A: If Jesus Christ committed just one sin, we would not have a Savior. If He had violated the Fifth Commandment (“Honor your father and your mother…,” Deuteronomy 5:16; Exodus 20:12), He would have sinned, as “sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4). Many Scriptures make clear that the law spoken of in the New Testament includes the Ten Commandments (compare James 2:8-12).

We read that Christ never sinned (Hebrews 4:15). He practiced what He preached. When a young man came to Him to find out what he had to do to have eternal life, Christ told him to keep the commandments (Matthew 19:16-17). He then specifically listed the Fifth Commandment, in verse 19. Christ also emphasized in Mark 7:7-13 the continued obligation for children to honor their parents (Compare, too, Ephesians 6:1-3).

Christ never transgressed the Fifth Commandment. When He was twelve years old, He was subject or obedient to His parents (Luke 2:51). He never became disobedient throughout His life.

The potential problem with His statement in John 2:3-4 is caused by the translation of the Authorized Version, stating, “And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come.”

First, let us notice that the expression, “woman,” did not convey disrespect. When Christ hung on the cross, He told John to take care of His mother. Christ was in agonizing pain, knowing that He would soon die — still, His thoughts and concerns were directed toward the welfare of His mother. Notice that He called Mary “woman” at that critical time as well (John 19:26). Halley’s Handbook points out, on page 533, that the word “woman” was a title of respect in the usage of the day.

Returning to John 2, we should also notice that Mary did not consider Christ’s answer as one of disrespect. In verse 5, she told the bridegroom’s servants, “Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.”

Let us also note the annotation in Eerdman’s Handbook to the Bible, on page 536: “No one, not even his mother, has the right to put pressure on Jesus. But his reply is not as harsh as some translations make it sound. New English Bible, ‘Your concern, mother, is not mine,’ is better.”

Other translations agree with the conclusion that the rendering in the Authorized Version is too harsh. The New King James Bible translates verse 4 as, “‘Woman, what does your concern have to do with Me?'” The New International Version states, “Dear woman, why do you involve Me?”

Halley’s Handbook comments further, on page 533:

“The point of his remark seems to be, ‘Suppose the wine is gone, what have I to do with it? It is not my affair. My time to work miracles has not yet come.’ Probably he had just told her of the new miraculous powers bestowed on him by the descent of the Holy Spirit at baptism. She saw in the situation an opportunity for him. While he did this miracle as her suggestion, his ‘hour’ for the general use of his miraculous powers came about four months after, at the official beginning of his public ministry in Jerusalem at Passover time (John 2:13).”

Christ also wanted to tell His mother that the main purpose for His coming was not to perform those kinds of miracles. That is why the New English Bible’s rendering of verse 5, “Your concern, mother, is not mine,” is quite good. Because of respect for His mother, however, He acquiesced, as the performance of that miracle was not against God’s commandments or His will.

Rather than conveying that Christ disobeyed the Fifth Commandment, John 2:1-4, when correctly understood, shows the deep honor and respect that Christ had for His mother, prompting Him to fulfill her desires that were not against God’s will.

A: It is not. The Biblical record clearly reveals that Mary, although a virgin when “she was found with child of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18-20; Luke 1:27-35), had additional children after the birth of Jesus Christ. Matthew 1:24-25 tells us that Joseph “did not know” Mary [a Biblical expression for sexual intimacy, including intercourse, compare Luke 1:34] “TILL she had brought forth her FIRSTBORN Son.” The word “till” or “until” signifies that Joseph DID know Mary sexually after Christ’s birth. The same Greek word for “till” or “until” is used in Matthew 2:15 and Matthew 5:26, showing a change in circumstances after a certain event.

Further, Mary gave birth to her “firstborn” son (compare, too, Luke 2:6-7). The Greek word for “firstborn” is “prototokon.” It means “FIRST-born,” indicating that others would be born subsequently. It does distinctively NOT mean, “only-born.” The Greek word for “only-born” is “monogenes.” It is used in Luke 7:12, referring to a dead man who was “the only son of his mother.” Christ, however, was NOT the only Son of His mother.

The Jews knew that Christ had brothers and sisters, and that He was not Mary’s only child. Notice Matthew 13:54-56:

“When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogues, so that they were astonished and said, ‘Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses [Joseph], Simon and Judas [Jude]? And His sisters, are they not all with us?'”

