This subject has been covered, over the years, in sermons and other material, and in our Statement of Beliefs, you will find the following:

“Our doctrines and practices are based upon a literal understanding of the teachings revealed in the entire Bible. We believe that the Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments are God’s revelation of His Will to man, inspired in thought and word, and infallible in the original writings; that said Scriptures are the supreme and final authority in faith and life, the source of Truth and the foundation of all knowledge.”

We have also produced a booklet entitled “Old Testament Laws – Still Valid Today?” and another booklet with the title “God’s Law…Or God’s Grace?” plus many other booklets that will reflect our belief in the inerrancy of the Bible; that it is without error or fault in all its teaching. We also produced a Q&A in January 2006 which addressed the question: “In the Bible, God gives specific instructions and commandments. But weren’t Paul’s writings driven by the prevailing culture at that time?” This is still available on our website, where the question is thoroughly answered.

However, there are numerous people and church organisations who feel that they can “pick and mix.”   Let us give you an example of such an approach.

In 2004, the Roman Catholic Church in the UK produced a paper to present in Rome, entitled “The Gift of Scripture”. These are some brief comments on this subject taken from the ekklesia website. The headline on September 14, 2005, was: “Catholics encouraged to give emphasis to the Bible.”  It then went on to say the following:

“Roman Catholics throughout Britain are being encouraged to reaffirm the Bible as foundational for their faith, and to make its critical appreciation a key part of their discipleship and church identity. The Gift of Scripture provides an explanation of Catholic teaching on the Bible. The 60-page booklet outlines the basic principles by which it is interpreted, and gives guidance on some difficult questions which arise, says the Catholic Communications Network.”

Four books of the Bible came in for some heavy criticism – Genesis, Exodus, Proverbs and Revelation – and they feel that the first two chapters of Genesis are contradictory rather than complementary.

On page 27 of their document, when talking about the book of Exodus, they state that “The entry into the promised land is seen as a fulfilment of the divine promise, but the narratives raise serious theological questions.”

The book of Proverbs does not escape their criticism – they say: “Some proverbs are profound and weighty, while others are somewhat trivial.”

Then, of course, there’s the book of Revelation. They say, on page 48: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and not be interpreted literally.   We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world.”

In the Times in October 2004, the religious correspondent observed that “the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church – in the UK – has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.”

On the website catholicplanet there is “A Critical Review of the Document ‘The Gift of Scripture’” by Ronald L. Conte Jr.  from November 14, 2005 where he writes:

“In summary, it is a heresy (and not a new one), which has been repeatedly condemned by successive Roman Pontiffs, to claim that the Bible is only infallible in matters pertaining to salvation, or only to faith and morals. Yet this document, called ‘The Gift of Scripture,’ not only displays a clear belief in this heresy, but also presumes to teach the same heresy, along with various other errors, as if such was the teaching of Christ.

“Furthermore, most of the text of GS (Gift of Scripture) treats the Bible as if it were merely a set of human books, containing errors, contradictions, and imperfect, time-conditioned human ideas. Despite some paragraphs that proclaim the Divine inspiration of Scripture, most of the document speaks as if it were merely a human book.”

It would appear that not everyone agreed with this booklet, including those within the Catholic church itself.

There is so much criticism from atheists and agnostics who feel that the Bible is not true in whole or part, as well as many “Christians” who will take the parts they like and dismiss those parts that don’t quite suit them.

On the website bibleinfo we read: “When the 66 books of the Bible with their 1,189 chapters made up of 31,173 verses are brought together (in the KJV), we find perfect harmony in the message they convey. As the great scholar F. F. Bruce noted: ‘The Bible is not simply an anthology; there is a unity which binds the whole together.’ In addition, Dr E L Towns noted that ‘there were numerous authors writing over a period of about sixteen hundred years and representing fifty-five generations and even though these authors represent a great diversity of occupations and ethnic/sociological backgrounds, the unified structure and theme of the Bible suggest there is one Mind who put it all together – God Himself, the Author of Scripture.’”

