When I talked to Danny Layne he told me that the doctrine that the Restoration is Prophetic (prophesied of in OT, NT, and found in the book of revelation) is a cardinal doctrine because when you accept that you will have no problem accepting all the other teaches. And because I don't or won't accept that teaching that was why I was put out and why he feels I am not saved.

I can't accept DS Warner’s teaching that Revelation teaches the date in type that his moved started. This Movement Dating has the Warner’s restored church (Evening light movement) starting in 1880 with 350 years (gotten from 3 days and a half of Rev 11:11 -- a day for a century) of Protestantism which starting at 1530 and 1260 years (1260 days of Rev 11:13 -- a day for a year) of Roman Catholic which started in 270 and with the claim that the church fell or when into the wilderness in 270.

Below is a diagram from the book Bible Readings by H.M. Riggle one of the leading teachers in Warner’s movement. This diagram shows the dates 270, 1530 and 1800 that I referred to above.

Trace of the Church from Bible Readings HM Riggle Page 105







3 Reasons Why I Can't Accept This Teaching

#1) You can't use a day for a year in one part of revelation and then in another a day for a century and then in yet another place use a hour of 100 years (1/2 hour of silence of Rev 8:1 -- a hour for a century). In Num 14:34 it notes that forty days means forty years (Num 14:34 After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.) Also in Daniels 70 weeks found in Dan 9:24 most prophet teachers make this 70 weeks to be 490 days which is 490 years.

Both the premillennial teachers that use the gap theory where the last week is the 7 years of tribulation and the amillennial teachers that use the time of Jesus theory where the last week is the ministry of Jesus use the day for a year to interpret the days.

Here is the Wikipedia entry on the Dispensationalist interpretation and the Time of Jesus interpretation and directly below you will find two charts showsing the two common interpretations of the 70 weeks of Daniel.

70 Week Tribulation Chart showing one day for a year.






70th Week Time of Jesus Chart showing one day for a year.






#2) Nothing happened significant on the dates of 270 and 1530 and those dates are gotten by back dating from the start of Warner’s movement.

#3) And perhaps the main reason for me is that Warner’s movement was not the restored church was that he allowed divorced and remarried people to stay together which in my understanding of the Bible is adultery and makes his movement an "adultery group".

If the Lord was restoring his church to its glory of the New Testament time surely the Lord would not pass over the sin of adultery and would let Warner know that if people are in adultery they must forsake that relationship. The idea that God was completely restoring his church but was unable to get Warner to see and teach Biblically on this important point should clearly proof to any rational thinking Christ that Warner’s movement is not what it claimed to me.

Warner started his movement in 1880 and died in 1895 and in those 15 years he didn't change his teaching nor has Warner’s movement every changed it. Today what is called the Anderson Church of God no only allows those who are in a divorced and remarried relationship with another living spouse to remain in that marriage but it marries people into those kinds of marriages.

Danny Layne has build the Restoration movement on top of Warner’s movement (an adultery group) and finds in the Revelation where Warner’s movement apostatized in 1930 and 50 years later (1/2 hour of silence of Rev 8:1 - one hour for a century) in 1980 at the start of his ministry it was restored and hence the Layne movement is called the Restoration. While Layne changed the Warner's allowance of divorced and remarried couples to stay together, and numerous other teachings, the fact remains he has build on top of Warner’s movement which was an adultery group.

One of the main issues I have with this teaching is it sets up the people who have espoused this movement to believe what ever the ministry teach. That means any thing the ministry decides to start teaching the members must accept or be cast out and doomed to go to hell. Not only do I consider this teaching unbiblical and untenable but I consider it a dangerous especially where the members are all ready being taught not to question for them selves what the ministry teach but to unquestioning accept all that they are taught.

So heads up to all that are thinking about joining the Restoration. Over time you will have to accept this teaching or you will be put out and unsaved and if you bring your family they may not leave with you. If they stay they must accept Layne’s pronouncement that you are not saved. So now you will have your wife telling your dear little children "Daddy is not saved and is on his way to hell".

If you do accept this teaching then you will have to accept the teaching that as Layne’s movement is prophetic they will have no false teaching which means you will have to accept every thing they teach as the truth.

Any way there you have it, the Restoration is Prophetic teaching and the reason why I can't accept it and hence according to Layne will burn in hell for ever unless I recant and get saved.

Brent D
>>>Well, Qwerty, you are still defending these people as "true Christians", so you must not think that this teaching is all that bad, at least not to the point of heresy.

