Raising the Ruins (10 page)

“Broad Is the Way”

Besides the serialization, several other examples from 1986 demonstrate Tkachism’s intention to generalize teachings that had traditionally been clear-cut, specific explanations of Scripture.

In addition to
Mystery of the Ages
,
Mr. Armstrong wrote a handful of booklets the last year of his life—one of which is titled
Are We In the Last Days?
After he died, editors renamed the booklet
The World Won’t End This Way!
Here is how they explained this change: “The old title was an excellent way to present the topic to an earlier generation. But the new generation of television viewers simply did not respond to this prophetic title as they do to other brochures and booklets on prophecy.”
³⁸
The old version was supposedly requested less, and Tkachism knew the exact reason why. The
title
was outdated.

In another booklet,
Ending Your Financial Worries,
Mr. Armstrong made the tragic error of saying that America is the “wealthiest nation on Earth.” W
CG
scholars gleefully noted that “smaller nations have a significantly larger per capita annual income than does the United States.”
³⁹
This may seem like a meaningless change, but again, those with a general understanding of Mr. Armstrong’s theology immediately realize the impact these little adjustments had on major doctrinal positions. Mr. Armstrong often referred to America as the single greatest nation on Earth—thanks, in large part, to its phenomenal wealth. That’s because the Bible actually
prophesied
of America’s assent to greatness in this end time. Mr. Armstrong explained these prophecies in his book
The United States and Britain in Prophecy
.
Knowing what eventually happened to that book, you can get an idea of where they were going with these 1986 edits.

In 1986, editors were also hard at work revising one of Mr. Armstrong’s biggest books—
The Incredible Human Potential
.
On page 5 of that book, commenting on Simon Magus and his deceptive work to pervert the true gospel during the first century, Mr. Armstrong wrote,

There ensued “the lost century” in the history of the true church of God. There was a well-organized conspiracy to blot out all record of church history during that period. A hundred years later, history reveals a “Christianity” utterly unlike the church Christ founded.
⁴⁰

Drawing upon research from scholars and church historians—like Edward Gibbon, who referred to a “dark cloud” that hung over the first age of the church—Mr. Armstrong coined the expression “lost century” to describe the sparse historical record of the early church. For
WCG
scholars in 1986, “the lost century” was “hardly appropriate.” After all, they reasoned, John’s writings were recorded during this time—and Polycarp followed in John’s footsteps. So how could that historical period be considered “lost”? So they rephrased it as “an obscure period in the history of the true church.” While they felt like that was more accurate, the change unmistakably de-emphasized Satan’s conspiracy to blot out a true record of church history.

In
What Do You Mean—“The Unpardonable Sin”?
Mr. Armstrong wrote,

In John 7:31, it is recorded: “And many of the people believed on Him .…” But were they really Christians?
Notice, beginning with John 8:30: “As He spake these words, many believed on Him. Then Jesus said to those Jews which believed on Him, If ye continue in my Word, then are ye my disciples indeed .…” But they did not actually believe Him! They believed on Him—that He was a great teacher, as a man—they believed on the person—like millions today. But they did not believe Him—did not believe what He said—His message—His gospel.
To these same people, who “believed on Him,” Jesus said, just a few verses farther on, “… but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.”
⁴¹

By removing all the italicized words in 1986, editors agreed that it would read more “smoothly.”
⁴²
It also removed a reference to “millions today” being deceived in the same manner as those in Christ’s day.

Years later, Tkachism would often ridicule Mr. Armstrong’s teaching about the whole world being deceived (Revelation 12:9). Thus, viewing these selective 1986 edits in hindsight, their intent to undermine Mr. Armstrong’s teaching is clear.