It is an incredible document.

We read in 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Inspiration is from the Greek word “theopneustos” which is translated “divinely breathed” which clearly shows the source.

Whom do we believe?   God – the author of the Bible or Roman Catholic Bishops or anyone else who have their own ideas about which bits in the Bible they like and which bits they don’t?

The problem with some is that they can take the “social and cultural norms of the time” approach that allows the culture of the day to become more important than God’s clear instructions!   That’s dangerous ground!

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13:8). He says: “For I am the LORD, I do not change” (Malachi 3:6) and the Word of God, likewise, is unchangeable. We can’t “cherrypick” Scripture. We must take the Bible in its entirety and that includes Paul’s writings which are now part of Scripture and which cannot be dismissed as only applicable to his own time. If we do take the approach that we can have this bit of Scripture but discard another bit, then we become the arbiters of what is right and what should be in the Bible. We have neither the ability to so discern – nor do we have authority. And as for casting doubt on certain books in the Bible, that is nothing new.

Martin Luther, the 16th century German theologian, was frustrated by the works-emphasis, as he saw it, of the book of James, calling it “the Epistle of Straw”, and questioned its canonicity.   He was also irritated with the complex symbolism of the Book of Revelation and once said that it too, was not canon, and that it should be thrown into the river!   Apparently, he later retracted these statements, but it does show that leading figures have had their doubts about certain portions of the Bible that do not fit in with their own ideas.

In Acts 24:14 we read that Paul had no doubt about the validity of God’s Word: “But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets.”

Paul believed ALL things written in the law and the prophets. There is no doubt here at all. Did he, one of the great men of the Bible, cast any doubt on Scripture? Not at all, and neither should anyone else who purports to be a Christian!

Jesus Christ also showed that He believed in the inerrancy of the Word of God. When He was tested three times by Satan as we read in Matthew 4:1-11, He said, four times “It is written”, referring to the Old Testament. He also made a statement in John 10:35: “… the Scripture cannot be broken.” In Matthew 5:18, He further asserted: “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.”

The Catholic Bishops emphasised in their paper the human dimension of Scripture. But the Bible has something to say on this aspect too. In 2 Peter 1:20-21 we read: “… knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

As one internet commentator wrote: “He (that is Peter) wrote these words not long before his martyrdom. They emerge not only from his personal experience of being taught directly by Christ Himself, but also from several decades of His Christian life afterwards. These words were tested by long years of living experience. Under God’s inspiration, this is the true testimony of an authentic apostle of Jesus Christ.”

The Bishops – all of them – are answered from Scripture. We know that when Jesus Christ was tempted by the Devil, He answered not by human reasoning but by quoting the Word of God.   That is the way to respond, not making up our own arguments that can come from fallible human reasoning and pre-conceived ideas – but straight from the Word of God.  Isaiah 28:10 states: “Here a little, there a little”, as we have long understood that the Bible interprets itself for those with eyes to see.

In Deuteronomy 12:32 is a warning: “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.” In Revelation 22:18-19 is another warning: “For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

The message of the Bible is complete and needs no extra attention from anyone.

What rebukes these are to those who treat the message carelessly or think that they have answers or input over and above that which is clearly stated in the Word of God! We know that these Bishops, and others, are not being called now – their fruits clearly show that they are not in step with the Word of God, but they will have their opportunity in due course, because God is fair.

In the meantime, those of us who have been called into the true Church of God must make sure that we don’t treat the Word of God lightly and that we revere ALL Scripture.   Anything less and we will be in serious trouble!

Yes, we do believe the Bible in its entirety!

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

One correspondent wrote to us: “If you rest on the seventh day you do well, but New Testament churches very obviously functioned on the first day of the week. Acts makes consistent, repeated, and clear use of ‘the first day of the week’ (check out Acts 20:6,7 & 1 Cor.16:1,2…).”