I don't see movement dating at a big issue. I think I would see the premillennial pre-tribulation rapture teaching way more dangerous than movement dating. The rapture teaching can remove the urgency of getting saved from the lost as it teaches all the Christians will be secretly raptured and then there will be 7 year tribulation you can get saved in. The lost that are exposed to this error will think them are okay but not realizing that Jesus can come and any time and end the World.

>>>Maybe they are only "slightly misguided" in your mind?

Yes I would agree with that.

>>>If so, why didn't you stay in there for the sake of your marriage and the unity of the church?

I would if they let me. If fact I would go back now if they would let me. I didn't offer my objections I was asked for that and I am just an honest person. I wouldn't feel like I could be honest and beat around the bush and advoid the question.

Sheesh! "People get the government they deserve." Holdemans, don't you dare be critical of Qwerty wanting to go back if he could. Rather, look, listen, and ponder.

Danny Lane is a false prophet who leads a lot of well-meaning people to destruction. Him and his "ministers" are going to have a lot to answer for.

Brent D
>>>Danny Lane is a false prophet who leads a lot of well-meaning people to destruction.

Well I don't agee with all that he teaches and the way he does things. As far as calling him a false prophet I think that is a bit much. I have known Layne before he started preaching and he has always seemed to me to be a committed Christian doing the best he can to live for the Lord.

I guess it wouldn't be easy to Bishop a group of 1000 to 2000 Christians in 10 plus congregations with out making mistakes in teaching and practice but I think he has done a better job than I could have done.

I guess it wouldn't be easy to Bishop a group of 1000 to 2000 Christians in 10 plus congregations with out making mistakes in teaching and practice but I think he has done a better job than I could have done.


the blind leading the blind my dear friend, that guy is a false prophet, he has hoodwinked you and his followers into thinking they are holier than "normal" Christians since they do certain things to "gain holiness"

qwerty, you have the worse case of holier than thou I have ever seen, God in his mercy put you out of there to wake you up!

Fred:
>>>the blind leading the blind my dear friend, that guy is a false prophet, he has hoodwinked you and his followers into thinking they are holier than "normal" Christians since they do certain things to "gain holiness"

I would disagree. While I am not going to testify for the Restoration people I can tell you that personally I don't think I am holier that "normal" Christians as I don't think holiness has different degrees. Either you are holy or you are not. Also we have no holiness or righteousness of our own as the only holiness we have is that which is imparted to our soul when we are saved and it is not ours. While many believe it is only imputed and they still sin in word thought and deed everyday I would hold the Bible teaches that it is not only imputed but imparted and profess to have experienced that for blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God (Matt 5:8).

Also you statement about doing certain things to gain holiness is wrong unless you are referring to coming to God in faith to be saved from our sin.

>>>qwerty, you have the worse case of holier than thou I have ever seen

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/holier-than-thou
1. obnoxiously pious; sanctimonious; self-righteous. –noun
2. a person who is obnoxiously pious or self-righteous.

I hold that all self-righteous is filthy rages (Isa 64:6). I profess that there is no good thing in me but God's Spirit. I believe that the holding to rules and regulations that are not found in the Bible are a sign of weakness not of more spirituality or holiness (Rom 14:1,2). But at the same time I hold that we commanded to be diligence and add to our experience the fruit of the Spirit (2Pet 1:4), and that we are to watch and pray with carefulness that we don't enter into temptations and fall into sin (Mat 26:41).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sanctimonious
1. making a hypocritical show of religious devotion, piety, righteousness, –adjective

By the grace of God I live what I profess to live. I openly confess that I have many faults, failings, and weaknesses and that I need much help from the Lord. When I have done all the I feel like the Lord is leading me to do I openly confess that I am an unprofitable servant (Luk 17:10) only doing those things that the Bible charges me to do and trying by the grace of God to live a spiritual life in a vile body (Php 3:21) and to find daily grace to have victory over this world (Heb 4:16).

Now you can reject my testimony and say I deceived and while I think the above you are able to see into my heart from hundreds of miles away and know its not true and that really I am a hypocrite and I am trusting in my works and own righteousness to get to heaven. Or worse yet you can say I am a liar, that is up to you.

qwerty, i don't think you are a liar, or even a hypocrite, I in fact believe you to be quite sincere, but sincerity has noting to do with truth. One can be sincerely wrong. There is noting particularly wrong with a lot of what you say, but it certainly does complicate Christianity. Christian life should flow from your life, as apposed to be so "strict" and disciplined. You got to do this, you can't do that
is sort of well that doesn't seem like eternal life, rather eternal drudgery.



And I think the Lord in his mercy is dragging you through a thing to help you become his child in a more meaningful way to help bless his other children.