Other Changes in 1986

Tkachism changed the church’s teaching about the human spirit within months of Mr. Armstrong’s death.
⁴³
In explaining why they changed the wording in
The Incredible Human Potential
to reflect the new teaching, they said it read “smoother,” whereas Mr. Armstrong’s explanation had “puzzled a number of readers.”
⁴⁴
That Mr. Armstrong’s teachings could now be altered for no other reason than because they “puzzled” readers must have had liberals in Pasadena eager for the next round of changes.

They also changed the meaning of the Hebrew word for
God
in 1986. Anyone who ever heard Mr. Armstrong discuss who and what God is undoubtedly remembers him explaining the meaning of
Elohim,
as he did in
Mystery of the Ages
:

… a noun or name,
plural in form,
but normally
singular in grammatical usage
. It is the
same sort of word as family, church, group
—one family consisting of two or more members—one church composed of many members—one group of several persons.
⁴⁵

They first introduced their different understanding of the word
Elohim
when they reprinted two other writings of Mr. Armstrong’s—
The Incredible Human Potential
and the booklet
Why Were You Born?
They altered the definition this way: “… a noun, plural in form, but with either singular or plural usage.”
⁴⁶
They left out the fact that the Hebrew word is like the English words
family
,
church
,
team
or
group
. And instead of it being “singular in
grammatical
usage,” as Mr. Armstrong said in
Mystery of the Ages
,
it had an “either
singular
or plural usage.”

Years later, when the Worldwide Church of God adopted the trinity doctrine, it argued that
Elohim,
as it is used in Genesis 1:1, refers to a
SINGLE DEITY
.
⁴⁷
The
WCG
officially
accepted the trinity doctrine in 1993. But like with so many other doctrinal revisions, fingerprints appeared several years earlier. In this case, it was 1986, when they
CHANGED THE DEFINITION
of
Elohim
.

Christ’s Agenda?

On the day Mr. Armstrong died, Joseph Tkach promised to maintain the founder’s course and “not deviate from it one iota.” Yet he clearly started breaking promises that very day.

In 1995, after supporting and defending the Tkach administration for nearly a decade, David Hulme had finally had enough of the doctrinal transformation. He wrote this in his resignation letter to the elder Tkach:

The most disturbing aspect of our recent conversation on the eve of Passover, is that with some pride you stated that you had agreed with Richard Plache and Al Corozzo in the 1970s with regard to the place of the law in the Christian life. You said you agreed with them (and therefore disagreed with Herbert W. Armstrong) but felt that they were ahead of their time, and that nothing could be done. I remind you that Richard Plache was one of the prime movers in a 1975 attempt to overturn Sabbath observance in Britain. As a result he was put out of the church, along with Charles Hunting and David Ord, by Mr. Armstrong. If you agreed with these men as you claim, did you inform Mr. Armstrong of your radically different stance any time before his death?”
⁴⁸

In his response to Hulme, Tkach Sr. did not deny that these conversations took place. He just said that Hulme had misrepresented his comments. But notice what else Tkach wrote:

I was trying to point out to you that challenges about the validity of certain doctrines, challenges that were raised by leading ministers of the church in the 1970s, caused me to realize that there were indeed doctrinal questions that had never been adequately answered.
⁴⁹

Notice! From Tkach’s own pen (or whoever wrote the letter for him) we discover that these were questions raised
in the 1970s
. They were raised by “leading ministers” at the time (many of whom were disfellowshiped by Mr. Armstrong, he failed to mention). And they were questions, at least in Tkach’s mind, that had never been adequately answered. This “nagging realization,” Tkach admitted, “troubled me.” And so what did he do? “My response at the time,” he explained, referring to the 1970s, “was to simply put the subject
‘on the shelf’
and give it little thought until years later, when I found myself, as pastor general, responsible for the spiritual instruction of the church and challenged on many of the same points.”
⁵⁰

Can you believe that? He readily admitted to setting controversial subjects on the shelf “
UNTIL YEARS LATER
”—
when Mr. Armstrong was no longer in control!
But the idea that he or anyone ever had an agenda? “Preposterous,” he says. “It was
Christ’s
agenda.” That’s all it was—
an innocent coming-of-age story about Jesus Christ leading a wayward church out of darkness and into the glorious light.
They
NEVER
had
any
of this in mind.
None
of them did.

