@ 2021-12-28: WAS HERBERT W. ARMSTRONG "THE ELIJAH TO COME"?

 

How many of you have heard of Herbert W. Armstrong (1892-1986—see also this Web site and this page on Wikipedia)? What should we think of him, some thirty-five years after his death?

Without question, Mr. Armstrong was by far the most influential preacher that has ever arisen in the Sabbath-keeping Churches of God. Indeed, he was one of the most influential “Christian” preachers of any kind. He founded the Radio Church of God, which later became the Worldwide Church of God. His radio program, The World Tomorrow, once bought more radio time than any other program on earth. His television program of the same name likewise had international audiences. The Church’s magazines, The Plain Truth and Tomorrow's World (not to be confused with the magazine of the same name published by the Living Church of God), had large circulations for magazines of their type. Other publications—and there were many—came into the hands of Church members, contributors (“Co-Workers”), and the public alike.[1]

Let us not forget the three campuses of Ambassador College (Pasadena, CA; Big Sandy, TX; and Bricket Wood, UK); the personal evangelism of Mr. Armstrong, his son Garner Ted Armstrong, and others; and above all Mr. Armstrong’s unique outreach to (and sometimes through) world leaders in many countries. Many more activities could be cited.

Yet today, few have heard of Herbert W. Armstrong. Those who have, often have through negative (and false) propaganda about him and his teachings. Many of the so-called “Church of God groups” that arose out of Worldwide’s headlong slide into American Protestantism speak, write, and act as if Mr. Armstrong never existed!

What a tragedy! It is as if the curse that has befallen so many people—as Mr. Armstrong described it in his booklet The Seven Laws of Success—has befallen him. In his day, as a minister, he became unbelievably successful—just this side of a “household name”. But, like the author Elbert Hubbard of Mr. Armstrong’s time, most people have forgotten Mr. Armstrong now. And yet, Mr. Hubbard is still quoted even in such places as the syndicated television show Criminal Minds. Mr. Armstrong? At least in North America, who dares to cite him as a source of “pithy quotes”, despite his unique writing style and clarity of thought? 

Herbert W. Armstrong—In Sum 

The last thing Mr. Armstrong wanted to become was a minister. He had been trained in advertising, and in a writing style that captured the reader’s attention. His training in public speaking likewise enabled him to capture and to teach an audience. He had no deep interest in religion, however. Challenged on “the Sabbath versus Sunday” on the one hand and “creation versus evolution” on the other, he came to believe—largely against his will—that the Bible is “the inspired Word of God”.

In time, the Oregon Conference of the Church of God ordained him as an “apostle of the primitive faith”. His ability to uncover biblical truth, despite his lack of formal theological training, and his eventual unique outreach to the world, proved that the ordination indeed was apt!

Mr. Armstrong was the best self-taught logician I have ever known. As he said himself, he always had craved understanding. I met him twice face-to-face (the second time for an extended period of fellowship, with 19 of my fellow AC Pasadena seniors), and watched him live and on broadcast for countless hundreds of hours. I read everything he and his senior ministers read that I could. However, I also came to learn in time much of what he did and did not understand about the Bible, in a way that I cannot say is true for many other people he taught.[2]

But let me give my human teacher credit where it truly is due. Mr. Armstrong and I perceived the world in opposite ways—he in a concrete way, I in an intuitive way—but we made decisions in the same ways. I learned much from his brand of logic and sought to imitate it in my own Bible study. Face-to-face, it was rather like “the irresistible force meeting the immovable object”, yet we could reach each other’s minds and hearts in mutual respect.[3] I owe everything I have fundamentally, as a Bible student, to Mr. Armstrong, the Worldwide Church of God, and Worldwide’s legitimate heirs. Does this make me “special”? No—but I hope it proves before God that spiritually, I was a “quick study”, even if “at a distance”! 

“A Voice Cries Out!” 