Fred:
>>>but sincerity has noting to do with truth. One can be sincerely wrong.

I agree.

>>>Christian life should flow from your life, as apposed to be so "strict" and disciplined. You got to do this, you can't do that is sort of well that doesn't seem like eternal life, rather eternal drudgery.

I feel like my Christian life does flow out of my heart. I am strict and disciplined (well I am trying to be) on myself but I don't hold others to that. I don't feel like I have embraced any rules that won't help me and protect me from the sin and folly of this world and all the rules and restrictions I have embraced are a joy to follow.

My Christian life is not a drudgery but I have fulness of joy and peace in my soul. I love so much the holy way of Christ that many times I go about my home praising God as loud as I can jumping and shouting and feeling the waves of the glory of God go through my soul as I thank him for being saved from a life of drug abuse, anger, lust, and selfishness and for the wonderful new life he has given me.

My trials which bless me with endurance are small, my life which I endeavor to live fully for God will be short, and I look forward to each new day and enjoy living for God. If I am decieved, in my opinion I have the best deception going around.

>>>And I think the Lord in his mercy is dragging you through a thing to help you become his child in a more meaningful way to help bless his other children.

Oh I fully believe that strongly.

I do love you in the Lord Fred and I pray for you that the Lord will bless you.

I added the following section to the article on the Restoration in Wikipedia.

== Restoration dated in prophecy ==
The earlier ministers of the Church of God (Anderson) taught that the restoration of the church was prophecy by the Old Testament Prophets, in the New Testament, and in the book of Revelation. They taught that the date of 1880 for the restoration of the church of God is taught in symbols in the book of Revelation. H. M. Riggle wrote in Bible Readings page 107 "According to the voice of ancient history the church retailed it unity and purity until about 270 AD." From a number of scriptures in Daniel and Revelation they took "time, times, and half a time", "42 months" or "1260 days" (Dan 7:25; 12:7, Rev 11:3; 12:6; 12:14; 13:5;) to mean 1260 years of the Papal age holding that in symbolic language one day is one year. The 1260 years of the Papal age is added to the time that the church lost it unity and purity which gives the end of the Papal age as 1530 AD. Then using the symbol from Revelation of "three days and a half" with each day equaling a century they held that the duration of the Protestant age was 350 years which brings them to 1880. This date was the beginning of the full restoration of the church of God and called the Evening Light age.

The Church of God (Restoration) builds their movement dating on the same dates the Church of God (Anderson) earlier ministers did. They also hold that in about 1930 the Church of God (Anderson) became apostate and there was silence in the spiritual heavens for about one half hour. This one half hour taken to mean 50 years using one hour in symbolic language as one century. The time of the silence period ended in 1980 which was about the time of the beginning of Daniel Layne’s ministry.

Some people reject the date of 1880 and claim the dates 270 and 1530 hold no historical significance and were only obtained by back dating from 1880. Others point out that while there is Biblical authority to use the symbol of one day for a year there is no Biblical authority to use one day as a century or one hour as a century which the Church of God (Restoration) uses to get the 350 years of the Protestant age and the 50 years of the silent time.

That the Church of God (Restoration) is found in Bible prophecy is considered to be a cardinal doctrine of the Church and members that are not in agreement with this teaching can be disfellowshipped, banned from attending meetings, and told they are not saved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_God_%28Restoration%29

Qwerty; you refer to D.S. Warner as setting a starting date in respect to restoration of the church; then you go on to quote what HM Riggle wrote, expanding prophetically on years 270, 1530 etc.

My question : is this what D.S. Warner himself taught, or was this something Riggle and others expanded on. I would like to see what Warner actually said in this regard. A lady at church (an old ground person) gave me a book after leading their SS class; "Birth of a Reformation, Life and Labors of D.S. Warner" by A.L. Beyers. I do not find this information in this book but here is a quote which suggests others may have taken Warners initial comments and built and expanded to something far in excess to what Warner believed and taught. Clearly, this is what Danny Layne has done. (I see such an expansion of teaching at CGCM, building on an initial ( incorrect) premise of John Holdeman.)

page 243; "In our preceding chapter, Brother Warner has already given quotations from the prophets related to bringing out a pure church through the preaching of holiness. (now note) We wish to show by several other lines of prophecy that the state of the church, being free from the bondage of of human ecclesiasticism and enjoying her primitive glory, makes a distinct prophetic time or period in this evening of the dispensation... End of quote.