The Jews’ testimony was that Christ had four brothers and at least two, and perhaps even more than two, sisters. After all, they had asked, “And His sisters, are they not ALL with us?”

In spite of this clear Biblical record, some argue that Christ did not have brothers, but that He merely had cousins. However, the Greek word for “brother,” used in Matthew 13:55, is “adelphos.” (Compare, too, Matthew 1:2; 4:21). The Greek word for “cousin” is “exadelphos,” literally meaning, “from brothers.” This word is NOT used in reference to Christ’s brothers.

During His life, Christ’s brothers did not believe in Him (John 7:3-5). After His death and resurrection, however, we find at least some of His brothers among Christ’s disciples (Acts 1:13-14; compare, too, 1 Corinthians 9:5). Christ appeared after His resurrection to His brother James (1 Corinthians 15:7), the oldest of Christ’s brothers. James later became an influential apostle in the New Testament church (Galatians 1:18-19; 2:9, 11-12; Acts 12:16-17; 15:13-21; 21:18). He was also the author of the “Epistle of James” in the New Testament.

After James’ violent death (he was apparently stoned, around 62 A.D.), he was replaced in his role in the Church by Christ’s brother Simon. According to tradition, Simon died around 100 A.D.

Nothing has been preserved regarding any role of Christ’s brother Jose or Joseph in the Church. However, Christ’s youngest brother, Judas or Jude, wrote the “Epistle of Jude.” He identifies himself in his letter, in verse 1, as the “brother of James,” the oldest of Christ’s brothers.

The Bible clearly reveals that Jesus had four brothers and at least two, perhaps even more, sisters. The teaching that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life is clearly not Biblical.

A: In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul sets forth the timeless principles of proper hairstyle and hair length for men and women. After explaining in 1 Corinthians 11:3 that the Head of Christ is God the Father, the Head of a man is Christ, and the head of the woman (wife) is the man (husband), Paul continues: “(verse 4) Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. (verse 5) But every woman who prays or prophecies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. (verse 6) For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. (verse 7) For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God… (verse 10) For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels… (verse 13) Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? (verse 14) Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? (verse 15) But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.”

The context of the Scripture discusses the length of hair — not the wearing of a veil or of a hat (There is, however, nothing wrong in God’s eyes for a woman to wear a veil or a hat, if she so desires, following the culture of her upbringing). We read that a woman should wear long hair, which is given to her “as a covering” or, as some translations render this, “as a veil.” The Church of the Eternal God and its sister churches are not going to engage in a “yard-stick religion” of defining and regulating how long and how short hair should be worn. However, the following Biblical principles are helpful:

We read that a woman should have “long hair” as a covering, as distinguished from an “uncovered” head, a “shaved” head, or a “shorn” head. A “shorn” head pictures very short hair. One might think of the analogy of a “shorn” sheep. In Acts 8:32, the Greek word for “shorn” — “keiro” — is applied to a “shearer” engaged in shearing his sheep. A “shaved” head describes a bald head. In contrast, a woman should wear “long hair,” showing that she accepts the authority of her husband over her, “because of the angels.” The thought is conveyed here that a wife cannot rely on angelic protection, if she shows through her conduct that she does not accept the God-given authority of her husband over her. (This is not to say, however, that a husband should ever abuse his authority. Our free booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families,” explains the God-ordained husband-and-wife-relationship in much detail.)

At the same time, we are told that a man is not to wear “long hair,” and that even nature teaches us that wearing long hear is a “dishonor” to a man. The Greek word for “dishonor” is “atimia.” This word, or a related form (“atimos”), can be found in the following additional passages: Romans 9:21; 1 Corinthians 15:43; 2 Corinthians 6:8; 2 Timothy 2:20; 2 Corinthians 11:21 (translated as “shame”); and Romans 1:26 (translated as “vile”). Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance points out that “atimia” can describe a comparative indignity or disgrace (under No. 819). The related word, “atimos,” can describe something “less honorable [comparative degree]” (under No. 820).

Please note that the word for “shameful” in verse 6 (“But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved…”) is a different word in the Greek. It is “aischron” (derived from “aischros”) and can also be found in 1 Corinthians 14:35; Ephesians 5:12; and Titus 1:11 (translated as “dishonest”). (The noun, “aischrotes,” is found in Ephesians 5:4 — translated, “filthiness.”) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance defines these words as “a shameful thing, i.e. indecorum:–shame,” and as “shameful, i.e. base (spec. venal):– filthy” (under Nos. 149 and 150).