How tragic—again—that as I have said in an earlier essay, too many of Mr. Armstrong’s students became “Armstrongites” rather than true Christians. As he put it all too aptly: “Brethren, I don’t think half of you get it! I don’t think a tenth of you get it!” He might well say today that not a hundredth of us really “get it”—that is, what true conversion is, and all that goes with it—and I believe he would be right! Far too many of us are still “Armstrongites”, believing what he said simply because he said it (cf. John 7:18a, ESV)—which is exactly the opposite of what he normally taught (“Don’t believe me—believe the Bible!”).[4]

Part of this fallacy rested—and still rests—in what Mr. Armstrong (and others under him) came to think about how God was using him to reach the world. To them, “the Work” looked very much like what John the Baptist—the (first) “Elijah to come”—did, and what the (second) “Elijah to come” would do right before Jesus Christ’s return.[5]

Mr. Armstrong’s then-famous international personal campaign, “A Voice Cries Out!”, deliberately was in the mold of Isaiah 40:3ff. Like a lone prophet crying out in the figurative wilderness of religious confusion (which Mr. Armstrong aptly—and rightly—compared to “Babylon”), he sought to give a basic, easy-to-understand, yet powerful message about the coming Kingdom of God.[6]

But of course, Mr. Armstrong’s unintended (or intended?) self-advertisement as “the Elijah to come” rested on far more than his personal campaigns. It rested on his proven ability to discover fundamental biblical truths, many of which he claimed had been lost even to the Church of God for 1900 years. In effect, Mr. Armstrong claimed (either directly or indirectly) to be “restoring all things” pertaining to the Church, just as Jesus said “the Elijah to come” would do.

How true was that claim? 

Herbert W. Armstrong’s “18 Truths” 

First, few indeed seem to remember a sermon that Mr. Armstrong gave very late in his life, in which he flatly denied that he was “the Elijah to come”.[7] By then he could see that he would not live to see Jesus Christ’s return—as one would expect, were he “the Elijah to come”. Rather, as he wrote in his very last letter to the brethren, “The greatest Work still lies ahead!”[8] Certainly, this implies that someone even greater than Herbert W. Armstrong would arise to do it! But let’s face it—Mr. Armstrong was “a very tough act to follow”, especially if he were “Elijah”.

We cannot afford simply to beg that question, however. It is possible that Revelation 10 refers to Mr. Armstrong’s ministry (especially thanks to the coincidence between the “seven thunders” and the seven biblical truths expounded in his Mystery of the Ages), and Revelation 11:1-13 refers to the ministry of the Two Witnesses. Surely their witness will be greater than Mr. Armstrong’s—and quite possibly, one could be parallel to Moses and one to Elijah (given their predicted miracles).

But let us look at the facts of true-Church history. In hindsight, after his death, the WCG under Joseph Tkach Sr. gathered a list of “18 truths” that Mr. Armstrong “restored” to the Church of God. I do not use quotes to cast doubt on what Mr. Armstrong did, or on what he was. But not everyone has read what I have read, concerning the history of the Sabbath-keeping Churches of God. Nor has everyone done what I (a member) and other ministers and members (living and dead) have sought to do in clarifying these “truths”.

Again, I do not mean to cast doubt on what Mr. Armstrong gave us before it is cross-examined. But cross-examination is exactly what he would wish us to do.[9]

Now of course, Grace Communion International—what Worldwide became after it abandoned sound biblical doctrine—critiques Mr. Armstrong’s “18 truths”. It is amazing how far that critique misses the mark—or is it?—but let us list the “18 truths” as they are given on that page (and hope that neither these “hostile witnesses” nor I misstate them): 

·       The government of God;

·       The Gospel of the Kingdom of God;

·   “God is reproducing Himself” (through humanity—this involves what it means to be “born again”);

·       Who and what is God (God is a Family, not a closed Trinity);

·       What is man (this refutes the “immortal soul” doctrine);

·       The truth about the “spirit in man”;

·       The Church is only the “firstfruits”;

·     The Church is not yet the Kingdom of God (as a corollary, the WCG is the one and only true Church);

·       Only those whom God the Father calls and draws to Him can be converted now (i.e., “now is not the only day of salvation”);

·       The truth about the Great White Throne Judgment;

·       The truth about the Millennium;

·       The Holy Spirit coming into our minds only “begets” us;

·       We are only “begotten” now, not “born again”;

·       The identity of modern Israel (that is, the Ten Tribes in particular);

·  Prophecy can be understood only if you know that we (broadly, the descendants of the Northwest Europeans, and specifically the British and Americans) are Israelites;

·       The Festivals and Holy Days;

·       The authority of the sacred calendar as preserved by the Jews;

·       Second and third tithe.