I am interested in this because we are part of a church that has its roots in Warners teaching, however, we give little acknowledgement to these roots. Below is what we say on our website;

http://www.cornwallchurch.com/

"The Church of God in Bellingham had its origin around the turn of the Twentieth Century. It was part of a movement that had begun in 1880 by Daniel S. Warner. Warner had grown dissatisfied with the status quo of denominations he was in, primarily because of their reliance on traditions as opposed to reliance on the Bible. The divisions that were so prevalent in that day caused him to seek a more biblically pure movement that would allow anyone to take part, regardless of affiliation. The only prerequisite was for people to know and desire to live their lives for Jesus.

This movement quickly spread across the country and in the late 1890s came to Washington. Around 1900 a leader from the movement, Simon Decker, came to Bellingham to establish a church. In those early years the church met in homes, but by the 1920s had its first facility on Broadway Street. This early church was characterized by an evangelistic zeal and an emphasis on prayer."

Fred:
>>>Qwerty; you refer to D.S. Warner as setting a starting date in respect to restoration of the church; then you go on to quote what HM Riggle wrote, expanding prophetically on years 270, 1530 etc.

Yes by all means Warner was the one that came up with the dates.

You can download the Birth of a Reformation from the dswarnerlibrary. The link is bad on that site but here is the right one.
http://www.dswarnerlibrary.com/Birth%20of%20a%20Reformation.doc

In chapter 13 which is called A Prophetic Time Warner penned the following concerning the 270, 1530 and 1880 dates.

"Daniel wished to know the truth respecting the little horn that had eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things. He beheld that the "same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom" (verses 21 and 22). Now this horn that came up from among the other ten horns was nothing other than the elements of Roman Catholicism, developing into popery. It was the "man of sin," the product of the substitution of man rule for the Holy Spirit rule, the date for which change historians have fixed at about the year 270 A.D. This horn was to "speak great words against the Most High," and to "wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him" (verses 25-27).
The "time and times and the dividing of time," marking the period during which the elements of the papacy should have full sway and should wear out the saints of the Most High, etc., are interpreted as three and one half years; a time in prophetic reckoning being one year, times two years, and the dividing of time one half year. Three and one half years would be forty-two months, or, if reduced to days according to the Jewish reckoning of thirty days to the month, twelve hundred and sixty days. Taking each day for a year, which is proper prophetic counting, we have twelve hundred and sixty years, and this added to the year 270 brings us to the year 1530, the date of the beginning of organized Protestantism, and the end of the universal sway of the papacy. Following this, "the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end" (verse 26). Since her universal spiritual supremacy ended, the judgment against Roman Catholicism has gradually proceeded and her political power has waned. "And the time came when the saints possessed the kingdom" (verse 22). The saints' possessing the kingdom is the culminating point in this line of prophecy, and means nothing other than the victory over human ecclesiasticism which the saints now possess.

In the 11th chapter of Revelation we have the wearing out of the saints expressed as treading under foot the holy city, and the time-period of "a time and times and the dividing of time" expressed as forty-two months (verse 2). In verse 3 the same time-period is expressed as twelve hundred and sixty days. During this time the two witnesses the Word and the Spirit prophesy in sackcloth, which represents the low estate to which they were relegated during the dark age of popery. It will be remembered that the twelve hundred and sixty days (years) end with the year 1530. Following this comes three days and a half (three centuries and a half) of Protestantism during which the two witnesses (Word and Spirit) are, in the governmental sense, operatively dead, the organized systems of man rule having usurped the place of divine government and authority which these witnesses originally held. At the end of the three days and a half, three hundred and fifty years (which, added to 1530, brings us to the year 1880) "the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet" (verse 11). They ascended to their place in the ecclesiastical heaven, to the true church, and were thus victorious. This brings us to the present reformation. This is soon followed by the sounding of the seventh angel, which represents the end of time when the 'kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of our Lord and his Christ; and he shall reign forever and ever' (verse 15). The curtain drops."

The book is a very good read and will give you a very good idea of work of Warner and the start of the COGA.

Hank:
I change the first paragraph in the Restoration dated in prophecy section and included DS Warner in there and a reference to chapter 13 from Brith of a Reformation and found a good HTML link to the book from timelesstruths.org

Qwerty; do you think DS Warner was pushy and adamant that his followers accept all he taught, or else!!! as Danny Layne is ? ... or was Warner just giving his view of prophecy ? Many pastors teach end time prophecy and many accept it and I suppose many reject such in favor of their own scenarios.

In all my study and connection with "COG, Anderson, Ind.", I have not come across issues that would say today's COG is out to lunch, but rather they fall into mainstream evangelical thought (with its own particular emphasis). I know you have said that COG Anderson, has fallen away from true biblical teaching, but that is not what I see. I suppose it comes down to how you see the "visible church" in society today. Here is what attracts me to my fellowship in our city.