The reason for the different choice of words may be seen in the fact that the Old Testament permitted a man on special occasions to wear long hair. This exception is set forth in Numbers 6, known as “the Law of the Nazarite.” Men were permitted to make a temporary “Nazarite vow” to God. During the time of their vow, a Nazarite was not to cut his hair, but let “the locks of the hair of his head grow” (verse 5). In addition, he was not to touch a dead person, eat any fresh grapes or raisins, or drink anything made from grapes, including wine. This law was inseparably connected with the ritual law of sacrifices: At the end of the separation, the Nazarite had to bring several offerings, and he had to go through additional rituals before the priest.

The long hair of the Nazarite vow reflected, in physical terms, the willingness of the person to be under authority — under the authority of God. Sometimes, certain people were consecrated from their birth as Nazarites, to be separated to God throughout their lives. Famous examples are Samson (Judges 13:5,7); Samuel (1 Samuel 1:11); and — perhaps — John the Baptist (Luke 1:15; Luke 7:33).

Jesus, however, was not a Nazarite. He grew up in the city of Nazareth and was therefore called a “Nazarene” (Matthew 2:23) — which is of course quite different from being a Nazarite. Christ drank wine (Matthew 11:19; Matthew 26:29), and He touched dead people (Luke 8:49-55) — things a Nazarite was prohibited from doing. Archaeology and history have established that the Jews at the time of Christ did not wear long hair. Jesus did not wear long hair, either. He looked like a Jew — so much so that Judas had to kiss Him to identify Him to the soldiers that had come to arrest Him. After all, it was He — the Word of God — who inspired Paul to write that a man is not to wear long hair. For Paul, this fact was so self-evident that he asked his readers, “Does not even nature itself teach you” this truth? (1 Corinthians 11:14).

In the early New Testament church, we do find occasional references to some who continued on occasion to make a temporary Nazarite vow (compare Acts 21:23-24, 26-27). It is possible that even Paul made a temporary Nazarite vow for a short time (compare Acts 18:18. Incidentally, the word for “shorn,” i.e. “keiro,” is the same as used in 1 Corinthians 11:6). However, these vows ceased within the church when the temple was destroyed, as the purification ceremonies could not be carried out any longer.

Today, the rules and regulations pertaining to a Nazarite vow are no longer of any consequence for us. We are rather to follow the clear principles given in 1 Corinthians 11 — that a woman should not wear her hair as to look like a man, and a man should not wear his hair as to look like a woman. If one cannot tell, by just looking at hair styles and hair lengths, whether a person is a male or a female, then the clear guidelines set forth in 1 Corinthians 11 have not been followed.

A: The Bible teaches that we are to confess our sins to God. We read in 1 John 1:8-9, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Other Scriptures clarify that such confession must be made to God. Romans 14:10-12 states, “But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written: ‘As I live, says the LORD, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God.’ So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.”

We read that the people came to John the Baptist, “confessing their sins.” (Matthew 3:6). Note, however, it does not say that they were confessing their sins to John. Other Scriptures tell us that confession of sins is to be made to God.

The practice taught by some religions to confess our sins to a human mediator to obtain forgiveness by that person is not Biblical. We are taught that we have only one Mediator and Advocate between God and man who makes intercession for us before God the Father — Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5; 1 John 2:1-2; Hebrews 7:25). It is God who forgives sin (Mark 2:7; Isaiah 43:25; Acts 5:31). David understood that sin, in the final analysis, is against God (Psalm 51:3-4), as God gave us His law which defines for us sinful conduct (James 4:12).

John 20:23 does not justify a different conclusion. In John 20:23, Christ tells His disciples, “‘If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.'” This passage does not teach confession to a priest. Read in context with the parallel passages in Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18, Jesus is giving His ministers spiritual discernment to ascertain whether someone has repented of his or her sins or not. In addition, Christ gives His ministers the authority to disfellowship a person from the Church in case sins are not repented of (compare 1 Corinthians 5:2; 1 Timothy 1:20), with the goal to restore such a person to the congregation in case of subsequent repentance (2 Corinthians 2:6-10; 2 Timothy 2:24-26). Jesus’ words in John 20:23 — as well as in Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18 — are not to be understood as saying that God’s ministers are free to “forgive” sins — or to refuse to grant forgiveness — and that God is bound by such a decision. Rather, the passages, correctly translated, convey the thought that God inspires His ministers to make those decisions, and whatever they bind on earth HAS ALREADY BEEN bound by God in heaven.