Isn’t that amazing?

“[T]hese things that [Mr. Armstrong] had written in that book [
Mystery of the Ages
] were never central—we never used the term ‘central’ to our teaching. They were just his interpretations of Scripture .…”

— Joseph Tkach Jr.

Deposition, September 8, 1998

During my father’s firing on December 7, 1989, the subject of
Mystery of the Ages
came up. My father strenuously defended its content, arguing that it should not have been discontinued. Joseph Tkach Jr. told him it would be impossible to distribute it, as the book was “riddled with error.” That statement shocked my father. The church membership had been told the book was discontinued because it was expensive and its content could be found in other literature. But on that winter night inside Tkach Jr.’s office, the real reason emerged.

Nine years later, during a deposition, when asked if he had used the phrase “riddled with error” during the firing, Tkach said, “I believe those were my exact words.”
¹
According to Tkach,
Gerald Flurry
felt that
“
Mystery of the Ages
should be promoted more than it was being promoted, and I told him that it had too many errors … to promote it the way he thought it should be .…”
²

We have already examined a number of changes that took place in 1986. Tkachism continued dismantling doctrines throughout 1987 and the first half of 1988—when they removed
Mystery of the Ages
from circulation. Based on what Tkach Jr. told my father in 1989, the changes were so numerous and far-reaching that
Mystery of the Ages
could not be used in any form. It was, as he said, “riddled” with error.

Names and Dates

As noted in chapter 6, Tkach’s fellows wasted little time altering the teachings in
The United States and Britain in Prophecy
.
Besides removing all references to ancient Assyria being Germany today, editors also had trouble with the way Mr. Armstrong delineated between Israelites and Jews.

As Mr. Armstrong taught, “It is wrong to call the Jews of today ‘Israel.’ They are not the nation Israel—they are Judah! And wherever Israel is today, remember that Israel as a national name does not mean Jew!”
³
Editors removed these kinds of statements from the 1986 version, presumably to avoid offending Jews. Yet Mr. Armstrong was not trying to offend anyone. He was simply making this key distinction in support of the book’s central point:

Jews are Israelites, just as Californians are Americans. But most Israelites are not Jews, just as most Americans are not Californians. The Jews are the house of Judah only, a part of the Israelites.
But when these people are spoken of as nations, rather than as collective individuals, the term “Israel” never refers to the Jews.
“House of Israel” never means “Jews.” The three tribes at Jerusalem under the Davidic king are called, merely, the house of Judah.
⁴

The italicized sentence, the most critical point in the paragraph, is what editors removed from the 1986 version.

Earlier in the book, when Mr. Armstrong expounded on Genesis 48—where Jacob passed on the birthright blessings to Ephraim and Manasseh—he explained that, in verse 16, it was these two lads who were named Israel, not the descendants of Judah. Later, Mr. Armstrong asked, “Who, then, according to your Bible, is the real Israel (racially and nationally) of today?”
⁵
Ephraim and Manasseh of course! But these sorts of statements needed to be removed because, according to
WCG
scholars, they had been a “source of criticism.”
⁶
A source of criticism
? This is the central point of the entire book!
⁷

They also had a problem with captivity dates for Judah (604 to 585 b.c., according to Mr. Armstrong) and Israel (721 to 718 b.c.). In the latter case, editors chose 721 alone as the date for Israel’s captivity. As for Judah’s, they decided to leave the attacks on Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar as “generally …
UNDATED
” in the 1986 version of the book.
⁸

The significance of these changes has much more to do with prophecy than it does with assigning dates to ancient events.
⁹

Of course, Tkach Jr. says they had no idea where changes such as these were leading. But the truth is that these massive edits, starting in 1986, damningly reveal the mindset of the same people who completely rejected the book a short two years later.