We have no membership rolls, but preach the gospel and holy living. We baptize those who repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ. We teach, we encourage home Bible study groups; we supply helps to the hurting, to broken marriages, to addicted and homeless folks and invite all believers to fellowship with us. We view our weekend services more as "preaching by the seashore" for all to hear. We do not pretend to be an assembly of only believers, but rather as the parables of Jesus say of the net casting to catch the good and the bad. The Lords supper is communicated monthly during a mid-week meeting, so believers need to put forth special effort to participate (rather then just passing the elements at Sunday service) and to make it special. Twice a year we do serve communion Sunday morning and one happens to be this coming Sunday; but we are careful to explain what the supper is we ask any to refrain from communicating who are not trusting Jesus Christ or have un-confessed sin in their life. So, Qwerty, what do you see un-biblical in our church from the little I have communicated ?

Another point (and you now seem to put a different spin to it) is that I feel comfortable with COG's conservative past; that being that all believers are in the church by virtue of faith, our Arminian theological view, holy living, faith in Jesus alone and not in denominationalism, amillennial view of end times and more. Today, we do not emphasize the specifics on end times but our pastor rather speaks on what the Bible is clear about. That is, Christ is returning, returning soon, and believers should be ready.

Qwerty, I bring these things forward because you have said that because Warner taught certain points of belief, these points were incorrect, and so the organization or base is non-biblical and corrupted. Do I understand you correctly in this ? It is my understanding that "COG, And. Ind." , is the main original body started by Warner, and others, like COGR have broke off from this organized body. Is this your view ?

(sarcasm alert) Qwerty has me sweating about whether I am in the wrong/right church )

Spelling corrected.

(sarcasm alert) Qwerty has me sweating about whether I am in the wrong/right church )

Hank, lol, I was wondering about that!

I think I've mentioned to you before that I have some close friends (and my financial advisor) who are part of the COG(a) church and I consider them to be some of the finest Christians I know. We also have a Bible College close by here. From what I have known of the (Anderson) group, I would concur with you Hank, that it has been the continuation and evolution of the main vision while others have broken away. I personally would have no problem fellowshipping with your church (and have on occasion) and would consider their essential doctrine to line up with orthodox Christianity.

Qwerty (and any others interested) you wetted my interest in what happened at COGa (Anderson) in respect to change of views and how Danny Layne was able to start a reformed movement and take others with him. He has some (and maybe all ) of the early extreme views of Warner and COGa's views, and with this has historical writings that give him and COGR a base to work from. I found a paper, linked as follows, which writes of the historical struggle at COGa during 1920-43, when COGa dropped its exclusive view of Revelations and Daniel, and started to teach it as an option rather then exclusivism.

http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyan_theology/theojrnl/21-25/25-14.htm

It is interesting that Warner & co, adopted very similar to Seventh Day Adventist views (cleansing of the temple, 1840 or ??, and inserted "come outterism... come out of other churches " (the teaching that God stopped working in denominational churches and that Warner was now leading God's true church, which he said was non-sectarian) where SDA used the "Sabbath" as the sign of the true worship. As I said above, a change took place at COGa by 1943, after which COGa really experienced growth.

The paper sums up the struggle with the following, which occurred as late as 1980, however, it looks to me like the issue had really been settled as early as 1945. Quote:

In 1980, the organization, Women of the Church of God, published a Bible study on Revelation written by Marie Strong. Strong did not take a church-historical approach to interpretation and departed from the teaching of F. G. Smith. Consequently, some pastors urged Women of the Church of God not to distribute the study.

Doris Dale, Executive Secretary of Women of the Church of God, refused to be intimidated. She explained:

The confusion has occurred because more than one interpretation of Revelation is taught within the Church of God. The WCG does not promote Dr. Strong's teaching as the standard Church of God teaching; but as one of the valid interpretations within our movement.108

Continuing, Dale verbalized the approach of the Church of God to scripture interpretation.

(NOTE) As a movement we have taught that the Spirit of God gives each believer the power to interpret scripture for himself/herself. Allowing each believer to interpret scriptures places the responsibility on the believers. .. we jealously guard the personal freedom to read and interpret as each of us see (sic) fit. This is a heritage taught by our early leaders and still valued.109

In summary, the experience of the church has shaped the eschatology of the Church of God. The original church-historical interpretations of D. S. Warner and F. G. Smith complemented their experience of the church as an exclusive movement. As long as the pioneer views were the only legitimately recognized interpretations, Church of God doctrinal boundaries were clearly defined. But coincidental with a transition to a more inclusive understanding and experience of the church, Russell Byrum, Otto Linn, and Adam Miller supplied alternative interpretations of the book of Revelation which stretched the church's doctrinal boundaries and self-understanding. Since the late 1970's, the quest for internal unity has been accompanied by discussion between proponents of diverse views of Revelation. Doctrinal unity has been subordinated to a unity of Christian experience.