We should therefore generally not “confess” or tell our sins to others. There is, however, one exception to this rule.

We are being told in James 5:16 that we are to “confess [our] trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that [we] may be healed.” The Greek word for “trespass,” paraptoma, is used in numerous additional passages, for instance in Galatians 6:1; Ephesians 2:1; 2:5; or 2 Corinthians 5:19. It is consistently and correctly translated in the New King James Bible as “trespasses” in those passages. We are told in Colossians 2:13 that God, upon our repentance, forgives us all of our “trespasses.” We are also told that if we forgive men their “trespasses,” our Father will forgive us our “trespasses” as well, but if we do not forgive men their “trespasses,” our Father will not forgive us our “trespasses,” either (Matthew 6:14-15; compare Matthew 18:35).

The “trespasses” which we need to confess to our brother or sister, in order to obtain his or her “forgiveness,” are those that we have committed against our brother or our sister. Mark 11:25-26 tells us, “And whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive him, that your Father in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father in heaven forgive your trespasses.” Unresolved problems between brethren might even prevent healing of physical sickness. James 5:16 tells us, “Confess your trespasses to one another [with the goal to “clear the air”], and pray for one another,THAT you may be healed.” After all, Christ told Peter to forgive his repenting brother “seventy times seven.” In Peter’s question, the brother had sinned against Peter and had come to him to express to him his sorrow — in other words, to “confess” to Peter his trespass or sin against Peter.

We also read in Luke 17:3, “Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.” Notice, too, Matthew 5:23-24, “Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First, be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.”‘

If we commit a sin or trespass against someone else, resulting in an offense and a problem within our relationship with that other person, we are to “confess” our sin or trespass to that person, asking him or her for forgiveness, with the goal of restoring our relationship. At the same time, we are NOT to “confess” or talk about our sin or trespass with others, unless a situation develops as described in Matthew 18:15-17. Notice, however, the very first step in the Matthew 18 process: “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him ALONE. If he hears you, you have gained your brother.” At that moment, the process is supposed to end, and the sin or trespass against the brother is supposed to be forgiven, buried and gone. It is not to be “resurrected” by the parties, and it is most certainly not to be talked about to others.

At the same time, the Bible does not teach that we should “confess” or tell others (including a minister) sins that we might have committed against God. God can forgive and forget (Hebrews 8:12) — people, though, being human, have a long memory many times when it comes to the sins of others.

A: The Church of the Eternal God believes in and teaches the Godly command of tithing. Our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound,” explains on pages 18-20 that tithing is a binding command today that was not abandoned by Christ. (Our booklet explains that Hebrews 7 did not abandon tithing – contrary to what some may erroneously claim.) Our Updates have consistently upheld and referred to God’s command to tithe — compare, for example, Edwin Pope’s Editorials in Updates #38 (dated April 12, 2002) and #53 (dated July 26, 2002). That tithing is a command for today is taught in many Scriptures, including Matthew 23:23; Luke 18:12; and Malachi 3:8-10.

The Church of the Eternal God also believes and teaches that God has indeed instituted THREE different types of tithes – commonly referred to as the first, second and third tithe.

Some teach that the Bible never instructed second and third tithes. However, this conclusion is clearly false, and historical records show that ancient Israel practiced a tithing system of three tithes. The apocryphal book of Tobit, which was apparently written about 250 BC (compare Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 22, p. 264, copyright 1959, under “Tobit”), confirms the practice in ancient Judah of a three-tithes system. Although apocryphal, the book of Tobit is useful from a strictly historical standpoint to show that Jews of that day were knowledgeable of and practiced the same tithing commands as revealed through Moses. Tobit 1:6-8 (New Revised Standard Version) states the following:

“But I alone went often to Jerusalem for the festivals, as it is prescribed for all Israel by an everlasting decree. I would hurry off to Jerusalem with the first fruits of the crops and the firstlings of the flock, the tithes of the cattle, and the first shearings of the sheep [describing the FIRST tithe]. I would give these to the priests, the sons of Aaron, at the altar; likewise the tenth of the grain, wine, olive oil, pomegranates, figs, and the rest of the fruits to the sons of Levi who ministered at Jerusalem. Also for six years I would save up a SECOND tenth in money and go and distribute it [use or spend it] in Jerusalem. A THIRD tenth I would give to the orphans and widows and to the converts who had attached themselves to Israel. I would bring it and give it to them in the THIRD year, and we would eat it according to the ordinance decreed concerning it in the law of Moses and according to the instructions of Deborah, the mother of my father Tobiel, for my father had died and left me an orphan.”