One Small Booklet, One Giant Revision

About six months after they made the changes covered above,
WCG
editors
SLASHED MORE THAN TWO THIRDS
of the text from the 1986 version of
The United States and Britain in Prophecy
—reducing the 184-page book to a meager 53 pages.

Absent from the 1987 version are the Introduction, the first two chapters and the last fourth of the book. The last four chapters of the book, in fact, are summarized in five pages in the 1987 version. Editors essentially pulled out what prophetic teeth had been left in the 1986 version. And the tiny bit they left in was highly sanitized—making it much less personal for the modern descendants of Israel (“we” and “us” were changed to “they” and “them”).

When the Tkaches announced that the book had been downsized, they explained that the larger edition had “become prohibitively costly to mail in vast areas of the English-speaking world”.
¹⁰
So they made the small version
only
for areas with high postage costs. But—get ready for this—once they finished it, they discovered it was “Mr. Armstrong’s style at its best”! It was “so effectively written and to the point” that Mr. Tkach decided to make the small version available for
EVERYONE
—
conveniently making the book version dispensable
. That’s how they explained it to the membership in 1987—that the booklet version was better and that it would save the work postage costs. N
OTHING
was mentioned about the doctrinal transformation the text had undergone since Mr. Armstrong died.

The following year, in mid-1988, even the 53-pager failed to survive the editor’s knife. After a tumultuous two years in print after the death of Mr. Armstrong, editors finally laid to rest
The United States and Britain in Prophecy
permanently, even though members would not find out the real reason for its removal until years later.

Tkach Jr.’s biggest beef with the book is how Mr. Armstrong’s teaching supposedly “worked to foster racial prejudice.”
¹¹
In
Transformed by Truth,
he wrote, “Within two years of Mr. Armstrong’s death, several church leaders began discussing Anglo-Israelism
¹²
with my dad.”
¹³

He says
within two years
. In fact, by the time two years had passed, two thirds of the material had already been
CHOPPED OUT
—and the entire book was buried a few months later. Significant changes to the text, as we have seen, were made
immediately
after Mr. Armstrong died. It was as if the destruction of this truth had been planned all along and that the only obstacle preventing it from happening was Mr. Armstrong being alive.

Indeed, the blueprint for the book’s demise had been drawn up a decade earlier. Writing about
The United States and Britain in Prophecy
during the liberal era of the 1970s, Mr. Armstrong told the church, “[M]y son, assuming an authority never delegated to him, had this most important booklet
cut down to almost nothing,
then
PUT OUT OF CIRCULATION ENTIRELY
!”
¹⁴

Isn’t that incredible?
It happened the
EXACT
same way after Mr. Armstrong died. Yet the Tkaches claimed they had no idea where the massive 1986 edits were leading.

Jesus Christ’s Sacrifice

Many commentators analyzing the
WCG
’s transformation out of “Armstrongism” point to March 1987 as the watershed event that began the process of re-evaluating everything. We have already seen how the changes were actually in full swing long before this. That said, however, the early-1987 change regarding Jesus Christ’s sacrifice and divine healing was huge.

Mr. Tkach Sr. first introduced the subject in the March 18, 1987,
Pastor General’s Report,
sent to the ministers of the church. He explained the change one week later to the entire membership.
¹⁵
Tkachism has led people to assume, incorrectly, that the “healing change” meant that it was no longer a sin for
WCG
members to go to doctors. But Mr. Armstrong
NEVER
said it was a sin to go to doctors.

