How Anglo-Israelism Entered the Churches of God
A history of the doctrine from
John Wilson to Joseph W. Tkach

Ministers of Jesus Christ do not want their understanding of the pure Word of God to be polluted by the world. Yet in every generation the culture, customs, beliefs, traditions and values of society, as well as the ministry's own sinful natures, corrupt the understanding of even the most converted.

Prophetic doctrines are naturally vulnerable to such corruption. This corruption results, in part, from the desire of many Christians to see prophecy fulfilled —- especially prophecies of their Lord's return. Like thirsty people in a desert who believe mirages are real, these Christians see prophetic fulfillment where none exists.

An overzealous desire to silence those who disbelieve the Bible may also corrupt our understanding of Scripture. Biblical prophecy displays God's inspiration of the Scriptures, but some Christians have unconsciously misread biblical prophecy trying to make it say things it does not, all in a vain attempt to "prove" the Bible. The Church must guard against such misguided zeal lest in the end its message be further ridiculed.

Another corrupting influence on our understanding is the tendency to misunderstand the nature of the biblical literature itself. While it is not difficult to grasp the general moral messages of the biblical prophets, to grasp the details of their messages requires more than a casual approach to the text. Exegesis benefits from an appreciation of the intricacies of the biblical languages. It requires a consideration of the ancient literary genres used by the prophets and their compilers. And it demands an awareness of the original circumstances under which the prophecy was given.

A wise interpreter pays close attention to the linguistic, literary, historical, cultural and canonical contexts in which God gave his word. Unfortunately, many Christians have read the Bible as if it were written according to the literary standards of post-Enlightenment Europe. And many Christians have rejected and ridiculed scholarship that could have tempered their opinions.

Wisdom moves Christians to consider the role that their own fears, prejudices and political leanings have in shaping their interpretations. Christians —- ministers and laymembers alike —- often share the fears, prejudices and political leanings prevalent in their society. As a result, Christians may unconsciously read these attitudes into the Bible, especially biblical prophecy. When this happens, instead of seeing the future, Christians only see distorted reflections of themselves.

Unfortunately, the history of Christian prophetic interpretation is not encouraging. Misinterpretation has been rampant, disappointment from failed prophetic doctrines all too common.

When a prophetic doctrine fails, Christians generally react in three ways:

1) They become cynically disillusioned,

2) They deny the failure through some form of reinterpretation or

3) They maturely confess their error.

The Worldwide Church of God strives to be a mature church. It struggles against the vanity, pride and traditionalism that shackle its advancement, while wishing to uphold those things that God's Word truly teaches. In that spirit it investigates what beliefs, what values and what traditions it holds that might be culturally bound.

The Church realizes that our historic prophetic doctrines have come to us through Herbert Armstrong. It respects him as the man God used to bring many to a saving knowledge of Christ. Nevertheless, Mr. Armstrong's prophetic writings are no less subject to investigation than mine or yours. The Church should ask of his teachings the same searching questions it should ask of anyone's teachings.

In that spirit it is fair to ask, What portions of Herbert Armstrong's prophetic teachings were biblically sound, and what portions were not? Did culture ever influence his teachings more than the Bible?

Mr. Armstrong wrote so much on biblical prophecy that this paper cannot cover it all. This study focuses, therefore, on the prophetic doctrine that more than any other shaped his thinking and ministry —- Anglo-Israelism.

Herbert Armstrong Tests the Church of God

Early in his conversion, Herbert Armstrong believed that the Church of God (Seventh Day) understood the Bible better than any other group. Yet it troubled him that they were small, weak and virtually unknown. How could this be God's Church?

If this were God's Church, he reasoned, then it should be willing to confess doctrinal error and change. While he did not expect to find a Church perfect in knowledge, he did expect to find a Church willing to grow in knowledge. Consequently, before he would become a member of the Church of God, he decided to test its willingness to do just that.

This approach assumed three things. The first assumption was that a test of knowledge and the willingness to accept "new truth" was the primary way to determine where God was working. The second assumption was that a test for one of the Church's leaders would be a sufficient test for the Church as a whole. The third assumption was that Mr. Armstrong himself understood the Bible well enough to administer such a test. It apparently never occurred to him to ask that the Church of God test him as well. It was the Church of God (Seventh Day), not he, that was on trial.

His first test dealt with a minor difference over how to understand Matthew 28:1, one of Jesus' resurrection appearances. The second test was greater. It dealt with prophecies of the end-time House of Israel.

Prophecy had played an important role in converting Herbert Armstrong. As he struggled over his faith, he "realized that the place to start was to prove whether God exists and whether the Holy Bible is his revelation." But how to do this? Though he studied several subjects, it was ultimately his investigation of Bible prophecy that led him to believe in the divine inspiration of the Scriptures.

He concluded that "in every instance (except in prophecies about a time yet future), [biblical prophecy] had come to pass precisely as written!" (The Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong, Pasadena, California: Worldwide Church of God, 1986, volume 1, 296–7). It is no surprise, then, that prophecy continued to play an important role in his thinking and in his test of the Church of God (Seventh Day).

Like many Protestants, the Church of God (Seventh Day) believed that many Old Testament prophecies about Israel had yet to be fulfilled. Their general Adventist perspective taught that God would eventually fulfill these prophecies among the Jews.

Herbert Armstrong thought otherwise. He believed Anglo-Israelism —- the doctrine that the Anglo-Saxons of the United States and Britain were the true descendants of the House of Israel, while the Jews descended from Israel's other division, the House of Judah —- provided the key to understanding the prophets. He concluded that instead of applying the House of Israel prophecies to the Jews, one should apply them to the United States and the British Commonwealth.

As we will see in detail later, Mr. Armstrong's second test was a detailed presentation of his views on Anglo-Israelism. If they accepted what he had to say, that would prove they were who they said they were, the Church of God.

After he read Mr. Armstrong's manuscript, A.N. Dugger, editor of the Church's Bible Advocate, appeared to agree with him. Yet he was unwilling to proclaim it. He wrote to Mr. Armstrong:

I am returning from the Arkansas conference . . . and have just finished the manuscript on the Third Angel's Message and British Israel. . . . You have put much work on this and I am impressed to write you now while the matter is fresh on my mind. . . . I have seen no work near its equal in clearness and completeness. You surely are right, and while I cannot use it in the paper at the present you may be sure that your labor has surely not been in vain. . . . There is a purpose in your having gone into this matter so deeply . . . and you will hear more from these truths and the light herein revealed later. (A.N. Dugger to Herbert W. Armstrong, 28 July 1929, The Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong, 1967 ed., 406)1

Dugger's response deeply disappointed Herbert Armstrong.

Did this Church accept and proclaim this vital new truth —- the key that unlocks the doors to all prophecy? Here was the key to understanding one third of the whole Bible. But this Church refused then to accept it or preach it or publish it . . . though their leader frankly confessed it was truth and a revelation from God!

Yet here was the Church which appeared to have more truth, and less error than any other. . . . 

Truly, this was bewildering! (The Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong, 1967 ed., 346)

Herbert Armstrong couldn't understand why Dugger treated Anglo-Israelism so casually. In Mr. Armstrong's eyes, this doctrine directly affected the preaching of the gospel. It gave it power, at a time in world history that the gospel needed more power. Jesus was about to return!

Mr. Armstrong's bewilderment was further compounded by his deep conviction, already formed, that God had commissioned him, and no other, to shout an end-time Anglo-Israelite message to the world. (We will closely examine this conviction later in this paper). Though not directly expressed in his Autobiography, Mr. Armstrong believed as early as January 1929 that the rejection of Anglo-Israelism was tantamount to rejecting him as God's special messenger.

But was Anglo-Israelism "new truth," or had the Church of God heard it before?

The Origins of Anglo-Israelism

Anglo-Israelism did not originate with Herbert Armstrong. Some believe it originated as far back as 1649, when John Sadler speculated in Rights to the Kingdom that the English descended from Israel's lost tribes.

This paragraph refers to Jacques Abbadie (and other spellings), 1654-1727. He wrote in French for French Huguenot refugees in England, extolling the virtues of Britain and its monarchy. Some of his works were translated into English and German. He wrote the Le Triomphe..., which was published in Amsterdam. He was made Dean of Kilaloe in Ireland in recognition of his support for William of Orange. His work, Le Triomphe... is available in several academic libraries - see the Union Catalog.

Mike Linacre, Research Associate, University of Chicago

"Abbadie began his masterpiece Traite de la verite de la religion chretienne (1684) at age 22. A Huguenot, he fled France upon the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes [1685] and became the pastor of a French congregation in Berlin. From 1689 he pastored a church in London, eventually retiring to Killalow, Ireland, where he died in 1727. Abbadie's Traite, which was translated into German and English [A vindication of the truth of Christian religion, 1694, 1698], is perhaps the finest apologetic work of the century" (William Lane Craig, The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus During the Deist Controversy (Edwin Mellen Press, 1985), p. 212.

In 1723 a Dr. Abade allegedly wrote, "Unless the ten tribes have flown into the air . . . they must be sought for in the north and west, and in the British Isles."2 Another version of this story calls him Dean Abbadie of Kilaloe, Ireland. The quotation in this version of the story is also different: "Unless the ten lost tribes of Israel are flown into the air . . . they must be those ten Gothic tribes, that entered Europe in the fifth century . . . and founded the ten nations of modern Europe." The quotation is supposed to have been published in his book Triomphe de la Religion.3

Other scholars believe Anglo-Israelism began with Richard Brothers, a Canadian madman. Around 1800 Brothers both amused and irritated the upper echelons of English society. Troubled by visions, Brothers claimed to be God's prophet called to warn London of its impending doom. Armageddon was coming. Of all the centers of evil and corruption, Parliament was singled out for God's special wrath. He identified it as the beast of Revelation to which God gave the number 666.

