Recently, a letter arrived at the office accompanied by a document once published in the Worldwide News on August 25, 1986. The above title was handwritten by the letter-writer; the original title was “18 Restored Truths.” Also written by hand next to Herbert W. Armstrong’s name was the description, “End Time Elijah.” The problem with that assessment is there was only one Elijah to come prophesied in the Scriptures, which was spoken of John (Matt. 17:10-13). John the Baptizer is clearly labeled as the Elijah to come, and no further (end time) Elijah was foretold.
Armstrong was born in 1892 and died the same year the 18 restored truths were published. He founded the Worldwide Church of God in the late 1930s and was a well-known radio voice, also. He believed that he was called to be an apostle and an end time Elijah for Christ, Who has still not returned 30 years after Arm-strong’s death. He recycled the Anglo-Israel doctrine, which was set forth in the book, Judah’s Scepter and Joseph’s Birthright by J. H. Allen, originally published in 1902.
The 18 Restored Truths
The first alleged restored truth gleaned from his writings concerns the government of God. “When Christ comes, He will restore God’s government to the whole earth.” The problem with this “truth” is that God does not have an earthly government of any kind either to implement or restore. Jesus is the Head of and rules over the church, which is the Kingdom of Heaven (Eph. 1:22-23; Matt. 3:2; Col. 1:13-14). Since Jesus has never relinquished control of His Headship, it cannot be restored. The kind of government mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 has both apostles and spiritual gifts; however, it was only a temporary measure until the will of God was entirely revealed (1 Cor. 13). The permanent government for the church is revealed in 1 Timothy 3:1-12 and Titus 1:5-9.
“Truth” #2 is given as: “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God has been restored after 1900 years.” The claim is made that the church did not have a clear understanding of the Gospel. Unfortunately, nothing wrong is specified; neither is it spelled out what the true gospel is. The fact is that, while it may have been ignored by some, it never disappeared. It has always been in Romans 6:3-5, Acts 2:36-38, 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, and in many other verses.
Is the third “truth” a misprint? It says: “The purpose of God, that we are to be born of God and become God.” As the reader can tell, this sentence is either incomplete or a fragment, but such is the way it appears. Did Armstrong really mean that we are to become God? Shades of Mormon doctrine! The Bible teaches that we are to become God-like. We cannot become God, however, unless we discover a way to have existed from all eternity at this late stage. How are we going to be all-powerful? But those aside, how do we even become as holy as God is? Yes, we have the responsibility to make the effort to do so (1 Peter 1:15-16), but we never achieve it absolutely, according to the Apostle John (1 John 1:8, 10). If we claim to be sinless, the truth is not in us.
The fourth “truth” makes it clear that none of us misread the third one. Included in this section are the following words:
God is a Family into which we may be born and also become God. His Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are the begotten children of God. And when we are born of God we will not even be able to sin.
These thoughts contradict the teaching of 1 John 1:10. Furthermore, the facts do not substantiate this claim. Was Peter born again when he spoke on Pentecost? Yet Paul said he was later to be blamed (Gal. 2: 11).
If Peter was already born again when he sinned (several years after Pentecost), then Armstrong’s theory is as wrong as it can be. If Peter was not born again until after the events enumerated when he was in Antioch, then how was he able to speak by inspiration on Pentecost, use the keys of the kingdom that sinners might enter in, and be one of the leading apostles of the church—all without being himself saved?
A more personal application involving the Armstrong family serves to highlight the fallacy of this point, also. Herbert ordained his son, Garner Ted Armstrong, to the ministry in 1955. Surely he would not have selected someone he did not believe was part of the Family of God. The problem was that eventually it was discovered that the son was committing adultery and gambling, which forces one to make a choice. Either adultery and gambling are not sins, or somehow Garner Ted’s Godhood got tarnished. Whichever alternative the father (Herbert W.) believed, they soon parted ways. Of course, the New Testament does not teach that any Christian is sinless or becomes Deity.