Let us look at those two scriptures that have been used to think that the first day of the week was kept rather than the Sabbath. We need to keep in mind that the biblical Sabbath is the time span from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. The Bible calls it the seventh day or the last day of the week. On the other hand, Sunday is the first day of the week, even though some mistakenly refer to it as the “Sabbath.”

Acts 20:6-7 reads: “But we sailed away from Philippi after the Days of Unleavened Bread, and in five days joined them at Troas, where we stayed seven days.  Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight.”

In verse 6, it mentions the Days of Unleavened Bread which shows that the annual Holy Days were being kept many years after Christ’s crucifixion. In verse 7, the first day of the week was on Saturday evening after the weekly Sabbath had ended when they were breaking bread which just means that they were having a meal. To use this to say that Sunday had replaced the Sabbath is not something that is upheld by any informed historical source.

For an in-depth explanation of this passage, see our Q&A on Acts 20:7.

In the New Testament, we read a number of instances about the Sabbath in the book of Acts 13:14, 27, 42-44; 15:21; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4 and it is mentioned 58 times in all.

We read about the uproar over circumcision in Acts 15 where the apostles and elders came together (verse 6) to discuss this matter in Jerusalem. Just think of the furore that there would have been had the keeping of the weekly Sabbath been in dispute, but there is no such mention in the Bible. This would have been an even bigger matter had that been the case, but it simply didn’t happen.

1 Corinthians 16:1-2 states: “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also: On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come.”

This is about a collection for the saints which was done on a Sunday – the first day of the week.   There was a famine in Judea and church members (saints) were in need of food.   This collection was done on a common workday, not on a holy Sabbath day.  Some churches have used this as a means of Sunday church collections but this is a complete misunderstanding of what this was all about.   It was the first day of the week, Sunday, and is not the Lord’s day; just the first day of the week. Further, no money was being collected, but food was to be stored (1 Corinthians 16:2; Romans 15:26-28) to be brought to the brethren in Jerusalem who needed food.

From the sabbathtruth website we read the following:

“In order to make the gospel more attractive to non-Christians, pagan customs were incorporated into the church’s ceremonies. The custom of Sunday worship was welcomed by Christians who desired to differentiate themselves from the Jews, whom they hated because of the Jews’ rejection of the Savior. The first day of the week began to be recognized as both a religious and civil holiday. By the end of the second century, Christians considered it sinful to work on Sunday.”

We can see that Sunday was slowly introduced, but the early New Testament Church of God did keep the Sabbath during the first century.

Interestingly, many quote Revelation 1:10: “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day”, which is the theme of the book. This is not, in any way, Scriptural authority for Sunday keeping.  In the previous verse (Revelation 1:9), we read that John was “on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Joel 2:1 reads as follows: “Blow the trumpet in Zion, And sound an alarm in My holy mountain! Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble; For the day of the LORD is coming, For it is at hand.”  The day of the Lord is a time which will begin just prior to the return of Jesus Christ, and the book of Revelation (a revealing) is about the future just ahead of us now.

Some cite John 20:19 for the idea that the disciples conducted a Sunday worship service. However, the passage reveals that they had assembled at evening, when the doors were shut for fear of the Jews. They did not meet for a worship service, but they were hiding from the Jews.

There are many admissions by other churches, including the Roman Catholic church which acknowledges the seventh-day Sabbath. Here are just two examples of many:

“It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church” (Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903).

Dr. Edward Hiscox, author of The Baptist Manual, wrote the following:

“There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not on Sunday… It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week… where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament. Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of a sun god, when adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!”

At a later time, “The Roman emperor Constantine, a former sun-worshiper, professed conversion to Christianity, though his subsequent actions suggest the ‘conversion’ was more of a political move than a genuine heart change. Constantine named himself Bishop of the Catholic Church and enacted the first civil law regarding Sunday observance in A.D. 321.”