Much could be said about all of these “truths”. And essentially, they all are biblical truths. But did Mr. Armstrong uniquely “restore” these to God’s Church? Or have at least some of them appeared in true-Church history again and again?

How many “Church of God people” today know that “the identity of Israel” was known, discussed, and even accepted and promoted by several prominent ministers and members in the “Sardian era”, during the mid-to-late 1800’s? Certainly, the Seventh Day Adventists wanted nothing to do with that doctrine, but some who raised up what became the Church of God 7^th Day found it most convincing! This was roughly half a century before someone introduced the same doctrine to Mr. Armstrong, thanks to the book Judah’s Scepter and Joseph’s Birthright.

What about “Church government”—that is, direction “from the top down” in a hierarchy? Again, while the COG7D became essentially congregational in time, not everyone during the “Sardian era” “bought into” that form of organization. Some at least believed in “Bible order, discipline, and government in the Church of God”, as opposed to the extremes of “popery” on the one hand and “anarchy” on the other. Besides, we can point to strong leaders in earlier “Church eras” who were no less committed to “government from the top down” than Mr. Armstrong became.

What about the Festivals and Holy Days? Again, in the 1800’s some few kept them—not just Passover. A major schism arose in the COG7D because one minister insisted that they should be kept—again, long before Mr. Armstrong and his wife came independently to the same understanding. Besides, we must not forget “Hebrew Christianity” (now “Messianic Judaism”), which long has kept the Sabbath, Festivals, and Holy Days (if not quite in the same fashion, or with the same understanding of their meaning).

We could go back as far as the first “truly Catholic scholar”, Justin Martyr, and show that even then, people did understand about the Millennium—and that the idea that Christians went to heaven immediately upon death was false. It took time and effort for what became the Roman Catholic Church to suppress that truth. But when the Adventist and related movements arose, the “Sardian era” of the Church of God worked very hard to sift truth from error on the subject. They gained a basic understanding of the Kingdom of God and of the Millennium.

Most of what Mr. Armstrong taught on the above “truths” simply needs to be clarified, not refuted. One example is the exact teaching on who and what Elohim is. Another is Mr. Armstrong’s statement that spiritually, Christians “are begotten but not yet born”. This conflates the role of God the Father (begetting) with the role of the Church as our Mother (bearing)—both of which presently are ongoing processes! The late John H. Ogwyn gave an excellent discussion of what the Greek language says on the subject—yet no one seems to have listened to him!

There is a reason why Jesus Christ says what He means and means what He says to prophetic Sardis after it “lets down”, right about the time Mr. Armstrong encountered it: 

Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you (Revelation 3:3, ESV). 

Sardis indeed had received and even restored a great deal of basic biblical truth, long before Mr. Armstrong came along—but in the days of the Seventh Day Adventist movement, and later during Mr. Armstrong’s early ministry, many of its ministers and members had lost it or were about to lose it! For example, if one does not know who the “Lost Ten Tribes” are in the modern world, one loses a vital key to understanding what the Adventists wanted to know above all: when Jesus Christ is about to return!

But there are also reasons why Jesus Christ says what He does—no more and no less—to the “Philadelphian era”. As I discussed in an earlier essay, this points to that era’s obedience to the truth and the fraternal affection that causes. Mr. Armstrong made that possible for us, as God’s human servant. One can quibble about who restored what to whom in what stage of true-Church history, but the fact is, the Worldwide Church of God had more biblical truth—old and new, as it were—than any era since Ephesus itself. That is the essential thing. Truly, Mr. Armstrong was the apostle of the Work of Philadelphia.

But did that make him also “the Elijah to come”? Did he in fact “restore all things?” 

Truths Herbert W. Armstrong Did Not Restore 

What I am about to discuss are fundamental truths that have been missing for 1900 years—truths that Mr. Armstrong did not bring to the attention of the Church of God, but others did. In some cases—let us be fair—he effected a partial “restoration”. In at least one case—the first I will discuss here—he had no role at all.