The 5th “restored truth” is that the dead do not know anything, which will be a surprise to the rich man and Lazarus alike (Luke 16:19-31). Jesus proved to the Sadducees that the dead are still alive, citing Exodus 3:6, which declares that God is the God of the living (Matt. 22:32). One wonders how anyone can be so misinformed concerning the Scriptures when Jesus already explained the truth of the matter.
It is postulated in the sixth “truth” that “there is a human spirit within the human brain.” Man does have a spirit (whether it resides in the brain or elsewhere). Armstrong goes on to say the spirit is not a conscious part of the man. That might explain, if true, why so many people appear to be unconscious even though they appear to be awake, but what kind of theological sense does this assertion make? We all have a spirit, but is it unconscious? Does it ever wake up, and if so, when? Its task is “to be united with the Spirit of God.” Are we to infer that the Spirit of God is also unconscious, since unity is the goal? How can there be unity if one is unconscious and one is fully conscious? Does this principle make sense to anyone?
Seventh, the Church is only the firstfruits of those saved. He “isn’t trying to save the whole world yet.” Really? That puts Christians in an awkward position; should we be evangelistic or not? If Jesus, as the Head of the church, is not yet trying to save the whole world, then it would seem reasonable that His followers should not be trying, either. Christians are only in training now, it is alleged.
They will be prepared to teach “when Christ comes to rule in the Millennium.” There is a reason that Armstrong does not use any Scriptures in any of the 17 points following the first one (and he misused them there). The Bible does not teach what he advocates. Jesus said (now listen carefully): “My kingdom is not of this world…” (John 18:36).
Armstrong, in his brief 8th point, avers that the church is not yet the kingdom of God but will become such someday. The New Testament teaches that we are already citizens of that kingdom (Col. 1:13-14; 4:11; Heb. 12:28, et al.).
“Only those whom the Father calls and draws to Him can be converted now.” This 9th, so-called “truth” answers the question posed earlier. Christians do not need to be evangelists now; if God wants anyone saved, He’ll do it Himself. The document says that this is another point no one ever taught except Armstrong. There is a reason no one else had ever taught such things; they constitute religious error. Armstrong was wrong!
The 10th allegation is that those who have died will receive a second chance. Catholics teach this false notion by means of the idea of purgatory; Mormons practice it through being baptized for ancestors already dead; pre-millennialists have their own concoction of errors. Armstrong’s version worked like this:
In the judgment, they’ll be found guilty and condemned to death. They’ll have their first chance to know that Christ came and paid the death penalty for them. They’ll be allowed to accept that payment, and they’ll have 100 years to prove they want to live differently than they did in their first life. They can be saved at last.
And what Scripture mentions this scheme? The whole thing is bogus. None of the passages dealing with the judgment teach of any other opportunities beyond the judgment (Rom. 14:11-12; 2 Cor. 5:10-11; 2 Thess. 1:6-10). Armstrong’s description is sheer fiction.
The 11th point continues with the Millennium concept: “Salvation will be open to all for the first time since Adam sinned and God closed off the tree of Life.” Perhaps an adherent of this sect can explain why Jesus and the Spirit offer the invitation now instead of waiting until later (Matt. 11:28; Rev. 22:17).
The doctrine of illumination is taught as the 12th “truth.” The Holy Spirit “opens our minds so we can understand the coded book, the Bible.” Is that why Garner Ted had trouble understanding, “You shall not commit adultery”? It was coded so well he could not grasp the idea? Perhaps someone in the Armstrong camp can answer, “Why did the Holy Spirit bother to inspire the Scriptures to be written if they would become so obscure that no one could understand them without His help?” Those in denominations can answer, too, if they wish, because the majority of them believe the same thing. The document repeats: “Without that Spirit we cannot understand the Bible.” Hogwash! Even an atheist can understand what the Bible teaches regarding sin. Many of them reject the Word because they do understand God’s explanation of sin and His teaching on repentance all too well! The doctrine of illumination is an appeal to elitism.