Coming back to the original question, “Did the New Testament show that the early Church kept the First Day of the Week?” The answer is a categorical no!  There are Scriptural references about the first day of the week and not one of them is referenced as being a holy day; it was, quite simply, an ordinary day.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

In a previous Q&A “How Long Did it Take Noah to Build the Ark?” it was shown, applying several assumptions, that it could not have taken more than 75 years to build the ark – not the 120 years that some have assumed.   Nevertheless, that is a considerable amount of time.

In Genesis 6:15, we read about the specific dimensions that God gave to Noah: “And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits.” Wikipedia states that “The Near Eastern or Biblical cubit is usually estimated as approximately 457.2 mm (18 in).” Therefore, applying this to the ark, the length would be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high.

A newspaper report in July 2016 gave details about a project that had recently completed in the USA. It read: “A $100 million representation of Noah’s Ark opened to ticket holders Thursday in Williamstown, Kentucky, but critics say the religious enterprise shouldn’t have received government tax breaks.

“The massive exhibit, claimed to be the largest timber frame structure in the world, sits on the grounds of a Christian theme park, Ark Encounter, a for-profit enterprise founded by Ken Ham. He said the park is an evangelical tool aimed at teaching creationism, a literal interpretation of the Bible’s Book of Genesis. The ark is 510 feet long, 85 feet wide, and 51 feet high, constructed based on dimensions derived from scripture, Ham said. Its three decks span more than 120,000 square feet. ‘It is much more than you can ever imagine,’ Ham said. ‘When you see the architectural algorithms you need, engineering diagrams … and all the supporters, thousands upon thousands of supporters who financially made this possible … I mean it’s amazing.’”

It can be seen from this report that they have used a cubit slightly larger than 18 inches. It is 510 feet (155 m) long, 85 feet (26 m) wide, and 51 feet (16 m).

The entire ark project took 18 months to complete. To meet the deadline, additional workers and specialists were required and about 1,000 people worked on the project overall, with more than 300 people working on site at one time.   If that was the case, how could Noah and his family have built this in 75 years or less, and without all of the modern equipment that man has at his disposal today?

It is important to keep in mind, that however large or difficult an assignment might be, God would not ask anyone to do something that was impossible to do.

One online commentator has made an assumption that if only Noah and his three sons were available to work, the situation would be as follows: He has worked out the overall volume of the ark, and applied a worst case scenario that 20% of the ark’s volume was worked, lumber that the four men had to gather, transport to the construction site and do the necessary shaping and install.  He further states: “An experienced crew of four could have installed, we assume, an average of 15 cubic feet of wood per day. If anything, this estimate seems low, but this is the worst case and it would take sixty-five years under this worst case scenario!  A big job, yes, but Noah was a faithful man, and accomplished the task. By applying these calculations, it can be seen that it is entirely possible to complete the task as required.”

Even if more than the four men were needed to do all of the work, maybe the four wives could have helped and Noah could have employed local workers, who may well have been sceptical but who may have taken the opportunity to work and get paid for their work. The Bible simply does not make any reference to whether or not there were others who might have helped or not. It only says that God told Noah to build the ark—but not, that he had to do it alone.

What about the necessary equipment to make such a large boat?  We must never forget that Noah was told by God to do this job under His divine direction.

On a website about ancient technology, we find these selected comments:

“(In addition to Egypt,) high levels of manufacturing and building technology are evident in ancient cultures of China, India, South America and many other places. Obviously most has been lost over the years, so we must assume there was even more on offer than we are aware of.

“History demonstrates that technology usually takes a few centuries to mature. For example, the development of the Greek trireme (an ancient Greek or Roman war galley with three banks of oars) in the climate of competing marine empires resulted in the huge ships over 100m long. History also shows technology is easily lost when a civilization changes or crumbles, such as the demise of the huge Chinese junks due to a change of government policy. With this in mind, it should be safe to presume that the pre-flood manufacturing expertise was higher than the best Egyptian culture (which had to regain momentum after the flood). This is quite a high level of technology, in many ways challenging even the much later Greek and Roman civilizations.”