Brothers increased his comic infamy by claiming descent from King David, through the apostle James, the brother of Jesus Christ. God told him, Brothers said, that he was the "nephew of the Almighty." To complete the picture, Brothers claimed to have received a revelation as to the racial origin of the English people —- they were Israelites.

Brothers reasoned that since he was a descendant of King David and the English were Israelites, only he had the right to be king of England. George III disagreed. He had Brothers convicted of treason and sent to an asylum.

Though motivated by visions, Brothers used Scripture to justify his claims. Yet ultimately the "revelation" that England was Israel didn't come from the Bible. It came from his madness.

Brothers died insane in 1824. Before he died, his caretakers had concluded that Brothers was harmless enough to be released. After his release he was supported by a handful of his disciples. They continued publishing his ideas until 1850.4

Modern Anglo-Israelism arose during those waning years of Brothers' cult, primarily through the writings of John Wilson. Wilson based his theories on his understanding of Scripture, not upon a madman's dreams. While there are similarities between what Wilson and Brothers taught, there are many significant differences. To date, no one has produced a single passage from Wilson that has been clearly influenced by Brothers. While the chronological overlap of Wilson's book with the remnants of Brothers' cult suggests that the madman Brothers planted the germ for Wilson's ideas, that suggestion remains unproven.

There is some evidence that other writers preceded Wilson in giving Anglo-Israelism an apparently biblical face. Did these writers actually exist, and if so, did they have ties to Brothers' cult? At the present time, we cannot say.5 Perhaps Wilson is not the originator of modern Anglo-Israelism after all. If so, then he can at least be remembered for popularizing the belief.

In 1840 Wilson published Our Israelitish Origin. The public's demand for it was such that the printers produced several editions, in both England and America.

The American edition came out in 1850. The widely known George Storrs read and recommended it.6 His recommendation places him among the first American Anglo-Israelites.

George Storrs

Anglo-Israelism began to catch on about the same time Millerism excited both American and British evangelicals. Millerism —- the belief that Jesus would return sometime in the period of 1843-45 and that believers should, therefore, warn others and prepare themselves —- began with William Miller, a poor and reluctant Baptist preacher from rural New York state. Miller was almost ignored by the public until Joshua Himes converted to Miller's belief. Himes used his extensive advertising and publishing skills to spread the word.

Millerites first proclaimed the autumn of 1843, then the spring, and later the autumn of 1844, as God's appointed time. When their predictions failed, their humiliation became known as the Great Disappointment.

Millerism penetrated Great Britain by 1840. There the Disappointment was delayed a year because many British Millerites thought 1845, not 1844, was the expected year. British converts to Millerism generally came from smaller, prophetically oriented churches on the fringes of British Christianity. These believers generally took a literal approach to Scripture. Often their prophetic views were bookish, lacking any social impact. By 1845, British offshoots of the Anglo-Israelite movement were among those attracted to Millerism.7

William Miller encouraged his followers to read British writers on prophecy. It seems there was some communication between Millerites and various British prophecy buffs. In that way, Millerism helped set the stage for the introduction of Anglo-Israelism in the United States. While we aren't certain, that would explain how George Storrs, a former Millerite, came to recommend Our Israelitish Origins in 1850 and why the book sold well in this country.

Before then, the Great Disappointment had led to the collapse of Millerism and the discrediting of its leaders. Most Millerites returned to their former churches. Those who did not became known as Adventists, because they continued to emphasize the imminent second advent of Christ. Their numbers included a few Sabbathkeepers.

After the Great Disappointment George Storrs continued working for the Adventist cause. Storrs' most important contribution to the movement came the day he started teaching that the dead were unconscious. The dead, Storrs believed, are not in heaven. They are not in hell. They are asleep in their graves. People do not have immortal souls. They must be given eternal life through Jesus Christ at the resurrection of the saints.

Storrs discovered this doctrine while riding in a railroad car. He literally picked it up off the floor, where he had found a tract on the subject written by an independent Sunday-keeping preacher. Storrs took the teaching and popularized it among Adventists. "Soul sleep" thus became an identifying tenet of most developing Adventist sects.

Although many Adventists opposed sect formation, on the grounds that organized sects immediately became Babylonian by virtue of their being organized, the advantages of organization soon became apparent. As typical in sect formation, Adventist groups began to coalesce around doctrines each group felt justified their independent organization. Adventist doctrinal differences revolved around the Sabbath, the nature of the millennium, the state of the dead, church government and Ellen G. White's prophetic claims.

This process of sect formation among the earliest Adventist groups continued until the 1920s. Since then, additional sects have arisen as offshoots of them. Though the parent groups decided their differences justified separate organizations, their similarities frequently produced cooperation between their members.

Storrs played a part in this process. In 1863 he helped found the smallest of the Adventist bodies, the Life and Advent Union, a Sunday-observing sect. In 1964 the Life and Advent Union merged into the Advent Christian Church.

Although the group Storrs helped found represented an extremely small branch of Adventism, his influence far exceeded its meager numbers. Every branch of Adventism, including the Seventh-day Adventists, the Church of God (Seventh Day) and the Jehovah Witnesses, owe their doctrine of conditional immortality to this man.8 Because we, the members of the Worldwide Church of God, trace our history through the influences of the Church of God (Seventh Day), the same can be said of us.

In light of Storrs' widespread influence among Adventists, one can conclude that his recommendation of Our Israelitish Origins helped spread Anglo-Israelism among the American Adventist movement. If George Storrs recommended a book, then one can be reasonably sure that others would have read it.

R.V. Lyon

One who may have followed Storrs' recommendation was R.V. Lyon. Lyon has been misidentified as a Church of God (Seventh Day) minister.9 The confusion arises because Lyon, though not a Sabbathkeeper, had influence within the Church of God (Seventh Day).

Ordained a Baptist preacher, Lyon left the Baptists to become a Millerite. After the Great Disappointment he settled in a group that, with other groups, eventually coalesced into the Church of God (Abrahamic Faith). The highly independent congregations within that fellowship taught conditional immortality, an earthly kingdom of God and Israel's restoration to Palestine.

So completely did they identify themselves with a belief in Israel's restoration that they have at times been known as the Restoration Church of God. While their restorationism would appear to have created a receptive atmosphere for Anglo-Israelism, we know of no one from among them who accepted that doctrine. Nonetheless, it is but a short step from Lyon's restorationism to classic Anglo-Israelism.10

The shortness of the step is evident in Lyon's conviction that the Jews do not represent all of end-time Israel. He understood the history of Israel's two divisions and how each went into separate captivities. He concluded that only the Jews returned. Israel supposedly continued to exist as an independent people from the Jews, but lost their identity.

Lyon believed Ezekiel 37:15–28 to be an important restorationist prophecy. It speaks of the reunification of Judah and Israel, and how they are again to be ruled by one king —- King David. In interpreting this passage, Lyon applied both a literalist and a typological hermeneutic. He did not seem to be aware of this inconsistency.

Let's examine Lyon's typological explanation first. In his booklet The Scattering and Restoration of Israel, Lyon explained that the "David" of Ezekiel 37 was actually Jesus Christ.11 King David, Lyon understood, was an ancient type of the Messiah. So Ezekiel's reference to David, Lyon believed, was actually a typological reference to Jesus.

While literalists would find such an explanation problematic, Lyon was justified in interpreting Ezekiel 37 typologically. Consider Ezekiel's broader message. A primary theme in Ezekiel is Israel's violation of the old covenant (16:8, 59–62; 17:13–19). This was evidenced by their commandment breaking and defilement of the Temple. Historically, Israel's violation of the covenant led to the rebellion of the northern tribes and their rejection of the Davidic monarchy, as well as the nation's division. Eventually, Babylon invaded Judah, taking away many captives. God called Ezekiel to proclaim to his fellow Israelite captives the final collapse of Judah, the destruction of the Temple and the apparent end of the Davidic rule.

Accompanying Ezekiel's message of doom is one of hope. In chapter 20 Ezekiel proclaims God as Israel's king (20:33). As Savior, God will deliver them from their tribulation. He will bring them within the bond of the covenant (verse 37). The nation will revive within this renewed relationship (verses 40-44).

In chapter 37 Ezekiel prophesies that God will revive the people, Israel, who spiritually had been as dead, dry bones. God will place his Spirit within them, giving them life (Ezekiel 37:13–4).

Ezekiel 37:15–27 expands this theme. Ezekiel explains that their King and Savior —- already established as God —- will dwell in their midst (verse 27). Dwelling among his people, he will make a new covenant with them (verse 26). Israel will again be God's people (verse 27). Unlike the old covenant they violated, the new covenant will be everlasting.

Other Old Testament prophets also spoke of a new David, and a new son of David, who would lead the nation with righteousness (Isaiah 11:1–3; 9:6–7, 16:5; Jeremiah 23:5, 33:15). The prophets saw David and Solomon as types of the messianic king. This view became a principal typological theme of the New Testament.

Jesus is the new David/Solomon (Revelation 5:5, 22:16). Not only is Jesus a descendant of David through Mary (Matthew 1; John 7:42; 2 Timothy 2:8), but also in him are typologically fulfilled the Davidic promises. He is the one to sit on David's throne (Luke 1:32). His kingdom is the kingdom of David (Mark 11:10). With the founding of the Church, God raises David's tabernacle (Acts 15:13–19). As the antitype of Solomon, Jesus is the Son of David (Matthew 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30–31; 21:19; 15). In the Psalms, the Church sees David as the type, Jesus as the antitype (Acts 2:25, 34; 4:25; 13:33, 35). In Hebrews, Solomon is a type of Jesus (cp. Hebrews 1:5; 2 Samuel 7:13–14). It is Jesus who fulfills God's promise that David would never lack an heir (Acts 13:34–36). The New Testament does not look to a resurrected David, for it has a resurrected Christ (Acts 2:25–36; 13:34–37).