Our Statement of Beliefs discusses the FIRST tithe as follows, “We believe in the Godly institution of tithing to enable the Church to carry out its commission of preaching the gospel and feeding the flock.”

The first tithe is the first ten percent of someone’s “increase” (compare Proverbs 3:9) – his or her job earnings and/or other income (such as proceeds from rental, interest, gains from stocks, etc.). The Worldwide Church of God, under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong, had made the administrative decision that in certain countries, such as Scandinavia and the United Kingdom, because of the extremely high income tax rates and the inability to deduct most or all contributions from individual tax returns, “increase” is defined as the amount of earnings after the deduction of the income tax. The Church of the Eternal God is following this teaching and practice. On the other hand, each individual is responsible before God to determine the amount of his or her “increase” in his or her individual circumstances.

The first tithe is to be sent to the Church on a regular basis (compare the principle in Exodus 22:29-30), to be used by the Church for the preaching of the gospel and the feeding of the flock. Since the Church has to rely on such regular contributions to be able to meet its expenses, it is important, of course, that those contributions are generally received on at least a monthly basis. It is also important for the contributor to recognize that the first ten per cent of his or her earnings or increase belong to God (Leviticus 27:30, 32), and that we honor God best if we give Him first, what is due to Him. An interesting example of the reinforcement of the tithing command in ancient Judah can be found in 2 Chronicles 31:4-12.

The SECOND tithe (or a second ten percent of one’s earnings or other income) is an additional tithe of one’s “increase” (Deuteronomy 14:22-26). Soncino confirms that Deuteronomy 14:23 discusses the “second tithe.” They state, “This refers to the second tithe, because the first tithe was to be given to the Levites who were allowed to eat it anywhere (cf. Num. xviii. 26, 31).” The Ryrie Study Bible has a similar comment pertaining to Deuteronomy 14:22-27, confirming the existence of a “second tithe.” So does “The New Bible Commentary: Revised,” copyright 1970, on page 220: “This is the so-called ‘second tithe,’ as contrasted with that tithe of the produce given to maintain the Levites (see Nu. 18:26-28).”

The individual saves the second tithe each year for use in observing God’s annual Holy Days – mainly the Feast of Tabernacles (FOT), as members are commanded to travel for the FOT to one of God’s designated feast sites. This tithe is to be saved for use by the individual. Only “excess second tithe” — the portion of the second tithe exceeding necessary individual use — should be sent to the Church. The Church will distribute such amount to members who were unable to save sufficient second tithe for the Holy Days, and it might use remaining funds for necessary Church-related Feast expenses (such as hall rentals).

In addition, God instituted a THIRD tithe system for the purpose of assisting and helping “Levites, widows and orphans.” The third tithe is an additional tithe of one’s “produce” or “increase” and is described in passages such as Deuteronomy 14:28-29 and Deuteronomy 26:12-15. (The third tithe was paid on the third and sixth year out of a cycle of seven years. On the seventh year, no third tithe was to be paid, as the land rested during the seventh year, Leviticus 25:4.)

Soncino confirms this understanding. They comment on Deuteronomy 26:12: “[The term] in the third year [refers to] the tithe of the produce of the third year…the year of tithing, i.e. the third in the cycle of seven years in which a special tithe was to be given to the poor.”

The principle of paying third tithe on the third and sixth year out of a cycle of seven years still applies today. Many members begin counting their third tithe years from the annual festival nearest the date of their baptism. Others decide to begin from the date that they first began tithing. It is the responsibility of each member to decide when he or she should begin the cycle, and the observance of that cycle should be carefully maintained.

Our Statement of Beliefs addresses the third-tithe system as follows, “We believe that needy members are to be helped and taken care of, through the tithing system described in the Bible, by other members of the Church (Luke 3:11; 1Timothy 5:8; James 2:15-16).” Traditionally, the Worldwide Church of God, under Mr. Armstrong, had taught that the Church can use third tithe income for first tithe expenses, if the Church has enough third tithe funds and is able to provide adequately for those of its members who need third tithe assistance. At the same time, it has been understood that if the Church does not have enough third tithe to help its needy members, it can use first tithe income for this purpose. The Church of the Eternal God is following this teaching and practice.