In his booklet
The Plain Truth About Healing,
Mr. Armstrong actually said we
need
doctors for a variety of things. He wrote,

The great advances in the medical field enable man to do for his human family many things he could not do 50 years ago, short of actual healing. God does for us (often by miracle) that which we are unable to do. God gave man talents, mind-power (physical) and
abilities that He intended us to use and develop
under His guidance, and always for His glory and toward our development in the holy, righteous character of God.
¹⁶

Earlier in the text, he said “[I]t is true that today most doctors prescribe medicines that are
NOT
poisons but rather are designed to help nature do its own healing.” He asked, “Do we ever need doctors?”

Answer: “Yes we do—but the true people of God do not need them to
compete
with God as our God-healer .…”
¹⁷
Mr. Armstrong’s teaching on this subject was similar to any other church doctrine: P
UT
G
OD FIRST
. And even then, if someone lacked faith in God, he actually
encouraged them
all the more to put their trust in doctors!

If a church member simply lacks the faith to be healed by the living Christ—if he has more faith in medical “expertise” than in God and God’s promises—God’s church will not judge or condemn him if he puts himself or his child under medical treatment. If that is the best he has faith in, better let him have what help man can give, rather than no help at all!
¹⁸

With Tkachism, on the other hand, church members
did
often judge each other—and usually the ones judged most harshly were those who chose
not
to rely on doctors for “healing”! In some cases, ministers even refused to anoint members, despite God’s clear command in James 5:14, because the members did not first go to a doctor.

Setting aside Tkachism’s misinterpretation of what Mr. Armstrong actually taught on the subject of healing, there were in fact definite changes made in the church’s doctrine in March of 1987. The most significant of these had to do with Jesus Christ’s sacrifice.

Mr. Armstrong taught that the way we are freed from the penalty of sin (eternal death) is by Jesus Christ’s shed blood. Christ died in our stead. Divine healing is based on the same principle. Prior to His crucifixion, Jesus was beaten and scourged. Numerous scriptures explain the reason for this terrible scourging: It was so we might be healed.
¹⁹

Nothing underscores the differentiation between the scourging and the crucifixion like the Christian Passover. At this ceremony, as New Testament scriptures explain, Christians are first commanded to eat broken bread, which symbolizes Christ’s beaten and broken body. Then we are to drink a tiny glass of wine, which represents Christ’s shed blood.
²⁰

Along these same lines, Mr. Armstrong taught that since God’s law is spiritual,
²¹
transgressing against that law constitutes
spiritual
sin—the penalty for which is eternal death. In like manner, man’s physical body functions according to definite
physical
laws. Transgressing against these laws also exacts a penalty—in this case, sickness and disease. In other words, sickness and disease come as a result of
physical
sin.

Jesus Christ died so that the penalty for spiritual sin, eternal death, might be paid and that we might receive the gift of eternal life.
²²
He was beaten before He died so that the penalty for physical sin—sickness and disease—might be paid in full so we can be healed. Jesus Himself explained in Luke 5:17-26 that healing is the forgiveness of physical sin.

With Tkachism, there is no such thing as physical sin. There may be a cause for physical sickness, but it is not physical sin. Therefore, Jesus was not beaten for our healing. His broken body has “far more significance,” Tkach said.
²³
The sacrifice of Jesus should not be separated according to the broken body and the shed blood, he said. Both blend together as one supreme sacrifice. Furthermore, while Mr. Armstrong believed it is always God’s will to heal (although it is up to God to determine
when
), Mr. Tkach said healing was not a promise from God, but rather a
blessing
—and that it was not always God’s will to grant that blessing.

You can find this kind of reasoning in the Systematic Theology Project, produced by
WCG
liberals during the 1970s. In attempting to water down God’s emphatic promise in James 5:14-15, the stp said, “Although this one statement appears to be written without qualification, the condition ‘if it be God’s will’ was no doubt tacitly understood.”
²⁴
Of course, you cannot find a statement like that—“if it be God’s will”—anywhere in the Bible regarding God’s promise of healing. But liberals in the 1970s believed that condition was tacitly understood. Mr. Tkach agreed and changed the church teaching in 1987, after Mr. Armstrong died.