As the Messianic type, the original David reunited the tribes (2 Samuel 5:1–5). With that as background, Ezekiel 37 looks to the future antitypical "David" who will bring a greater reunification. He reigns in Israel at the time God establishes his new covenant with them.

Thus, in the New Testament typological interpretation of the Old, the greater fulfillment of prophecy is in the antitype (Christ) rather than the type. Christ is a greater king than David or Solomon. Since Christ is the fulfillment of the prophets, why look elsewhere for some other fulfillment?

Lyon apparently believed this at least as far as it applied to the "David" of Ezekiel 37. However, having started typologically, he then applied a literalist hermeneutic to every other part of the chapter. How he justified his inconsistency, he does not explain.

Lyon reasoned that Ezekiel 37 could only be fulfilled millennially. Though the text only states that "David" would rule over a unified Israel, Lyon assumed Israel's reunification would be coincident with "David's" rule. It seemed not to occur to Lyon that perhaps reunification would occur thousands of years before David's rule.

In his discussion Lyon ignored the early chapters of Ezekiel, which speak of Israelites and Jews as already dwelling together (see Ezekiel chapters 3-4, 8-11). Missing also was Jesus' claim that when he went to the Jews he went "only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel" (Matthew 15:24). For Jesus, "House of Israel" and "Jews" were synonymous. Finally, Lyon did not discuss the New Testament's witness that God has already made the new covenant with spiritual Israel —- the Church (Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Hebrews 8:6).

Ignoring the mingling of Israel and Judah, Lyon argued that the Church must look beyond the Jews to find Israel today. Yet to the question, Where is Israel today? Lyon offered no answer. Lyon cuddled up to Anglo-Israelism, but apparently did not embrace it.

So why mention him? Lyon is important because of his influence within the early Adventist movement. By the American Civil War, he was evangelizing across the Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada. In addition to preaching, for 30 years Lyon sent his free literature to anyone who requested it, until his death in 1891. He had readers throughout the northern United States and Canada. Though he was not widely known among the general public, Lyon and his prophetic doctrines were known and welcome among those who would become the Church of God (Seventh Day).

Through the latter 1800s and early 1900s, restorationists such as R.V. Lyon and ministers of what would become the Church of God (Seventh Day) had many contacts.12 While the Sabbath separated them, both groups had much in common, including a fascination with Israel. While it was not until 1874 that elements of the future Church of God (Seventh-Day) published Lyon's prophetic viewpoints, his influence was indirectly felt earlier than that through the person of R.W. Reed.

R.W. Reed

Reed was a member of the Sabbath-observing Church of Christ at Marion, Iowa.13 In those years, the congregations that later formed the Church of God (Seventh Day) acted independently of each other. In the mid-1860s members of the Marion congregation revived the defunct Hope of Israel, which later became The Bible Advocate. The paper was a local, not a national, production supported by private contributions from around the country. Reed was one of those instrumental in the paper's revival.

Like Lyon, Reed believed there were more Israelites in the world than just the Jews. In 1868 he wrote an article for The Hope of Israel explaining this position.14 A comparison between Reed's 1868 articles and Lyon's earlier 1861 tract, The Scattering and Restoration of Israel, clearly shows the influence. In every point Reed followed Lyon's arguments. The influence was obvious. And just like Lyon, Reed left the question unanswered: If a non-Jewish Israel still exists, where is it?

In the following years, the paper failed two more times. Changing its name to The Advent and Sabbath Advocate didn't help. The disease looked terminal. Its salvation came in March 1874 when Jacob Brinkerhoff spent all of his savings to keep it going.

Jacob Brinkerhoff Confronts Anglo-Israelism

Brinkerhoff became the one person editorially responsible for the paper, though the Iowa brethren lent their support and viewed it as a Church publication. The paper changed its name to The Sabbath Advocate, but continued its previous policy of publishing opposing views on a variety of biblical subjects. Brinkerhoff had no problem with this. As long as the articles did not criticize the central doctrines of the paper, which included the Sabbath, an earthly kingdom of God and opposition to the Seventh-day Adventist prophetess Ellen G. White, he would print them.

Shortly after taking over the paper, Brinkerhoff reprinted within its pages Lyon's tract about Israel. Though the question, Where are the lost tribes? remained unanswered, it was not long before some Sabbatarians thought they knew the answer.

In 1884 the paper reported that a Brother Ellsworth believed in Anglo-Israelism and had converted several others to it. This is the first clear statement of Anglo-Israelism's presence in the Sabbath-observing Churches of God. By then, Lyon's views had circulated among them for more than a decade.

Brinkerhoff became concerned. In response, he wrote an article that ridiculed Anglo-Israelism.15 Six months later he published a second, more lengthy refutation.16

But the issue would not die. Just two issues after the second refutation, in early 1885, Brinkerhoff reprinted an article from the otherwise unknown Bible Banner.17 Though not relevant to the article's main theme, it nevertheless casually commented that England was Israel. Brinkerhoff responded to this statement by remarking that the idea had no evidence to support it.18

That was the last mention of Anglo-Israelism in any Church of God (Seventh Day) publication for several years. We don't hear of it again until 1900, when Merritt Dickinson accepted it.

After spending three years in Jerusalem, the Dickinson family returned to the United States to settle in Oklahoma. It was there that Merritt became an Anglo-Israelite.

Dickinson and Dugger Discuss Anglo-Israelism

A Dickinson family tradition says that in 1912 Merritt Dickinson and Andrew Dugger discussed Anglo-Israelism. (This is the same Dugger who later corresponded with Herbert Armstrong.) Andrew Dugger allegedly commented, "You can preach about that [Anglo-Israelism] if you want to, and there may be some truth to it; but you can't get anywhere with the people."19

Dugger's father had been an Advent Christian minister before accepting the Sabbath. (The Advent Christian Church was another offshoot of Millerism.) After accepting the Sabbath, the older Dugger played an important role in the national organization of the Church of God. In 1884 he established the Church's first Sabbath-school department and was elected their general conference's first vice-president. For several decades he was a contributing editor to the Church paper. In 1905 the Conference elected him to be the paper's managing editor.20

In 1906 the Church ordained A.F. Dugger's son Andrew to be an elder. A schoolteacher, though he didn't complete college, Andrew was alleged to be the most educated Church of God (Seventh Day) minister of his day. Eight years later he assumed the editorship of the Church paper, a position he held for two eventful decades.

The Seven-Times Theory

World War I began in 1914, the year A.N. Dugger became the editor of The Bible Advocate. Before this, Andrew's father had believed that a great war would break out sometime between 1912 and 1914. Decades later, Andrew explained that this belief sprang from his father's understanding of the seven "times" of punishment prophesied in Leviticus 26.21 That prophecy reads, "And if ye will . . . walk contrary unto me [the Lord]; then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins" (Leviticus 26:27–28, KJV).

A.F. Dugger interpreted the words "seven times" not as a sevenfold intensity of punishment, which a study of different translations and many commentaries would show, but as a duration of seven "times" in length [even though the word "times" is not in the Hebrew text].

How long were seven "times"? To answer this question, A.F. Dugger followed a common Adventist assumption that one prophetic "time" in the Bible equals one calendar year. Thus seven "times" are said to equal seven years.

However, the calculating does not stop there. Making another assumption that a prophetic year has 360 days, A.F. Dugger then multiplied seven years by 360. The result was 2,520 days.

He then applied the year-for-a-day assumption a second time, so that 2,520 days became 2,520 years. It was in this manner that a sevenfold intensity of punishment became transformed into a seven-year punishment, which in turn became a 2,520-year punishment.

What all of this mathematical exegesis supposedly proved was that the punishment God promised in Leviticus 26 to sinful Jews was to last for 2,520 years.

Even if one accepts that all the numeric gymnastics are valid, there remains for Christians another significant problem with this line of reasoning. Leviticus 26 says God imposed the curses for violation of the old covenant (Leviticus 26:2, 9, 15, 25). Leviticus 26 adds that the covenant relationship could be reestablished on national repentance, not upon the passing of a certain time-span (verses 40–42). Such was also the message of the prophets (e.g., Isaiah 24:4–5; Jeremiah 11:10; 22:8–9; Ezekiel 16:8, 59–62; Daniel 11:30, 32; Hosea 8:1). Therefore, for Leviticus 26 to have any modern application would require the continued validity of the old covenant.

That God prophesied the end of the old covenant and the establishment of a new —- an event fulfilled in Christ —- seems not to have affected A.F. Dugger's prophetic teaching (cp. Zechariah 11:10; Hosea 2:18–20; Jeremiah 31:31–34; Matthew 26:28; Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Hebrews 7:22; 8:6–13).

Hebrews 8:13 says that the old covenant was obsolete, was growing old, and was about to disappear. Yet fundamental to A.F. Dugger's exegesis is the ipso facto imposition of the old covenant blessings and cursings on modern peoples.

In his favor, we can say that A.F. Dugger correctly understood that the curses of Leviticus 26 began to reach their climax with Nebuchadnezzar's first siege of Jerusalem. The problem lay in how long he believed the curse would last. Dugger dated Nebuchadnezzar's first siege to 606 b.c. With that as his beginning point, he calculated 2,520 years forward and came to a.d. 1914.