It should also be mentioned that “third tithe” is FOR the poor and needy, not BY the poor and needy. It is therefore not necessary for a “poor” person to pay third tithe. Someone who receives assistance from the government does not have to pay third tithe. It would also be following a wrong principle to take out a loan in order to be able to pay third tithe. Based on this principle, the Worldwide Church of God, under Herbert W. Armstrong, had made the administrative decision to excuse Church members in certain countries, such as the United Kingdom, from paying third tithe because of the high rate of taxation and mandatory social security payments in those countries. In addition, much of social security benefits constitutes, to an extent, the equivalent of third tithe payments in those countries. The Church of the Eternal God is following this teaching and practice. On the other hand, each individual is responsible before God to determine whether he or she is “poor” or “needy” and therefore excused from paying third tithe.

God expects of us to obey His tithing commands faithfully. God is the giver of all things, but He wants to know how much we appreciate His blessings. We can show Him our thankfulness by obeying Him cheerfully and willingly.

A: The answer is clearly “yes.” Our Statements of Beliefs point out that the Church of the Eternal God in the United States, the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada, and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom, uphold and teach “the major doctrines” which “were taught by Herbert W. Armstrong,” unless ” any particular doctrine is proven to be wrong by the Bible.” As we all know, Mr. Armstrong clearly taught hierarchical government within the Church — that is, rule “from the top down.” He did not teach, and neither do we, that the Church is to be ruled by the lay membership, that is, rule “from the bottom up.” We clearly understand that God the Father is above all, and that Jesus Christ, the Head of His Church, is under the Father. Christ, in turn, appoints those under Him who are to serve, lead and guide the Church on a human level.

CEG’s Bylaws confirm our hierarchical structure. Article V — Governance — states, “The governance of the corporation is, after the Biblical example, hierarchical in form. The corporation is managed through a Board of Directors.” It is also regulated in our Bylaws that every Director must be, and must remain to be, a Church member of the Church of the Eternal God (CEG). In this way, CEG is set up exactly as the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) was set up under Mr. Armstrong.

CEG’s Board of Directors presently consists of the following five Directors who are all ministers: J. Edwin Pope (President, Chairman of the Board), Norbert Link (Vice-President), Dave Harris (Treasurer), Rene Messier from Canada, and Brian Gale from the United Kingdom. Mrs. Margaret Adair, widow of late Evangelist Colin Adair, although not a Director, serves as Secretary of CEG. Messrs. Pope and Link are Pastor-rank ministers. Mr. Pope, as the senior minister in CEG, has served in the ministry of the Church of God for the longest period of time, and also serves as Chairman of the Boards of CEG’s affiliates in Canada (Church of God, a Christian Fellowship) and Great Britain (Global Church of God).

Headquarters of CEG is San Diego, California, where Messrs. Pope and Link, as well as Mrs. Adair, reside.

The Board of Directors of CEG, presently consisting of all of our ministers in the USA, Canada and Great Britain, also functions in effect as, what has traditionally been referred to as a Council of Elders (COE) for doctrinal and doctrinally related matters of our Church organizations and operations worldwide.

Some have asked whether we practice “one-man rule.” If it is meant by this that one man has the absolute and arbitrary authority to establish or change doctrines, or to direct and decide unilaterally how to preach the gospel to the world and how to feed the flock, then the answer is “No.” We understand that in the past, Mr. Armstrong would have had, in theory, such authority (although he never exercised it, but rather he counseled extensively with the other ministers, before rendering a decision). We must realize that Mr. Armstrong was an apostle. He was also the only human apostle during his lifetime.

Mr. Armstrong did say, however, that if God had chosen to call a second individual as an apostle, then the structure within WCG would have had to be, by necessity, quite different. He pointed out that in the New Testament, there were several apostles, with, for instance, Peter being the apostle to the circumcision and Paul being the apostle to the uncircumcision (Compare Galatians 2:7-9: “But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcision had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas [i.e., Peter], and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.”)

After Mr. Armstrong died, NO ONE in the different Church of God groups, including WCG, had been or has been established by God as an apostle. Therefore, there should not have been “one-man-rulership” after Mr. Armstrong’s death. Unfortunately, that mistake was made, however, in that Mr. Joseph W. Tkach was able to assume autocratic authority — and the result of this mistake was an unspeakable tragedy and disaster for the entire Church.