We cannot argue, as Mr. Armstrong did in The Bible Hymnal, that while it is scriptural to sing hymns (especially as based on the Psalms), God did not reveal or preserve the original music. Traditionally, the Talmudists and Masoretes knew full well that this assessment is wrong.[10] What they have not understood for 1900 years (A.D. 70-1970) is what the written music, found in every verse of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, originally meant!

Quite literally, one-third of the intended message of Hebrew Scripture has gone missing! Had it not been missing, no one would be arguing now (for example) that Genesis 1:2a means anything other than “but the earth had become chaotic and disordered (because figuratively, it was wiped clean like a dish and then turned upside down)…” That distinction—plus the solution to countless other problems of exegesis, large and small—is found in the melodic decipherment of the Masoretic accents by the late Suzanne Haik-Vantoura (1912-2000).

In addition, the three vocal accents found in the Greek New Testament became obsolete before our oldest manuscripts containing them appeared. They nevertheless have a melodic and exegetical meaning—showing that, indeed, the punctuation we use in several “crux texts” is correct. (We owe to the late Curt Sachs the basic understanding of their melodic meaning: simple and rather strange by modern standards, to be sure.)

So here as everywhere else, “the Word of God is the foundation of knowledge”. Did Mr. Armstrong restore these melodic traditions to us? No—probably he did not know of their existence (although his brother Dwight may have, by the end of his life). He had good musical taste, but nothing says that even Western classical music is “the standard” by which all other music in all places and times should be measured.

Should we then start singing in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek? No—not unless these become our vernaculars, or unless we provide simultaneous translations as the Jews traditionally have done. Can these melodies be adapted to modern languages? No, they cannot. But without them, we would have no idea what the most fundamental forms of “good music” are. It would all be a matter of personal and cultural opinion.

What about “God’s government”? Very late in life, Mr. Armstrong finally realized (and said) that “God’s government” is not primarily about direction from the top down—it is primarily about love of God and neighbor. But he did not see that the Ark of the Covenant gives the perfect model of “the seven principles of God’s government”. Yes, we know what they are (justice, mercy, faith, cooperation, support, direction, and love)—but no one I know of before me has put all of them together in a simple, easy-to-understand, complete way. I like to think that if Mr. Armstrong and I discussed what I found under what I believe was under God’s guidance, he would see my point and embrace and preach it wholeheartedly.

What about the human mind? Certainly, Mr. Armstrong gave us the fundamentals here, concerning the “spirit in man” and the human brain. But he gave us only the vaguest of information about how the Bible describes human psychology.[11] For one thing, he believed that man gets information only through the five senses. He was wrong—which was not his fault, because he had not been trained in how to examine and identify his biases on the subject. But again—had he seen what God has led me (and others before me) to understand about how Jesus Christ describes the relationship between character and personality, at the beginning of His Sermon on the Mount, I believe Mr. Armstrong would have understood and embraced the biblical and related scientific concepts wholeheartedly.

What about the names Elohim—and indeed, Y^ehawweh? The restoration of the latter after 1900 years began with a “clue” I got from a late rabbi who believed what the Hebrew Masoretic Text says and implies. But again—surely Mr. Armstrong could have grasped this restoration, and certain corrections about what Elohim implies and does not imply, joyfully as he always did when he embraced new, demonstrable truth?

Yes, Elohim is now a Family which we can join—but it is not a “family name” in Hebrew the way “Smith” is in English, as Mr. Armstrong thought. For one thing, we cannot argue that Elohim is a Family simply because Elohim is plural in form (or, as in Genesis 1:26, uniplural in agreement). Rather, Elohim is One Being, More Than One Person, which is now also One Family (thanks to John 1:14, but also thanks to Genesis 1:26 in type).

As another essay I have written illustrates, Y^ehawweh is the Eternal Creator God. This name too (in some few verses) is uniplural in agreement. But normally, Y^ehawweh (which is singular in form) and Elohim (which is plural in form) is singular in agreement. Both words refer to One Being, or else to One Person within that Being. Elohim is not like the family name “Smith”, and it is not like “church, family, or team”. All those English words are singular in form and singular in agreement.