The year 1914 then took on great importance. Dugger thought that 1914 was the year in which God would remove the Levitical curse blocking the reestablishment of a Jewish state because the decreed time had passed. (He never thought that God might remove the curse at any time through repentance or by means of faith in Jesus' sacrifice.)

Dugger also believed that 1914 was to bring an end to the "times of the Gentiles" mentioned by Jesus Christ, who said "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Luke 21:24, KJV).

While it is true that the First World War began in 1914, and that it set in motion events that led to the establishment of a Jewish state, that does not verify A.F. Dugger's erroneous assumptions, misunderstandings or miscalculations (he was off by two years).22 While on the surface it appeared that Dugger was right, it appeared so only if one did not look too closely at the evidence.

Remember, just because world events appear to support an elaborate mathematical interpretation of Scripture, that does not make that interpretation correct. The corroboration may be an illusion. Those who put too much trust in the interpretive mirage set themselves up for a spiritual crisis once the illusion vanishes. A safer approach is to ask if the interpretation properly explains the biblical text. If it does not, no mathematical scheme, no historic event, can make it correct.

In the case of the seven-times theory, A.F. Dugger had accepted an approach first proposed by H. Grattan Guinness, a once popular, though now forgotten, British millenarian.23 Guinness' first book, The Approaching End of the Age, was originally published in 1878. Extremely popular, it went through 13 editions between 1878 and 1897. In 1918, after Guinness' death, E.H. Horne produced a revised and abridged edition.

In speaking of the supposed 2,520 years of Jewish punishment, Guinness wrote, "This is inferred from Scripture rather than distinctly stated in it."24 Having admitted this, however, Guinness proceeded to create an elaborately complex prophetic scheme. Though he was once a popular speaker, the failure of his date-setting doomed him to obscurity.

Guinness interpreted the 2,520 years as "the times of the gentiles." In a second book, Light for the Last Days, Guinness expanded his thoughts further. He dedicated a total of four chapters just to the seven "times" idea.25 Amazingly, Guinness proposed not one time span of 2,520 years, but many. These spans ended in 1884, 1889, 1893, 1898, 1906, 1915, 1917, 1923 and 1933–4.26

But of all these, 1917 was for him the most important.

The year is . . . doubly indicated as a final crisis date, in which the "Seven Times" run out. . . . There can be no question that those who live to see this year 1917 will have reached one of the most important, perhaps the most momentous, of these terminal years of crisis. (Light for the Last Days, 253, 255)

In Britain, Guinness was a sought-after speaker on prophecy.27 As for the United States, Richard Nickels reports that A.F. Dugger published Guinness' ideas in the Advocate in the 1890s.28 It appears, therefore, that the trail of the 2,520-year theory from Guinness through the elder Dugger resulted in it becoming an important part of Church of God eschatology.

On the other hand, Jehovah's Witnesses would readily notice another possible source of the seven-times doctrine —- themselves. Jehovah's Witnesses are the largest group that has descended from the disciples of Charles Taze Russell. Once called Russellites, today they are more commonly known as Jehovah's Witnesses. Though in a different form, the seven-times idea had circulated among the Russellites for several years before Guinness published his first book.

The Russellites were themselves a part of the Adventist movement. Charles Taze Russell had been a student of Jonas Wendell, an independent Sunday-keeping Adventist. When Wendell's prediction that Christ would return in 1874 failed, Wendell replaced it with another date —- 1914.29

The major difference between the Jehovah's Witnesses version of the 2,520-year doctrine and that of Guinness is that the Witnesses prefer Daniel over Leviticus to explain their understanding of the seven "times."30 Daniel 4 in the King James Version says that Nebuchadnezzar would be insane for seven "times." Jehovah's Witnesses see this as the type and the "time of the gentiles" as the antitype. From this premise they reason that the "time of the gentiles" was to last seven "times" or 2,520 years. They count the "time of the gentiles" from Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Jerusalem, which they incorrectly date to 607 b.c. Therefore, they believe that the "time of the gentiles" ended in a.d. 1914. Just as World War I confirmed to the Church of God (Seventh Day) that it properly understood prophecy, so it did for the Witnesses.

World War I also helped to popularize Anglo-Israelism. That is because Anglo-Israelites would claim that Ephraim, as the British Empire, had liberated Jerusalem from the Muslim Turk. They were giving it to their brothers, the Jews, all in fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

G.G. Rupert's Unique Anglo-Israelism

As previously noted, by 1914 Anglo-Israelism had penetrated the Church of God in the person of Merritt Dickinson. In Oklahoma, another Sabbathkeeper who embraced the doctrine was G.G. Rupert.

Rupert had been a Seventh-day Adventist missionary to South America and a regional conference leader in the United States. After leaving the Seventh-day Adventists, Rupert associated himself with the Church of God (Seventh Day).

Though an Anglo-Israelite, Rupert's version of Anglo-Israelism was unique. He rejected the racial descent theory and replaced it with one of spiritual descent. Spiritual Judah, he said, was the Greek Orthodox Church. Spiritual Israel he identified as the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant churches he labeled Ephraim. Since America was a Protestant stronghold, the United States was Ephraim. Because Hosea was written to Ephraim, Rupert believed Hosea was written for America. (Never mind the contextual evidence that places Hosea's intended readers in the eighth-century b.c.)

The Bible Advocate Publishes Anglo-Israelite Articles

In 1915 G.G. Rupert convinced A.N. Dugger to allow him to advertise his most famous book, The Yellow Peril, within the pages of The Bible Advocate. Though Rupert advertised in The Bible Advocate, he worked independently of it. Readers of Rupert's paper, The Remnant of Israel, formed a nucleus of followers.

After his death in the early 1920s, Rupert's wife continued the work. Though the paper ceased publication in 1929, a small remnant of Rupert's disciples remains.31

Despite all this, no evidence exists that proves Rupert to be the source for either Merritt Dickinson's or Herbert Armstrong's Anglo-Israelism. Rupert's Anglo-Israelism was not their Anglo-Israelism.

However, Herbert Armstrong did become familiar with Rupert's work. Copies of Rupert publications were among Mr. Armstrong's possessions. Rupert's observance of the biblical festivals might have increased his attractiveness to Herbert Armstrong. Still, an examination of Mr. Armstrong's correspondence for the late 1920s proves that his Anglo-Israelite beliefs came from another direction, which we will now discuss.

Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright

In 1917 A.A. Beauchamp issued his first edition of J.H. Allen's Anglo-Israelite classic, Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright. Though not a Church of God minister, Allen greatly affected the Church.

As we have mentioned, Merritt Dickinson was the first Church of God (Seventh Day) minister to preach Anglo-Israelism. He claimed to have accepted the doctrine about 1900, and to have discussed it with A.N. Dugger in 1912. This was before the Beauchamp edition of Judah's Sceptre. After its publication, Dickinson was one of its readers.32 From that point forward, it would have been natural for Allen's book to have shaped Dickinson's presentation of the subject.

Two years after Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright was released, Dickinson convinced A.N. Dugger to print Dickinson's own Anglo-Israelite articles in The Bible Advocate. The Church even distributed one of them —- "The Final Gathering of the Children of Israel" —- as a booklet.

The Great Pyramid

Through the years, bizarre beliefs have sometimes become attached to Anglo-Israelism. Among the oddest has been pyramidology. Pyramidologists claim that if one correctly interprets the measurements of the inner tunnels of the Great Pyramid of Giza one can know the future. Therefore, they believe that the Great Pyramid was inspired by God to help interpret biblical prophecy. Sad to say, this quackery found its way into the Church of God (Seventh Day). (Martin Gardner's Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science provides an excellent critique of this belief.)

In the spring of 1927, The Bible Advocate published two articles that advocated pyramidology. The articles claimed that the Great Pyramid proved that the Great Tribulation would start on May 29, 1928.33

Here, too, we find a tie-in with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Their founder, Charles Taze Russell, believed in pyramidology. He used it to supplement the Scriptures in predicting Christ's return.

After Russell's death, Judge Rutherford took over their organization. Rutherford didn't care for pyramidology and moved the main body of Witnesses to reject it. This led to splits within their church.

[In 1928] Rutherford . . . openly condemned resorting to non-biblical sources in the attempt to discover the will and plan of God. He specifically mentioned the Great Pyramid as an example. This provoked violent criticism from older members of the movement who had grown up under Russell's teaching and many of them withdrew (Charles S. Braden, These Also Believe, New York: Macmillan, 1949, 362. See also Edward Charles Gruss, Apostles of Denial, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978, 61–2).

Herbert Armstrong and the Great Pyramid

The pyramidology articles in the Bible Advocate did not go unnoticed. One reader who became especially interested was Herbert Armstrong. Wanting to learn more, he wrote to the author in care of The Bible Advocate. The Advocate forwarded his letter to Reverend Lincoln McConnell, pastor of the First Baptist Church of St. Petersburg, Florida.

Reverend McConnell responded to Mr. Armstrong's inquiry on June 3, 1927. His letter set in motion a chain of events more momentous than either Mr. Armstrong or Reverend McConnell could imagine.

Yes, there are many strictly scientific proofs that The Great Pyramid is more than a mere tomb these days, and I advise you, if you want the REAL THING in the way of proof to send to the A.A. Beauchamp Pub. Co., 603 Boyston Street, Boston., Mass. and get Davidson's great book on The Great Pyramid. . . . Then you will have plenty to occupy your time for months to come and will also have the most recent as well as the most scientific work ever written on the subject. . . . 