In an era in which other denominations, such as the Southern Baptists, are tightening their doctrinal statements and stifling theological freedom, the penchant for experiential unity has prevailed within the Church of God and taken it in quite another direction. Nowhere is this better seen than in the fact that, historically, in the Church of God, ecciesiology has shaped eschatological thinking, and in the ways in which that has transpired. (end of quote)

Qwerty, would you care to comment on this ?

Thanks Peter, for your comments. I recall you saying the same some time ago. Apparently Camrose, Alberta became a COGa center for study and leadership of this church in Canada. In 1976, when I was searching for "truth" of what the scriptures really taught, I went to listen to Dr. Hefferin, a COGa leader and teacher from Camrose, who was holding a series of meetings in Vernon, B.C. At that time I did not realize that 20 years later I would become attached to a COGa church.

For any interested, I am not promoting COGa to any one. I can only say what God is doing in my life... and in our city this is the place where God wants me at this time. This is the same for many of you in your churches in your localities. The important thing is that we serve God with honest motives, that we remain true to Him and to our convictions, and that we realize that God works in all those who trust in Jesus Christ with an honest heart of faith. Faith can never be exclusive to anyone. It is impossible, or else the promises of the Bible could not be trusted at face value. We can make our particular bents exclusive if we wish; but we can NEVER claim exclusiveness of the extent and thrust of the true NT church and kingdom. That is as Jesus said, "within you".

<<< The important thing is that we serve God with honest motives, that we remain true to Him and to our convictions, >>>

Hank, this is true, but don't you also have to add an additional constraint that one does not use their convictions or beliefs to harm others? Isn't this the bane of religion the world over? Isn't that point the entire problem. What do I care if an Amish pulls his ski boat to the lake with a draft horse as long as he doesn't harm me or mine.

Excellent point, Scott.

Well, you fellows make a point, but I trust in the Spirit of God to bring honest seeking people to the true Spirit of what it means to be a believer and how one should act. In the mean time, evil exists in this world, without doubt... and "religion" is hurting people.

I ask, how can one live a lie ? You must be true to what you believe. That is why I was put out of CGCM. I could not with a free conscience go along with what was going on in the church at that time. I know, others may say something else, and I almost caved in. The evening I went to church and had decided to go along with a "ridicules excommunication" (the person came to talk to me about it ahead of time and I could see how it brought him peace) I was prepared to stand and give my assent, when a second preacher got up and said: "and there is no other way to handle this situation". That comment glued me to the pew, and of course put another nail in my six foot box. My friends, I know without a doubt, that God honors our honest dependence on Him. Such honor from God will take one to "the truth of what it means to be a Christian". Each must address this for themselves, and my journey may be different then yours.

Listen, and I cannot say this strong enough. If faith is exclusive, then the promises of the Bible cannot be taken at face value. Then, faith must be filtered through a church or group of persons who control it. Its that simple. The interview program at CGCM was not from the Spirit of God; it was motivated by evil and false pursuits and filtered out the Holy Spirit from believers conscience. And, it will come back to bite CGCM, and likely is already.

Friends, we have convictions and conscience that may not always be biblically based. One thing about Qwerty is that he stresses, and rightly so, that we must deal with others in LOVE and gentleness. Even if I may disagree with Qwerty on some issues, or even on some judgments that he makes, you have to admit that he is kind and gentle. That is the way I read him. I think H ministers could learn a lot from Qwerty.

In all my study and connection with "COG, Anderson, Ind.", I have not come across issues that would say today's COG is out to lunch, but rather they fall into mainstream evangelical thought (with its own particular emphasis). I know you have said that COG Anderson, has fallen away from true biblical teaching, but that is not what I see. I suppose it comes down to how you see the "visible church" in society today. Here is what attracts me to my fellowship in our city.

>>>So, Qwerty, what do you see un-biblical in our church from the little I have communicated ?
Well I don't know if that is going to be profitable to go into that Hank. In my understanding they on longer teach salvation from sin and entire sanctification. I think that is one of the biggest issues.

>>>Qwerty, I bring these things forward because you have said that because Warner taught certain points of belief, these points were incorrect, and so the organization or base is non-biblical and corrupted.