If we had “one-man-rule” today in an unqualified way, where the “ruler” could make arbitrary and capricious decisions, which cannot be supported from the Bible and which cannot be said to be in accordance with God’s Will, we would only repeat the mistakes made within WCG after Mr. Armstrong’s death. With that rationale, all of us should have stayed in WCG, even when the unbiblical changes were introduced and taught, because we would have had to follow “that” leader, “ordained” by God, and “appointed” by Mr. Armstrong before his death. Unfortunately, many did, and some even today follow that erroneous rationale and have chosen to stay in WCG, hoping against hope that WCG, through its human leader, will change its doctrines back to the truth once and for all delivered to the saints.

When it becomes obvious that a leader is no longer leading properly, based on Biblical standards, then the Word of God shows that no true Christian should follow that individual merely because he holds an “office.” Leadership in the Church of God is for service to God’s people based upon these Biblical standards. Our check and balance in the Church of God is that given by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11, verse 1: “Imitate me, JUST AS I also imitate Christ.”

We have the history of the Church of God up until the present time. Jesus also made reference to that history in Revelation 2 and 3. He certainly holds all of His people accountable to follow the correct teachings in order to please the Father and to do all to the glory of Him and to our Savior, Jesus Christ.

In the early New Testament Church, there was more than just one apostle. We note that none of the apostles had autocratic one-man-rule authority. Rather, when the early Church needed to decide a doctrinal issue, they had to convene a ministerial conference, as recorded in Acts 15. It appears that all of the apostles, as well as the elders from the Headquarters Church in Jerusalem, participated at that conference (Acts 15:2, 4, 6). We find that after much dispute, the apostle Peter spoke, followed by the apostles Paul and Barnabas, followed by the apostle James. James was, of course, the half-brother of Jesus Christ (who had grown up together with Christ) and he was also at that time the apostle for the Headquarters Church in Jerusalem. From the Biblical record, we find that it was James who rendered the final decision (Acts 15:19), but it was based on a consensus of the ministry, who had been guided and led by the Holy Spirit to find the answer to the issue at hand (Acts 15:22, 25, 28; 16:4). James did not pronounce an arbitrary and capricious decision, but his judgment was inspired by the Holy Spirit, as had become manifest to the ministry and to the members (Compare also the same principle in 2 Chronicles 30:12: “Also the hand of God was on Judah to give them singleness of heart to obey the command of the king and the leaders, at the word of the LORD.”).

It is also not true, as some claim, that God always works with only one man. God worked at least with Peter, Paul, James and John at the same time (compare again Galatians 2:9. Note, too, as to the function of James, besides Peter and Paul, Acts 12:17; 21:18; 1 Corinthians 15:3-11; Galatians 1:18-19; Galatians 2:11-14; Jude 1). God worked with Moses, but He reserved certain responsibilities for Aaron, over which Moses had no jurisdiction. God announced these responsibilities through Moses to Aaron, but once the announcement was made, the authority and duty for these responsibilities stayed with Aaron and his descendants.

God worked with David and other kings, but these kings did not have the authority to usurp powers specifically given to the priests. King Saul was severely punished when he offered sacrifices — a task reserved to Samuel (1 Samuel 13: 8-14). King Uzziah was severely punished, too, when he entered the temple to burn incense on the altar — a task reserved for the priests (2 Chronicles 26:16-21). King David was corrected by the prophet Nathan — God obviously worked at that time with both David and Nathan (2 Samuel 12:1-15).

We in the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God, the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom, and the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada, discuss things among ourselves, “submitting to one another in the fear of God” (compare Ephesians 5:21). We are convinced, and experience has shown, that if a person is not willing to submit to others “in the fear of God,” such a person will sooner or later cease to be a part of the organization. When we do not reach an agreement on a given point, we place the matter on hold, meditate and pray about it, and come together again for further discussion. When we decide an issue, we do it under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, expecting full consensus, as was the case in Acts 15.

In the unlikely event, however, that we could not all agree on a given point, even after extended discussion, prayer, and meditation, and that the President/Chairman of the Board felt that it had to be done in a certain way, and that the rest of the ministerial Board/Council members could not point out Biblical reasons why it must not be done in that way, then we would all submit to the direction of the President as the oldest and longest-standing minister in CEG. We don’t expect this to happen, however, and if we all earnestly seek, pray for, and submit to the lead of the Holy Spirit, we will all come to agreement that will allow the kind of unity God expects of us.