The most recent book on The Great Pyramid and a much easier one to read if you want this, is by "Discipulus," and can be had of the same people. . . . Its special value lies in the fact that it connects Pyramid truth with "British"-Israel truth in a fine way. (Reverend Lincoln McConnell to Herbert W. Armstrong, 3 June 1927, Herbert W. Armstrong Papers collection [HWAP], #867).

To emphasize his point, McConnell added,

I must say that if you really want to KNOW your Bible you will have to get the books on "Anglo-Israel". . . . You will never know the real truth the BOOK is teaching without this key. This sounds radical perhaps, but you will see when you study it that it's simple truth.

Herbert Armstrong took the challenge. As was his custom whenever studying a biblical subject, he went to the Portland, Oregon public library. At that time, the Pacific Northwest was a stronghold of Anglo-Israel belief. Because of this, the library's collection held several Anglo-Israel titles, including W.H. Poole's Anglo-Israel or the Saxon Race, Samuel Albert Brown's The House of Israel or the Anglo-Saxon, and the 1917 edition of J.H. Allen's Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright.34

Herbert Armstrong took some time to familiarize himself with these and other Anglo-Israelite works. Then, taking the advice of McConnell, he wrote to Beauchamp asking for more information on both Anglo-Israelism and on the Great Pyramid.

Gentlemen:

I have heard that the most recent book on the Great Pyramids is one by "Discipulus," published by you.

I know nothing about this book, but if it is authoritative, giving accurate and reliable measurements of the interior passages as well as other measurements, I want it.

I have seen the works by Smyth, and have read The Miracle in Stone by Seiss. If this book is equally authoritative and dependable, but giving more recent data and information, you may send it to me at once, C.O.D.

What do you regard as the most authoritative and dependable book on the Anglo-Israel theory? I have seen many on this subject which I could not regard as at all reliable. One book which I have read, Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, by Allen, appears to be more reliable than others I have seen. (Armstrong to A.A. Beauchamp Publishing Co., 28 March 1928)

Mr. Armstrong's letter reveals a familiarity with the more famous pyramidology works. He has read Seiss' The Miracle in Stone and seen the works of Charles Piazzi Smyth.

Of these, Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid by Smyth has historically been the most influential pyramidology book.

Our Inheritance is a classic of its kind. Few books illustrate so beautifully the ease with which an intelligent man, passionately convinced of a theory, can manipulate his subject matter in such a way as to make it conform to previously held opinions. (Martin Gardner, Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science, New York: Dover, 1957, 176)

Equally popular, if not as influential, was Miracle in Stone. It underwent 14 editions. Mr. Armstrong read both books.

As we have seen, Mr. Armstrong did not write Beauchamp merely to ask about pyramidology. He also asked for an opinion about Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, which by then he had read. Mr. Armstrong seemed unaware that Beauchamp was the publisher of Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright. For him to ask Beauchamp for an opinion as to its validity is like asking the pope if one should be Catholic.

In reply, Beauchamp commented about both pyramidology and Anglo-Israelism. As to "Discipulus"' pyramidology book, he said it was

very good and up to date. Much of the information is based on a book by Davidson entitled The Great Pyramid: Its Divine Message. It . . . is one of the most remarkable and most interesting things that I ever read on the subject after Smyth's great work. . . . 

I am sending you . . . a series of articles by Davidson. . . . They confirm in every respect the noble work done by Piazzi Smyth and for which he suffered scorn and ridicule.

Then he added,

You ask my opinion as to the most dependable book on the Israel theory? I have always thought myself that Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright was the best book. (A.A. Beauchamp to Armstrong, 5 April 1928, HWAP, #874).

Beauchamp, publisher of Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, enclosed with his letter a 12-page catalogue of all his publications. It would be fascinating to know what was in that catalogue and if Mr. Armstrong ordered anything from it. It might be particularly insightful to know if Mr. Armstrong subscribed to Beauchamp's magazine The New Watchman (1922–?), originally called The Watchman of Israel (1918-1922). As we shall see, the idea of being an end-time watchman to modern Israel became an important part of Mr. Armstrong's ministry. Did he pick up this theme from Beauchamp?35

Beauchamp was an interesting character. Before his correspondence with Mr. Armstrong, he had converted to a now-defunct offshoot of Christian Science called the Church of Integration. His publishing house became the principal means by which the Church of Integration grew. Through his influence, Anglo-Israelism became the central perspective of the sect, while its prophetess, Annie C. Bill, became increasingly fascinated with pyramidology.36

By the time Mr. Armstrong wrote to Beauchamp, he had already corresponded about Anglo-Israelism with his friends the Runcorns. In a lengthy letter to them he mentioned that he and his wife were nearly convinced of Anglo-Israelism's truthfulness, but they had yet to make a final decision. Nevertheless, he felt confident enough to speculate that God never intended the Sabbath to be for gentiles, but for one race only —- Israel. "In that case, the Sabbath, not being intended for the rest of the world, was not part of the Gospel of Christ, nor of the Apostles." And he wondered if modern racial Israel, to once again inherit their Abrahamic blessings, must become Sabbatarian besides becoming Christian. "But, unless they accept, also the Sabbath, they are not recognized in the sight of God as of Israel, subject to those special and higher blessings —- higher than salvation —- an additional reward."37

The union of Anglo-Israelism with Sabbatarianism later became an important part of Mr. Armstrong's preaching on these subjects. The union he created between these two doctrines explains much of his future work.

He commented,

Now as my mind works on this subject, it appears thus: The theory is that England and the U.S. are descendants of Joseph. The Jews are the descendants of Judah, and possibly also of Benjamin and Levi. If we have them located, then where are the other eight tribes? Why, why not right here in the U.S., mixed, thru immigration and inter-marriage between different races? They would all be of the white race. We have married and intermarried with other white races, but not with Negroes, Japs, or Chinese, or Indians. . . . 

Now if my theory is worth anything, it is this: Salvation is for all the world who will come to Jesus and accept it, regardless of race. But the special blessings, many of which I believe are to pertain to the next world, promised Israel, are for that one blood race alone. (Armstrong to Mr. and Mrs. Runcorn, 28 February 1928, HWAP, #807, 4–5)

Shortly after writing this letter, Herbert Armstrong was convinced. In spring 1928 he wrote to Dugger telling him of his plans to write several manuscripts about both Anglo-Israelism and evolution. Dugger replied, "Your manuscripts . . . will be read with pleasure" (Dugger to Armstrong, 20 April 1928, HWAP, #871). The door was now open for Mr. Armstrong to advocate Anglo-Israelism within the Church of God.

About the same time he approached the Church of God (Seventh Day) about publishing his Anglo-Israelite and antievolution views, he was also approaching A.A. Beauchamp with the same idea. To Beauchamp he wrote,

I wonder if there is not a real need, as well as a ready market, for a new book on the Anglo-Israel subject?. . . . 

I have read very little, as yet, of the book by Discipulus. However, judging from what little I have had an opportunity to read, I do not believe this book as sound and authoritative as the one by Allen. (Armstrong to Beauchamp, 4 May 1928, HWAP, #873, 1–2).

For historians and literary critics, Mr. Armstrong's following comments are most enlightening.

The book I have in mind would follow, in great measure, the line of thought and proof offered by Allen. I would endeavor to keep it as dependable and as sound in its arguments as Allen's. But the ground covered by Allen would be covered in boiled-down form, condensed where possible. . . . The book would be written, moreover, in an entirely different style. . . . 

If you believe there is a need and a market for such a book, and you would care to consider the possibility of undertaking to publish it, then I should like to go into the matter further and in more detail with you. (Ibid., 2–3, emphasis mine)

Herbert Armstrong also mentioned to Beauchamp an offer he had to publish his antievolution book (an apparent reference to his correspondence with A.N. Dugger). "But [I] am afraid the publishing house in question is not equipped to turn out as up-to-date and attractive a job as I feel will be necessary."

Beauchamp's reply came quickly.

Your letter of May 4 at hand. In reply will say that I am quite sure that I would not be interested in publishing the book on evolution and as for the one on Israel I would not offer a great deal of encouragement. There have been three or four books on that subject brought out the last year, and I am now at work on the manuscript of one by the author of Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright, which I expect to publish some time during the fall. (Beauchamp to Armstrong, 9 May 1928, HWAP, #5044).38

With this rebuff, Herbert Armstrong's only encouragement came from A.N. Dugger. As Mr. Armstrong prepared his manuscript, he continued to learn all he could about Anglo-Israelism. Elder A.H. Stith informed him that S.S. Davison of Fairview, Oklahoma, had some Anglo-Israelite tracts written by Alfuc Davison that Mr. Armstrong could obtain by writing to him.39 The Davisons had been Church of God ministers for several generations. (Alfuc is probably Alpheus Davison.)

The Davison's Anglo-Israelism clearly preceded Mr. Armstrong's and was known within the Church of God (Seventh Day). Whether they influenced Merritt Dickinson or he influenced them is not known. Their response to Mr. Armstrong, if any, has not survived.

By January 1929 Mr. Armstrong had begun writing his manuscript. He was getting ready to put the Church of God to the test. On January 1 he wrote Dugger to remind him of his project.