This website also covers timber processing: “Noah, a healthy 500-year-old with an extremely Godly heritage, should be smart and capable. How about a simple, low tech animal powered saw? For working with timber, Noah might have had some sort of milling saw, a variety of smaller hand-saws for detail work, chisels, the axe and/or adze (a tool similar to an axe), and hand drills for dowels and spike/nail pilot holes, metal wedges for splitting timber, and the good old hammer.”

Also covered by this website is a piece about ovens, as follows: “The working of steel implies very high temperatures were achievable. This requires purpose-built furnaces.  Firing of pottery is trivial compared to melting or producing steel. Metal spikes may have been used to join structural timbers in certain critical areas of the hull of Noah’s Ark.  Steel tools are permitted; Tubal-Cain was doing this long before Noah came on the scene. Bronze or other copper based alloys could be the prominent metal, although the short working life of the ark and pitch coating would make steel acceptable. Heat was probably required for production or preparation of the pitch coating – although a much lower ‘cooking’ temperature.”

In a National Geographic piece, titled, “Unconventional ideas of Egyptian lifting methods”, they state the following: “Rope is valid, like the Egyptian ropes of grasses, papyrus etc. Wooden pulleys are very effective and easily fabricated, no problem for the Egyptians either. Methods of lifting were obviously employed in the raising of 300 tonnes obelisks in Egypt. For example, ‘the Vatican in 1586 moved a 330-ton Egyptian obelisk to St. Peter’s Square. It is known that lifting the stone into vertical position required 74 horses and 900 men using ropes and pulleys.’”

We must also remember that the ancient pyramids in Egypt were built without the aid of all of the modern equipment that enables such wonders to be built today.

Not too long after the flood, we read in Genesis 11:6: “And the LORD said, ‘Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them.’” The indication is that unless they were stopped, mankind would move ahead quickly to do great things, and so God took the appropriate action at that time by confusing the language.

If Noah building the ark is still considered impossible by some, thinking that it didn’t, or couldn’t happen, then the veracity of God’s Word is questioned.   As we have said on so many occasions, if one part of the Bible is wrong, then the rest cannot be trusted either!   Noah and his family (perhaps with the help of hired workers) did build the ark because God commanded them to do so and we have the biblical record of this.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

Let us look at the passage of Scripture that gives us a view of the problem that had caused such anguish for God. Genesis 6:3 is very revealing:

“And the LORD said, ‘My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’”

There have been two different explanations over the years about the period of 120 years, and it is worth reviewing these first.

Some believe that this period of 120 years was the maximum time that men would live in the future. Up until this time, many had lived way beyond 120 years – note that Adam lived until he was 930, Seth 912, Enosh 905, Cainan 910, Mahalalel 895, Jared 962, Enoch 365, Methuselah 969, Lamech 777 and Noah 500 (see Genesis, chapter 5). However, after the Flood we read that Noah lived a further 350 years; Shem lived until he was 600, Arphaxad 438, Salah 433, Eber 464, Peleg 239, Reu 239, Serug 230, Nahor 148, Terah 205 (all of these are shown in Genesis 11), Abraham 175, Isaac 180.

Secondly, many others believe that the 120 years was the time that God gave mankind before the Flood was to destroy everyone on the earth except the eight people who went into the ark.   If we look at the reason why this was to happen, it would appear from the context that it is not the longevity of mankind but is, more likely, to be applicable to the time humanity had before the Flood would occur. Many Bible scholars feel that God was giving mankind 120 years in which to repent of their wrong way of life, after which would come judgment for their wickedness.

As mentioned, Genesis 6:3 refers to the 120 years.   There is no Scriptural reference that God instructed Noah, at this same time, to immediately build the ark.  God made this decision at a time that was separate to the subsequent instruction to build the ark.  We read the instruction in Genesis 6:14-18:

“Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch.  And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits.  You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark—you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.”