“We are only begotten now, not born again.” A genuine apostle (Peter) wrote to Christians that they were born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible—by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever (1 Peter 1:23). Armstrong contradicts the Scriptures yet again in this 13th principle.
Americans are the modern tribe of Manasseh. So affirms the 14th “truth.” Such a claim is so much sophistry and completely unsubstantiated. In the first place, the ten tribes were not lost. Most of them were taken into captivity, but some members of the tribes had migrated to Jerusalem. Others retained their identity even though they lived in foreign lands. This whole concept that Americans are Israelites was “borrowed” from the teachings of J. H. Allen.
The 15th assertion is that no one can understand prophecy unless he agrees with the preceding point. Armstrong misapplied dozens of Old Testament prophecies (to uphold pre-millennialism)—which were fulfilled long before he was ever born.
Anyone who has been nodding his head in agreement with the prior “truths” will have no problem swallowing the last three, either, all of which shows a tremendous amount of ignorance of the difference between the two covenants. The Book of Hebrews contrasts the Law of Moses with the New Testament of Jesus (Hebrews 8:6-7). It explains that Jesus is the Mediator of a better covenant than the one that came through Moses. The sacrifices of bulls and goats could never take away sin (Heb. 10:4). Jesus’ priesthood does not come through Aaron; His is after the order of Melchizedek (Heb. 7).
Furthermore, we do not observe the Passover or any of the feasts from the old covenant; Jesus is our Passover (1 Cor. 5:7). Yet God “revealed” to Mr. Armstrong that he was to keep the holy days mentioned in the Old Testament (including the Sabbath, which came via Ellen G. White and 7th-day Adventism). The 16th tenet of Armstrongism is expressed thus:
It was not until the end of World War II in 1945 that they began to see that we have to get away from our homes for the Feast of Tabernacles. These Holy Days picture the seven major events in God’s plan of salvation.
Say what? What New Testament passage ties salvation to the observance of Jewish Feast Days? This is just bizarre! We are not Israelites, and none of those days has been bound upon us. In fact, when some tried to bind such Jewish practices on the church (Acts 15:5), the apostles (real ones) and elders met and decided none of those things belonged to the Christian system. They only bound four things that were part of the Law on Christians. Neither the Sabbath nor any of the feasts were included (Acts 15:23-29). Paul later wrote that if anyone took any part of Old Testament teaching (that was not repeated in the New), he was obligated to take all of the Law (Gal. 5:1-4).
Armstrong insisted that the calendar of the Jews remained authoritative (#17) and that churches had to observe the second and third tithes associated with the feast days (#18).
True Restoration
Most of the 18 “truths” range from fanciful to lunacy. They came from Armstrong’s imagination—not from the Scriptures. Most of them plainly deny the Word of God. Many Christians have been concerned about restoration, but we mean something entirely different by it than what we have been reading here. Primarily, we mean that we should endeavor to understand the New Testament as God wrote it and gave it to the saints (Jude 3). We do not need supernatural guidance in order to understand it. Paul said to the Ephesians that, when they read his words, they would understand his knowledge (Eph. 3:3-4). We do the same thing as our brethren did in the first century. The Holy Spirit inspired the Word to profit us (2 Tim. 3:16-17).
Of Armstrong’s 18 “truths,” 17 of them are false. He had one part of one point that was actually correct (man does have a spirit). Notice what he did not say. First, he did not talk about the need to have the correct plan of salvation; yet many false gospels were present in his day (as well as ours). He did not show what was wrong with the “faith only” of the Protestants or of the good- works-can-save-mentality of Roman Catholicism. He did not mention the necessity of repentance and baptism for salvation as Peter taught on Pentecost. Second, he did not talk about the church, the one body of Christ, as the New Testament does. Third, he never addressed acceptable worship.
He sought and gained his own following rather than promote the teachings of the Scriptures. Truly, he has his reward. Perhaps others will prove wiser by studying the Scriptures (instead of the teachings of uninspired men) and heartily embracing true restoration principles.