In his letter Mr. Armstrong presented Anglo-Israelism with a new twist, a twist he hoped would make his book more attractive to Dugger. He claimed that Anglo-Israelism, as he presented it, shed new light on a longstanding Church of God doctrine, the Third Angel's Message. Dugger replied that he would welcome any new information Herbert Armstrong could provide on that subject.40

The Third Angel's Message

What is the Third Angel's Message? The Third Angel's Message is an old Adventist teaching based on a misunderstanding of Revelation 14. It has played an important role in shaping both Seventh-day Adventist and Church of God (Seventh Day) concepts of their mission. The passage in question reads:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth. . . . And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive [his] mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God. (Revelation 14:6–10)

The Church of God (Seventh Day) believed these messages referred to their work. They explained Revelation 14 in this manner:

There is no question; but, after a thorough consideration is given all texts concerned, that the First Angel's Message embraces the proclamation of the everlasting gospel in the apostolic age, which continues to the end. The Second Angel's Message includes the great Protestant reformation which illuminated the earth with light and was a direct cry against the corruption of Babylon, while the Third Angel's Message sounds forth the final warning to the world, taking with it all accompanying light as yet unrevealed, preparing a people who will worship God "in spirit and in truth." . . . 

The Church of God is the body of people called to carry forth this wonderful work. (A.N. Dugger, The Bible Home Instructor, Jerusalem, Israel: Mt. Zion Press, 1982 reprint of an earlier Church of God publication, 338, 335)

The Church of God (Seventh Day) taught that the commandments were associated with that final warning —- especially the Sabbath.

Again the Third Angel's Message has for its creed "The commandments of God and the testimonies of Jesus". . . . It is the remnant church that holds to the commandments of God and the testimonies of Jesus. . . . The commandments of God and the testimonies of Jesus and no other testimonies form the creed of the last message. . . . 

Everyone knows that the Catholic church . . . observes Sunday today. . . . It was one of the doctrines, with many others, that they forced upon the world under penalty of death, and Sunday stands out prominently in this age as a sign to the world of their past greatness. It is a memorial of the dark ages when they ruled the world, and by taking away the Sabbath of God, which was declared to be His memorial forever, and putting in its place Sunday, they have exalted themselves above God, usurping a place not divinely given, and as the Third Angel's Message advances the matter is being squarely put before the people of the whole world, Which will they obey, the pope of Rome or the God of heaven? (The Third Angel's Message, Stanberry, Missouri: Church of God Publishing House, 1925, 10–11, 20. See also Nickels, 199, 216)

The Adventist movement gave birth to the doctrine of the Third Angel's Message following the Great Disappointment. It brought solace to Sabbatarian Adventists attempting to cope with their humiliation. The Third Angel of Revelation was delivering its message, they believed, and that because of this, faithful Adventists had become Sabbathkeepers. When the Sabbatarian Adventist movement split into various camps, the doctrine of the Third Angel's Message followed its divisions.41

In the 1920s the Church of God (Seventh Day) preached the Third Angel's Message with vigor. Recent events had convinced them that the Great Tribulation was about to come.

In 1928, Herbert Armstrong also believed in the Third Angel's Message. He wrote:

These men [the original apostles], carrying the FIRST Angel's Message, had the faith to perform miracles of healing. These miracles . . . greatly aided in winning lost souls to Christ. . . . 

Then, glance for a moment, at the men whom God raised up to carry the Second Angel's Message out to the world. Luther, Calvin, Wesley. Men who were filled with this wonderful power. Men who were heard around the world! Men who shook the world with their message and won millions to the side of Protestantism, out of the darkness and spiritual chaos of Roman Catholicism.

Now let us look frankly to the results being achieved by those who claim to be carrying the Third and last Angel's Message. The prophecy says this Third Angel's Message shall go forth "with a LOUD shout." . . . 

The average man and woman today is not aware of the fact the Message has been going forth. . . . Most folks, it is true, are passively aware that there has been some agitation over the Saturday-Sunday question. But the question has not gotten actively into their consciousness. . . . 

The Third Message is no more unpopular than were the First and the Second. And we are blessed with facilities for spreading the message which never were so much as dreamed of in the days of the First and Second Messages. (Herbert W. Armstrong, "Have We Tarried for the Power to Carry the Third Angel's Message?," The Bible Advocate, 16 October 1928, 1)

Later Mr. Armstrong would come to renounce the doctrine of the Third Angel's Message, but in 1928 he united it with Anglo-Israelism.

To understand why the union, realize that Herbert Armstrong took Anglo-Israelism to its logical conclusion. Previous Anglo-Israelites emphasized God's blessings to Israel. Nobody said anything about the curses.

Herbert Armstrong noticed the curses. He realized that to be consistent, an Anglo-Israelite needed to preach them as well. In Ezekiel, God foretold Israel's defeat and enslavement.

Herbert Armstrong failed to see that Ezekiel was written to Israel in anticipation of Jerusalem's fall in 587 b.c. Beginning from an Anglo-Israelite world view, he saw Ezekiel's references to the House of Israel not as evidence of an Israelite presence in Judah, but as proof that Ezekiel was written to the lost tribes. Ezekiel was, he believed, not for the Jews but for Israel. Therefore, even though Ezekiel clearly spoke of the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of its temple, Herbert Armstrong concluded that Ezekiel's message had nothing to do with those historic events. He insisted on an Anglo-Israelite interpretation. From this faulty premise he reasoned that God intended Ezekiel's book to be a warning to end-time Israel.

Since Mr. Armstrong believed that the Anglo-Saxons were the remnant of the House of Israel, he believed the message of Ezekiel was a warning for the United States and British Commonwealth.

Herbert Armstrong noticed something else as well. He noticed what he thought were the reasons for the curses. Listed prominently among those reasons was Sabbath-breaking (Ezekiel 20 and 22).

It was then a simple step for Mr. Armstrong to merge Anglo-Israelism with the Sabbatarianism of the Third Angel's Message.

The manuscript Mr. Armstrong wrote was over 260 pages long. He called it What Is the Third Angel's Message? By February 1929 Dugger had received its first few chapters. We are fortunate in that most of this manuscript has survived.42

What most have not considered is that at the time Herbert Armstrong mailed his manuscript to Dugger, Burt Marrs, not Dugger, was the president of the General Conference. It would seem that if Herbert Armstrong were simply testing the Church, he would have mailed his manuscript to Marrs. But this was more than a test. Mr. Armstrong was looking for a publisher, and Dugger was responsible for the Church's press.

A Special Calling

By the time he began mailing his Third Angel's manuscript to Dugger, Herbert Armstrong had become convinced that God had given him a special calling. In a letter to G.A. Hobbs written in February 1929, he claimed, "I was made to see clearly that I have been given a commission to get this warning message out with the loud shout to the world" (Armstrong to Brother Hobbs, 6 February 1929, HWAP, #850, emphasis mine).

How was Herbert Armstrong "made to see" that his God-given commission was to shout the Third Angel's Message to the world? The answer is a "mysterious woman."

By early 1929 Herbert Armstrong became totally absorbed in his studies. He devoted almost his time to writing What Is the Third Angel's Message? Mr. Armstrong has described this time as one of economic "desperation."

We had reached another crisis of hunger and desperate need. Again I prayed earnestly for God to either send us some money or provide a way for me to earn it.43

As his children went hungry, he must have asked himself if he should be spending so much time writing. Yet in his letter to Hobbs, he confesses, "I am writing for Bro. Dugger about the 'Third Angel's Message'. . . . I have spent all the time I had for writing on that."44

Spending time writing and studying did not put food on the table. In his desperation he prayed.

An hour or two later, a strange woman knocked on our front door. Mrs. Armstrong opened the door. There was something mysterious about the woman's appearance.

Who was she? She did not introduce herself. She gave no inkling of her identity.

"If your husband isn't too proud to do it," she said in a low, quiet voice, "there are two truckloads of wood he can throw in at this address." . . . 

The mysterious woman walked quickly away and disappeared. . . . 

We were totally perplexed as to the identity of this strange woman. How did she know we were in such desperate need? Who was she? We never knew. . . . 

No matter who this mysterious woman was, I knew God sent her! And I realized instantly that God was answering my prayer his way, and not mine. I knew he was giving me a test to see whether I could accept a humiliating job. (The Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong, 1973 edition, 330–31)

In writing to Hobbs about this incident, Herbert Armstrong commented:

We simply reached the end of the rope about a week ago, and I decided the time had come to fast and pray until I received a definite answer from the Lord. I received it. Will explain how when I see you, but the answer was to go ahead with this work as hard as I can and trust the Lord to take care of us. All our immediate needs have been taken care of. In fact, we were out of wood, and it came to our front door from a most unexpected source even while I was yet praying for it. I was made to see clearly that I have been given a commission to get this warning message out with the loud shout to the world. The true, full message never has been carried at all, much less with the shout. I don't see how I am to do it. The Lord will open the way, and I must simply trust him and look to him for guidance. The means will be provided and the way opened, I am sure. (Armstrong to Brother Hobbs, 6 February 1929, HWAP, #850)

As one can see from his letter, Mr. Armstrong believed that the manner in which God provided for his family proved that he was doing God's will in spending his time writing The Third Angel's Message, even if his family had been going hungry. He saw the "mysterious woman" as a sign that God had commissioned him, above all other humans on earth, to proclaim that message worldwide. He further believed that no one, not even the original apostles, had been so commissioned. "It never has been carried at all."45

There was no vision. There was no dream. There was no voice. There was only the woman at the door with an offer for him to stack wood, an apparent answer to prayer. But whose answer? His? His wife's? His children's? To those who were hungry, it does not matter. That offer to stack wood kept the Armstrong's from starving and enabled him to continue to write. This was all it took to convince him that he had a unique calling —- a God-ordained commission to shout the Third Angel's Message to the world.

This incident, above all others, defines the remaining 57 years of Herbert Armstrong's life. Uncertain how he would fulfill such a commission, he must have wondered if the Church of God (Seventh Day) would provide the means.