Noah was told to build an ark – and for him, his sons, his wife and his sons’ wives with him to go into the ark – his sons must have been born and married at the time this instruction was made and the promise given.

Genesis, chapter 5, gives the genealogy from Adam to Noah, and in verse 32 we read that Noah was five hundred years old and begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.  It is interesting to read of the events of Genesis 6:1-7 which took place and which caused God such anguish, and in verse 9 Noah “found grace in the eyes of the Lord” as he would not have been involved in all of the ungodly activity that made God pronounce His displeasure and condemnation in verse 3.

We read in Genesis 11:10: “This is the genealogy of Shem: Shem was 100 years old, and begot Arphaxad two years after the flood.” This leads to the conclusion that Shem was 98 years old when the flood ended, and 97 when the flood began.  In Genesis 7:11 we are told that the flood began in the 600th year of Noah’s life, meaning that he must have fathered Shem when he was 503.  We understand from Genesis 6:18 that God did not instruct Noah to build the ark until after his sons were born, and after they had wives of their own.  Let us make an assumption (which we have to do as Scripture does not give exact dates) that Noah fathered his three sons in three consecutive years which would mean that his last son would be born when he was 505 years old.

We have to make further assumptions as to the age when his sons married.   Let us say that Noah’s three sons were around 20 years old when they married; this would mean that Noah would be around 525 when God instructed him to build the ark.  Noah was 600 years old when the flood came and this would mean that the building of the ark could not have taken more than 75 years – not the 120 years that some have assumed.   In fact, this figure could be less if the assumptions made about the birth of the three sons was not as quick as calculated and the age that they married was greater than the assumed age of 20.   In fact, it is legitimate to make these assumptions because the biblical record is silent on these matters.   However, it is unmistakable that the time needed to build the ark was nowhere near the 120 years that some have assumed.

When reviewing the 120 years of Genesis 6:3, we find that this goes back to the time when Noah was 480 years old, not 500, simply because the Bible reveals that Noah was 500 when he began having sons (Genesis 5:32) but this does not mean that God could not have begun communicating earlier about what He had in mind at a later time.

In brief summary:

God must have first spoken to Noah at age 480

1. Noah sired sons from the age of 500
2. His three sons were married
3. God gave the commission to Noah to build the ark for “you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.”
4. Noah was 600 when he entered the ark
5. The 120 years of God’s patience with mankind at that time ended when Noah entered the ark at age 600
6. The maximum time that it took to build the ark would be around 75 years – or less.

This is an interesting subject, but whatever the exact time it took to build the ark, it is only of academic interest and is a non-salvational matter.   However, the story of Noah’s Ark is a warning that we can take from the historical record showing how God hates sin and the sinful ways of man.   It may not be too long now before God sends Christ back to this earth to destroy man’s sinful ways and societies once again but, this time, He will usher in the wonderful Kingdom of God.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

Over many years, we have been asked if we are, or are part of, the true Church of God. We have answered this a number of times; please see:

Q&A – Why Does CEG exist?  This is in our weekly Update number 96 on 6^th June 2003.

Q&A – Are You the True Church? This is in our weekly Update number 479 on 11^th February 2011.

There have been many other references to this, which have been included in our new booklet “How to Find the True Church of God”, where we state the following on pages 1 and 2:

“Even though God’s true Church—the body of Christ (Colossians 1:24)—is a spiritual organism, consisting of all who have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, it is nevertheless physically organized.  Organizations that are divided among themselves need to strive to come to the unity of the faith (Jude 3) and to embrace the unity of the Truth.

“It is the responsibility of every Christian to ascertain where the Truth is being upheld and taught; and this can only be accomplished by comparing the teachings and practices of a particular Church organization with the requirements of the Bible. We read in Acts 17:11 about the people in Berea: ‘These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.’

“We do believe that the Church of the Eternal God and its international affiliates in Canada, the UK and German-speaking areas are part of the true Church of God. While we are not saying that our organizations comprise the entirety of the Church of God, we are saying that we differ remarkably in many areas from other Church organizations, which all claim to represent true Christianity.”