So, what major biblical truths did Mr. Armstrong not restore—or at best, restored only partially? The biblical foundations of sound music, of sound psychology, of who and what God is, of who and what man is (meaning his psychology as such), and (ironically) of sound government. There may be others that do not come immediately to mind. 

“What Else Could Herbert W. Armstrong Have Done?” 

A pastor I deeply respect, and who believes that Mr. Armstrong was “the Elijah to come”, recently said in a sermon: “What else could Herbert W. Armstrong have done (that is, to fulfill that prophetic role)?” My immediate reaction was, “He could have succeeded!” It is just that simple.

Readers, I was there when Mr. Armstrong founded Youth Opportunities United, and participated in it. I heard many stories about Imperial School, its graduates, its successes, and its problems. I was there when Mr. Armstrong closed Ambassador College Pasadena and reopened it with just sixty students (of which I was one, for God alone knows what reason). I was there when he dramatically “restored” Worldwide’s doctrinal and administrative bases in Christ’s name. But more importantly, I was there when “it all went south” thanks to an internal and external conspiracy which destroyed the Worldwide Church of God (with its colleges) and replaced it with Grace Communion International.

“The Elijah to come” has a very specific prophetic role: 

(Mal 4:5 ESV) “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes.

(Mal 4:6 ESV) And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction.” 

Seriously—could the pitiful band of survivors of Worldwide, by far most of whom are split into countless factions and heresies, be those who fulfill verse 6, or Luke 1:16-17? Never has the “generation gap” between parents and children been greater than now—and it will only get worse with time! We cannot pretend that this does not affect us in God’s Church.

No, I think it is far more likely that one of the Two Witnesses will be “Elijah” and the other will be more like “Moses”. In my judgment, Herbert W. Armstrong did fulfill what the prophecy concerning the “Philadelphian era” implies. But that did not make him “the Elijah to come”. ###

---

[1] He considered his magnum opus, Mystery of the Ages, “perhaps the most important book since the Bible.”

[2] Thanks to that knowledge (among other, specialized forms of study), I worked for some twenty years for the Personal Correspondence and Editorial Departments of the Living Church of God. I sought to help the LCG grow beyond what Mr. Armstrong had given it—helping the Church grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

[3] In hindsight, I believe he had ESFP cognitive preferences, as I have ENFP cognitive preferences. Both of us were more “theoretical” in temperament than many of our cognitive fellows are.

[4] Yes, as I have written, far too often Mr. Armstrong did argue from his “apostolic authority”—but that was in the face of what he saw as the stubbornness of too many of the ministers and brethren! Ironically, the issues on which he was the most authoritarian often were the very issues on which he was the most “sincere, yet sincerely wrong”! “Makeup”, “divorce and remarriage”, and the dating of Pentecost were only three such issues.

[5] Cf. Malachi 4:5-6; Isaiah 40:3-11; Matthew 11:13-14; 17:10-13; Mark 9:11-13; Luke 1:13-17; 1:76-79; John 1:19-28.

[6] In many cases, when dealing with world political and religious leaders, the most Mr. Armstrong could say (without hopelessly biasing his audience) was this: “There are only two ways of life: give and get.” Many people today would have difficulty accepting even that! That’s how far this world has degenerated in its understanding of the human condition!

[7] I was sent a sound file of that “denial in passing”. It is too bad indeed that Mr. Armstrong did not explain himself further.

[8] This is a paraphrase. I do not have a copy at present of that letter.

[9] I could tell many a story about how my fellow students—and my teachers—at AC Pasadena reacted to my honest efforts to do exactly that in class. So could many who have read my writings since 1982. I was neither arrogant nor brave in those days—just as I hope I am neither here. I simply am doing what Mr. Armstrong taught us all to do!

[10] So have many Christian and other scholars and musicians since the Renaissance—including Thomas Ravenscroft, editor of The Whole Booke of Psalmes (English metrical Psalter, several editions).

[11] It is much more than “the human brain thinking”, “the human spirit granting intellectual power”, and “the human spirit being a template enabling God to resurrect someone”—even though all these things are true as far as they go.