Inadvertently, Dugger encouraged Herbert Armstrong in these opinions. After receiving the first few chapters of Armstrong's book he wrote,

I presume you think I am very neglectful of duty in not answering your letter before this, but it was a long while before your manuscript reached me on the Third Angel's Message. . . . 

I feel that we are entering into a new era for the message and that it is going to take on new life. In fact the time for the message is now here which I have long contended it would be when the events of the last few weeks came to pass. (Dugger to Armstrong, 26 February 1929, HWAP, #830. A photograph of this letter appears in Vol. 1 of the 1986 ed. of the Autobiography)

Excited, Mr. Armstrong shared his self-image with others. To Lt. Col. Mackendrick, (author of The Destiny of Britain and America), he wrote:

I am writing you for two reasons: I am going to point out what I believe to be a slight error in your argument. . . . and I feel that a great message based on this Israel truth has been revealed to me which must be powerfully broadcasted to the whole world without delay. (Armstrong to Mackendrick, 4 March 1929, HWAP, #848)

In this letter, Mr. Armstrong stated plainly that his understanding of Anglo-Israelism came not simply as a result of study, but of revelation. He felt this revelation "must be powerfully broadcasted [sic] to the whole world without delay." If this was revelation, then who could argue with it?

By 1929 the word broadcast had come to refer to radio. Therefore, two years before his ordination, Mr. Armstrong had already envisioned a worldwide radio ministry whose primary purpose was not to preach the gospel of salvation (the so-called First Angel's Message) but an Anglo-Israelite message that he called the Third Angel's Message. Years later, as his ministry expanded, it is not difficult to see how he viewed its success as God's confirmation of his views.

A few weeks after writing Mackendrick, Herbert Armstrong informed Dugger that he was sending him 10 more chapters of What Is the Third Angel's Message? He promised that four more would soon follow. Eventually, there were to be a total of 20 chapters.46 Subsequent letters show he planned to write even more. The manuscript in the Herbert W. Armstrong Papers collection contains most of this work.

By July 1929 Dugger had finished reading most of Armstrong's chapters. It was then that he wrote, "You surely are right."47

What separates this doctrine from the others that Herbert Armstrong investigated is its obvious extrabiblical nature. The Sabbath, baptism and creation are all biblical subjects he investigated early. These words are found in Scripture. But United States and Britain are words not in Scripture. Anglo-Israelism, though apparently biblical, is actually extrabiblical.

In studying Anglo-Israelism, Mr. Armstrong's methodology differed from that which he had earlier applied to the subject of baptism. With baptism, he investigated many different opinions before reaching a decision. Yet where has he commented on how he studied Anglo-Israelism in the same manner? He said so little on how he came to this conviction that some have thought the doctrine originated with him. Because he often said that God revealed truth to him, it is not difficult to see how someone might reach this conclusion. Placing this doctrine in the realm of divine revelation also had the additional effect of making it more difficult for many of his followers to question it.

In arriving at his prophetic doctrines, Mr. Armstrong seems to have assumed an overall literalist hermeneutic, influenced by dispensationalist and Adventist perspectives. He never questioned whether these perspectives were valid, or if valid, whether they were valid in every case.48

As time went on, Mr. Armstrong eagerly waited for Dugger's response. Would Dugger and the Church acknowledge the truth —- acknowledge not only Anglo-Israelism, but that Herbert Armstrong was the one to whom God had revealed the truth? Would they recognize his commission to proclaim the Third Angel's Message? Would they pass the test that Herbert Armstrong felt they had to pass?

As we've shown, Dugger had heard of and even promoted Anglo-Israelism before he ever heard of Herbert Armstrong. Yet Dugger had never heard Anglo-Israelism associated with the Third Angel's Message. Such a presentation must have been enticing. No wonder he responded, "You surely are right." Yet in the end Dugger decided that he would not include Anglo-Israelism in the Church's publications. Still, he encouraged Mr. Armstrong with the words,

There is a purpose in your having gone into this matter so deeply right at this time which it is not difficult for me to fully see through, and you will hear more from these truths and the light herein revealed later. (Dugger to Armstrong, 28 July 1929. Also see note .)

Dugger knew that trouble was brewing in the Church. He may have hoped, therefore, for a more convenient time to spread Mr. Armstrong's views. Yet Herbert Armstrong concluded that Dugger would preach only those truths he found convenient.

Undeterred, Mr. Armstrong continued to write. By early 1930 he began circulating the text of his book among those expressing an interest.49

We will now take the time to highlight some points in his original manuscript that Herbert Armstrong did not include in his later work, The United States and Britain in Prophecy.50

What Is the Third Angel's Message? Examined

The title of the original manuscript, What Is the Third Angel's Message?, highlights the context in which Mr. Armstrong believed Anglo-Israelism should be presented. As he proceeded through the text, he discussed the development of the Abrahamic covenant as it was renewed among Abraham's descendants. This discussion eventually brought him to the blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh, the grandsons of Israel. He wrote:

If you are wondering what all this early history of the beginnings of Israel has to do with the Sabbath, the Mark of the Beast, the call to "Come out of her, my people," and the Third Angel's Message, you will see, I am sure, before we are finished. The connection is very, very vital. (What Is the Third Angel's Message?, 43)

The influence of J.H. Allen is evident in the general presentation of Mr. Armstrong's argument. Herbert Armstrong acknowledged that influence on pages 109 and 112, when he quoted Allen in support of the idea that Ephraim is in the British Isles.51

In chapter 12, Herbert Armstrong combined the Guinness/Dugger seven-times theory with the Jehovah's Witnesses' seven-times theory. However, where Dugger and the Jehovah's Witnesses had claimed 1914 as the terminus of the "seven times," Mr. Armstrong followed Guinness in claiming 1917 as its end.52 Dugger saw the date as the time God would remove his curse from the Jews. Mr. Armstrong saw it as the time England would begin to repossess her rightful property. Mr. Armstrong viewed General Allenby's capture of Jerusalem as "clinching proof that Ephraim today resides in the British Isles."53 He confidently predicted that because Palestine belonged to Ephraim and not the Jews, "The Zionist movement is doomed to failure."54

Numerology also played an important role in his thinking, especially the number 19. He incorrectly noted that there was a 19-year period from Nebuchadnezzar's first siege of Jerusalem till its final fall. On that basis Mr. Armstrong then predicted a 19-year period from 1917 until 1936. It would be around 1936 that God would deliver

all the Promised Land to Ephraim-Israel, or Great Britain —- a date 2,520 years from 585 B.C. . . . Many different prophecies fix the date in the same year, 1936, and this coincides exactly with the Great Pyramid date. . . . In this connection, it must be especially emphasized that I do not say 1936 is the date of our Lord's return. In fact, were it not definitely ordained that no man may know the day or the hour of that event, I should be inclined to expect it before 1936 —- perhaps as early as the spring of 1933. But we do not know when that shall be. What we do know is that the balance of Palestine, including the land of the North of Jerusalem —- formerly Samaria, now called Syria —- is definitely destined to fall into the hands of Great Britain in the year of 1936. (Ibid., 120–21)

All of this was but a prelude to Armageddon.

If Armageddon must be the battle which accomplished the delivery of this territory, then we say Armageddon must be fought in the year 1936. And well may it prove to be so. We know Russia is secretly allied with Turkey and Germany, lusting for a war of revenge against Britain, swearing to take Palestine from Great Britain at all costs. We expect Mussolini to be in some manner prominently identified, and he expects to be ready with many millions of armed men and so many airplanes their shadow will hide the sun over all Italian soil, by 1935. The recent alliance between Mussolini and the Pope may well have startling significance bearing on these very events. (Ibid., 121)

A few pages later, Herbert Armstrong again introduced pyramidology. In explaining Matthew 21:42–45, where Jesus spoke of the stone that the builders rejected, he stated:

The Great Pyramid is here referred to and used as a symbol of the nation Israel. It is significant that the corner-stone, which is the top stone of the Pyramid, is MISSING, as if it had been rejected by its builders. (Ibid., 138B)

Of course, he offered no proof for this extraordinary claim. Somehow the distant similarity between Jesus' comments about a missing cornerstone and the reality of an uncapped pyramid was all the proof needed to show that Jesus had the Great Pyramid in mind.

He even said that the samurai, "or white Japanese," were Israelites (ibid., 138D). Again, he offered no proof. Was it their "whiteness," their aristocracy or both that made them Israelites?

Mr. Armstrong emphatically declared, "Deny this and you deny God's power to keep his word, or else you must deny the divine inspiration of the Bible altogether" (ibid., 140). When it came to Anglo-Israelism there was no room for disagreement. To deny his conclusions was to deny the Word of God.

What difference does it make? Unless we know our identity as Israel, we cannot understand the mighty personal warning which the Almighty has published in every English Bible to every individual Israelite. . . . 

Just as surely as it was given to God's holy prophets to foretell 2,500 years ago that in the year 1917 A.D. the Army and Air forces of the British throne should take Jerusalem . . . so he has revealed thru those same prophets what is yet to take place before all things are fulfilled. . . . 

These things could never be understood except thru a knowledge of Israel's twentieth-century identity.

For instance, the book of Ezekiel is addressed primarily to the United States and Great Britain, and to those of our present generation. In it are recorded events destined to take place within the NEXT SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS. (Ibid., 146D–146E, emphasis his)

Herbert Armstrong's transformation of Ezekiel into a warning for America appears to be unique in all Anglo-Israelism. It may be the one significant contribution he made to the belief. As such, it became an effective tool in calling people to repentance and to the Sabbath. Hence the connection with the Third Angel's Message.