To try to elaborate on this (hopefully, once and for all), let us give an analogy.

Suppose that you had received excellent grades in your “A” level studies at school and were going to make an application to attend a university in the UK.   In the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2018, a UK university league table revealed the 93 best UK universities and colleges.   Of these, the universities of Cambridge and Oxford came out as the top two.   The credentials of these two universities are outstanding.

According to Wikipedia, “The University of Cambridge (informally Cambridge University) is a collegiate public research university in Cambridge, England. Founded in 1209 and granted a royal charter by King Henry III in 1231, Cambridge is the second-oldest university in the English-speaking world and the world’s fourth-oldest surviving university. The university has educated many notable alumni, including eminent mathematicians, scientists, politicians, lawyers, philosophers, writers, actors and foreign Heads of State.  Ninety-seven Nobel laureates, fifteen British prime ministers and ten Field medalists  have been affiliated with Cambridge as students, faculty or alumni.”

According to Wikipedia, “Oxford university has no known date of foundation, but there is evidence of teaching as far back as 1096, making it the oldest university in the English-speaking world and the world’s second-oldest university in continuous operation.   Oxford has educated many notable alumni, including 28 Nobel laureates, 27 Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom and many heads of state and government around the world.  Oxford is the home of the Rhodes Scholarship, one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious international scholarships, which has brought graduate students to study at the university for more than a century.”

There are 127 other universities listed, with some being very good indeed, and with an impressive history and some which were only created in more recent times. How would you choose if you wanted the very best chance of getting the most valuable education that was available and would equip you to achieve excellency in your chosen career? Would it be the academic teaching that would attract you; or the one that was nearest to your home or the one with the best social life? What about going to the one where your school friends were also going to enrol? Would you be influenced by the decisions of others? What criteria would you use?

Those who wanted to become the best educated and the most successful in their field would surely choose the university that would offer them the greatest chance of success. They would check up on the courses and the teaching that they would receive to ensure that they would be able to achieve their goals. Anything less than this might mean that they may do well but not as well as they could have done with a little more care and research.

If we apply this analogy to the true Church of God, it can be seen that there are those who have chosen a particular Church of God organization to attend, based on the wrong criteria. Areas of consideration can be given to which Church group is closest to them, where the biggest congregation may be, what the social life is like, whether it has facilities for children, and whether their friends are there. They might like it best where they feel most comfortable. These are interesting decisions to make, but the basic, most fundamental question can be overlooked; that of where the Truth is best taught without fear or compromise.

Any serious prospective university undergraduate would surely focus entirely on the education that he would receive and that same yardstick must be used by those within the Church of God.

After the spiritual mayhem of the 1990’s when false teachers altered the true doctrines that the Church of God had taught for nearly 2,000 years (compare 2 Peter 2:1-3), those who would not submit to such heresy had to make a choice of where to attend. There were those who seemed to make decisions based on reasons other than doctrine.   However, the answer is to find the Church of God organizations which teach the biblical truth without fear of favour. Those who choose for other reasons might still make it into the Kingdom of God after perhaps having to endure serious pain and suffering; but those whose main focus is on doctrinal fidelity will certainly make it into God’s Kingdom subject to staying faithful until the end of their lives.

Attending where the whole Truth of God is taught will give members the best chance of making it into the Kingdom of God. Choosing where a person attends based on criteria other than doctrinal teaching could be a dangerous approach. It is much better to attend where the Truth is taught without compromise, political expediency or any other consideration than to be where a more liberal view may be taken.

The question was “Do You Believe That You Are, or Are Part of, the True Church of God?” The answer is simple. Yes, we believe that the Church of the Eternal God and its international affiliates in Canada, the UK and German-speaking areas are part of the true Church of God, and, most importantly, certainly fit into the category where doctrinal fidelity is at the very heart of the Truth that is taught boldly, fully, and without compromise.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)