinity, but I can understand where the idea of Modalism comes from.  My purpose is to point out that the WMSCOG does not believe in the Christian definition of the Trinity.  They have taken the word and given it a different meaning.  It's something you should be aware of when they they are talking to you about the "Trinity."