Well I said that in reference to the movement being the restored church to it full glory and teaching of the morning church. I reject that because Warner allowed divorce and remarried people to stay together. He didn't allow them to be married he just didn't tell them they had to break up. I think around 1930 they started marrying them.

I used this point in reference to Layne building his movement on top of Warner's and using Warner's dates.

>>>It is my understanding that "COG, And. Ind." , is the main original body started by Warner, and others, like COGR have broke off from this organized body. Is this your view ?

Well what became the COGA is not what things were in Warner's time. The movement left its teachings clearly by 1930. Then there was the Faith and Victory group that held the torch for a 50 years or so (most notable minister that was with them was CE Orr) then they when down hill and I think it is fair to say the R is the closest thing to Warner's movement. There is a lot of 7 seal groups that came out of the COGA in the 1950's but other than that Layne has Warner's torch.

Hank:
>>>Qwerty (and any others interested) you wetted my interest in what happened at COGa (Anderson) in respect to change of views and how Danny Layne was able to start a reformed movement and take others with him.

Layne was in the Faith and Victory movement and limited in his ministry to just his own congregation. So he left and good with him perhaps less than 200 people. His congregation, Ron Walters in Chilliwack, BC and they worked from there.

>>>Qwerty, would you care to comment on this ?

No what part. There was a lot there to comment on.

Thanks Qwerty, for your response. It appears to me that Warner, Layne, Holdeman, Hank W. , etc., all have erred or are erring. Or... are they just mistakes ?

Perhaps the verse in James 2:10 in the context of the Jesus' sermon on the mount applies to us:

"8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.”]Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment."

Will be gone till Monday night.

Qwerty; I meant to add...

And according to Layne, Qwerty is also making a very big mistake, or he would say "sin", since you are doomed to the fire unless you change your mind.

Qwerty, you brought up Chilliwack. What on earth happened there 2-3 years ago. A group of them started to attend the H church where my BIL goes, and he told us there had been a terrible upset. (They since moved on elsewhere.) J & P got close to one couple and those folks moved away from everything, up the B.C coast somewhere to recover from the shock, being tired out and wondering about God Himself !!! WHat is going on in Layne's church anyway ??? And you want to return to them ???

<<< And you want to return to them ??? >>>

Hank, I cannot believe you. Where is your sense of justice? Where is your consistency of thought? Why have you never said this about H membership? You have said again and again how God values each expression of Christianity (H, Amish, etc), and how all that matters is a sincere belief and faith in Christ. You would bless anyone who wished to return to the H (and you know what they do), and now you turn on Qwerty and say this? Hank, I really do have doubts about your character, your sense of justice, your intellectual honesty, etc. etc.

Hank
>>>Qwerty, you brought up Chilliwack. What on earth happened there 2-3 years ago. A group of them started to attend the H church where my BIL goes, and he told us there had been a terrible upset. (They since moved on elsewhere.) J & P got close to one couple and those folks moved away from everything, up the B.C coast somewhere to recover from the shock, being tired out and wondering about God Himself !!! What is going on in Layne's church anyway ??? And you want to return to them ???

There was a very messy split. Ron Walter took the whole congregation out of the R and it feel apart in about a year. Walter (used to be Layne's number two man) quite preaching 6 months after they left and then when things feel apart I hear he when into the world. I don't know if that is true or not.

All the people perhaps one family left the non-conformist standard, most of the children when into the world and many of them are bitter.

I don't put a lot of stock in what they have to say as from what I can see most of them are bitter and hurt. They have lied much about the R and they are not to be trusted from what I can see.

Its a long story not worth telling.

www.churchofgodrestorationexposed.us is run by one of the families that left before the split and it appears they were done wrong by the R from what I can see.

I was attending the Chilliwack congregation when this all happened and I talked to all 3 ministers they left to try to get their side and talked to Layne concerning some of their objections. There were 4 people that stayed with the R and 87 that left. My wife and I and two other sisters. One sister is now in the Aylmer congregation and the other one is in the Los Angeles congregation.

So on that one I can't fault the R. There were things done on both sides that clearly were not right. But it was a mess that is for sure.

The worst part of that is what happened to all the young people.

Hank said: And according to Layne, Qwerty is also making a very big mistake, or he would say "sin", since you are doomed to the fire unless you change your mind.

Scott said: You would bless anyone who wished to return to the H (and you know what they do), and now you turn on Qwerty and say this? Hank, I really do have doubts about your character, your sense of justice, your intellectual honesty, etc. etc.

Scott, Hank was speaking from Layne's point of view. He didn't think I have sinned nor does it think I am doomed to fire unless I change my mind. That is Layne's position, my wife's position, my ex-Pastor's position, the position for the whole Aylmer congregation ye even the whole movement, oh and the position of the two 8 and 6 year old boys that came to talk to me today and let me know I was lost and that I needed to come back and get right (they didn't say it in those words but that was what the older one implied).

Thank God I don't have children. That would be hard to bear.

There was a very messy split. Ron Walter took the whole congregation out of the R and it feel apart in about a year. Walter (used to be Layne's number two man) quite preaching 6 months after they left and then when things feel apart I hear he when into the world. I don't know if that is true or not.

All the people perhaps one family left the non-conformist standard, most of the children when into the world and many of them are bitter.

Qwerty, I think your grapevine judgments have gone too far now. Don't you think they maybe just made a mistake and went into the world and got bitter?

San Juanito
>>>Qwerty, I think your grapevine judgments have gone too far now. Don't you think they maybe just made a mistake and went into the world and got bitter?

No grapevine judgments here. I was part of the congregation and when through the split. When I mean going into the world I mean stopping professing being a Christian which many of them did. When it comes to being bitter I think you are right. Thanks for correcting me. I should have said they appear to be bitter.

Scott's post, July 31, 10:14 AM: "Hank, I cannot believe you. Where is your sense of justice? Where is your consistency of thought? Why have you never said this about H membership?... "

Scott; I have had 5 days to think about this and you may be making a point. I have been trying to look at myself and ask why would it appear, even to me, after you point this out that there may be apparent inconsistency in my judgment (maybe not the right word) in comparing H folks with others with whom I have no common bond. I come to 2 conclusions:

1. It may be natural for one to reach to one's own ethnic origin, where one grew up, where I thought I spend all my life, where I married, have cousins & in-laws, family connections from generations back, etc. When I have addressed others or encouraged others (I recall a public post to Red Rooster) to re-establish family and brotherly connections, I have meant to, if I did not, preface this with "if it is possible to do so without compromising one's conscience". Social structures are for a reason (and they are not all religious) and it is important for an individual to feel loved and belonging to one's family and to one's community. To function in a community/family one sometimes needs to drop one's insistence on absolute worded order or understanding. When I grew up, my parents said something like this: "Hank, what you are planning may not go well with some in the church, better not to do so; but if you are going to do it anyway, please be careful, do not flaunt it... be be quiet about it. You have to live your conscience, but you also need to be aware of your brothers feelings." And so Scott, in society we bend some, swallow some, and in love work towards harmony. Is this not what we all should do ? If we can do so without going against scripture ? Especially to those of our close community ?

I have no affinity with Layne's church, never heard of him till 8 months ago, never met the man, never met COGR except to follow their photo's and some preaching and reading on line. Now, I have gotten to appreciate Qwerty for what he has contributed here and feel with him for his condition with his church because I have experienced the same. And, Qwerty also answered for me that my comments were based on what He said were problems at COGR.

2. The other thing that crossed my mind is that there is a certain amount of autonomy and differences at CGCM among congregations. If a congregation has a strong, kind, gentle gospel leader; then other legalistic conference oriented ministers cannot make an inroads into those congregations with their coercive and pushy personalities. Such congregation (with understanding leadership) is one I grew up in, and there are others. Based on what Fred has said about his congregation (and I believe Fred) I would never recommend that he return under such conditions. Besides, Fred is an "outsider", a roofer from the tough side of Oakland who found Jesus and loves Him and the Word with all his heart and life (and he knows enough about his own human condition that he would be in trouble without Jesus). He was sold a bill of goods, and he has no spiritual obligation to return to the church in Plymouth. In Christ, there should be "no outsiders" but truth is that society (churches included) has its clicks.

So, I believe there is a difference in each case as to what a person should do or not do, and each must come to that decision themselves. I know this, God wants happy contented believers, wants to give us the desire of our hearts and will do so, if we fully trust in Him. We will have trials, but not more then what we can bear.

Just for the record Scott; there is no H church in my community; I believe in the local church and so I do not need to make any decision about any return to CGCM. It might have a social reward for me, but not spiritual... At least this is what I think now. I will have some to say about VS's comments about the back-tracking in MOT of some church writings... sounds kind of fishy to me... could there be some dishonest or totally off the wall ministers at CGCM who fear losing their "power" ? trying now to cover their tracks ? Can they turn such apparent ineptness around ? (haven't read the article so will withhold any further comments.) I believe there is hope for CGCM, to come to original Anabaptist theology and function as a proper NT church, humbly respecting "faith" wherever it is found.