In making the Ezekiel connection, Armstrong made the same error that many prophecy expositors have made. He ignored the plain statements of the prophet himself as to whom he was addressing and when his prophecy would be fulfilled. Training in proper hermeneutical tools would have been helpful.

He repeated the error with the Minor Prophets.

Many of these so-called "Minor" Prophets contain a most solemn personal, individual warning to every one of us —- a part, if you please, of "the Third Angel's Message," —- which has never been understood or preached. (Ibid., 146F)

In his view of the end-time cataclysm, communists and civil-right workers allied themselves with Satan against Israel.

Russia, too, is destined to play a tremendous part in these closing days. . . . Russia is gaining control in China. She hopes to gain it in Japan, by fomenting race-prejudice against White, or Western, or, if you please, Israelitish, power, dominance and civilization. . . . She is now bending Herculean efforts to foment unrest among the populous and ignorant Negroes of our South, painting herself as their champion against what she tells them is the tyranny and oppression of our country. (Ibid., 146G–146H)

Of course, communism was an increasing threat to the West in the 1920s. Communism was attractive to oppressed peoples. Many people, not just Herbert Armstrong, saw communism as the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. The present was read into the text.55

Having concluded that Ezekiel was written to modern America, much of the remaining text of What Is the Third Angel's Message? attempts to show that America should keep the Sabbath. God's ancient judgment on Israel for breaking the covenant became transformed into a condemnation of America for breaking the Ten Commandments.

After dispensing with America, What Is the Third Angel's Message? discussed the Millennium. At that time, Herbert Armstrong believed, the Ten Commandments will be enforced worldwide. For Mr. Armstrong, Christ was lawgiver, teacher and enforcer. God's promised new covenant was for those who obey. In the midst of page after page of his lengthy discussion of law and the Millennium, Mr. Armstrong gave faith and grace six short lines.56 So short, a reader could easily miss them.

Herbert Armstrong dedicated chapter 15 to the Sabbath. Here he focused on an important part of his Sabbatarian theology. He explained that Exodus 16 gave a separate Sabbath covenant as a sign between God and his people Israel. That Israel was God's people he understood in terms of race, not in terms of their having entered into a covenant with God. He believed that even if God had abolished the old Mosaic covenant, the alleged Sabbath covenant remained. He failed to realize that the Sabbath was a sign of Israel's sanctification and was, therefore, an intimate part of the old covenant. The end of the old covenant removed the basis of Israel's sanctification and therefore overthrew the Sabbath sign. Starting from his faulty premise, he then Christianized the Sabbath into a sign between God and obedient Christians, whether Jew or gentile. He called it "the final test of obedience" (ibid., 176).

Much of the remainder of What Is the Third Angel's Message continues along this line. In typical Adventist emphasis, the Third Angel's Message focuses on the Fourth Commandment.

Why didn't the apostle Paul, sent to the gentiles, more openly and definitely teach observance of the seventh day?

Why have the eyes of such great men of God as Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Moody, Finney, Cartwright, et al., been blinded to this truth? Why did not the Holy Spirit lead these men into this truth, when they unquestionably were men filled with the Holy Spirit? (Ibid., 196)

Why indeed, especially if the Sabbath, as Herbert Armstrong claimed, was "the final test of obedience"?

The answer, he said, all had to do with Israel.

Israel was blinded in part, until the end of the times of the gentiles (1917-1936) . . . and in the case of those individuals who repented, and returned to the true God, and accepted salvation, God winked at this blindness. . . . 

That is why Dwight L. Moody was blinded to the Sabbath truth!

That is why Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and all these great latter-day men of God were blinded to this truth!

Israel was blinded to it until the fullness of the Times of the Gentiles (Rom. 11:25), because God did not desire the House of Israel to be identified or known by the world until then.

This too disposes with that question: What about my parents and grandparents . . . who knew nothing about the Sabbath? Were they saved? The answer is now plain. . . . If these people had accepted Jesus Christ and his sacrifice . . . if they were willingly obedient to God so far as they had light or knowledge to be obedient, then God winked at their blindness in part. They were not held responsible for that which they did not know. (Ibid., 209–10)

Since Herbert Armstrong believed, as we have shown, that the time of the Gentiles ended in 1917, it seems to follow from the above argument that he believed it was in that year that the Sabbath became a "final test of obedience." That such a claim was unknown to Jesus and the New Testament Church did not alter his conclusion. It would be interesting to know how the coincidental 1917 publication of Allen's Judah's Sceptre and Joseph's Birthright fit into this thinking. But we have no written comments on this matter. Mr. Armstrong downplayed Allen's work while emphasizing his own.

Before the conclusion of his manuscript, Mr. Armstrong told his readers that his Third Angel's Message must be shouted to the world. "Any movement prior to 1917, therefore, was premature, and bound to be more or less in error, so far as proclaiming this truth is concerned" (ibid., 210). Keep in mind that he believed God had revealed only to him Anglo-Israelism's connection to the Third Angel's Message. He believed that God had commissioned only him to broadcast this message worldwide —- this less than two years after his baptism. Through What Is the Third Angel's Message?, articles in The Bible Advocate and personal correspondence, Herbert Armstrong was already preaching to whoever would listen, two years before his official ordination.

Chapter 21 concludes:

We are ready to explain it, the true Third Angel's Message —- the last, final warning Message which God is going to shout to a complacent, tradition-loving, self-seeking world before the falling of the Seven Last Plagues and the re-opening of the final terrible War Tribulation which is destined to culminate in the Battle of Armageddon in the year 1936 —- this true Third Angel's Message is, after all, just one more last and final warning from Almighty God. . . . 

In these closing chapters, God has placed this final eleventh-hour warning in his word.

And in these closing chapters we shall examine this very definite, specific, last-minute warning, just as the Bible has it, for this very present generation. (Ibid., 237–8)

Notice, Herbert Armstrong said that this manuscript was not simply his idea. He proclaimed it as God's "final eleventh-hour warning." It was God, not Herbert Armstrong, who placed this warning in this manuscript.

How was Dugger to respond to this approach?

In the closing pages of the book, Herbert Armstrong again transformed the Third Angel's Message. It had become a kingdom message.

This third and last stage of the Gospel is, simply, the gospel of the kingdom. It is this gospel which is to be preached to all the world just before the "end" comes. It is a warning not to worship the beast or the image of the beast, nor to have his mark, and it has something to do with keeping the commands of God. (ibid., 245)

While Herbert Armstrong would eventually drop the term Third Angel's Message from his vocabulary, and de-emphasize Revelation 14, such changes were cosmetic. The underlying message remained the same.

Furthermore, God's grace became of secondary importance. The important message for today, Mr. Armstrong felt, was obedience.

Just as the tendencies of the times required, in the apostles' day, that the grace aspect of the gospel be stressed, so now the tendencies of the times require that the obedience aspect be stressed. (Ibid.)

Yet is this the New Testament perspective? Or does the New Testament view grace as always of primary importance?

In 1931 the Oregon Conference of the Church of God (Seventh Day) ordained Herbert Armstrong into the ministry. For the Church, it was a time of increasing division and disenchantment with its national leadership. The world had entered the Great Depression, and nations were converting to the dark faiths of fascism and communism. There was talk of another world war.

Herbert Armstrong's Developing Work

Two years later, in 1933, the Oregon Conference supported one of Herbert Armstrong's evangelistic campaigns near Eugene, Oregon. That campaign led directly to the establishing of the independent Eugene congregation. This congregation became the parent of the Worldwide Church of God.

As the Church of God (Seventh Day) General Conference split apart, Herbert Armstrong received an opportunity to begin a radio ministry. As we have seen, since at least 1929 he had believed that God had commissioned him specifically to broadcast the Third Angel's/Anglo-Israel/kingdom message to the world.

With the assistance of the Oregon members, his internationally known work began. An advertising man by background, he wanted to give his listeners more than a weekly radio show. For them, he created a magazine.

The magazine never mentioned the Third Angel's Message by name. By this time, Herbert Armstrong may no longer have accepted Adventist views on this doctrine. Yet the teaching was there. It was just framed in other terms. The emphasis, besides Anglo-Israelism, became the coming kingdom of God. Everything he said got back to the kingdom or Israel or the Ten Commandments. Everything he did, he understood in terms of his assumed commission.

Early issues of the magazine echoed these themes. "The Times of the Gentiles correspond with the Times of Judah's national punishment."57 These Times of the Gentiles, he explained, had begun to taper off since 1917, but would continue until 1936. He taught that 1936 marked the "End of the Age." Coming soon was the heavenly signs and the Day of the Lord.

The Great Tribulation, he said, had already started! It began in 1928. He based that assumption, not on the Bible, but upon the Great Pyramid theory.

And for Great Pyramid students . . . the present depression, or tribulation, is there symbolized as occupying the entire low passage continuing from May 29, 1928, when the tribulation struck Europe, until September 1936. (Herbert W. Armstrong, "What Is Going to Happen," PT, June–July 1934, 5)

With the world in the midst of the Great Depression, it was easy to believe the Tribulation had begun.

Mr. Armstrong was certain that only Jesus Christ's return would end the Depression. Before then, the world would plunge into its last war. When Mussolini invaded Ethiopia, Herbert Armstrong cried, "He is marching to Armageddon!"58

At first Herbert Armstrong thought Mussolini would destroy the United States. Then in 1940, he commented that he might have been wrong. He said that it now appeared that Hitler would do the United States in.59

Throughout the war, his message remained the same. Fascism would conquer America. Naturally, he continued to feel divinely commissioned to warn America. Toward that goal, in September 1942, he published the first edition of The United States and Britain in Prophecy. Missing was any mention of the seven-times theory as it related to the Jews. Herbert Armstrong probably still believed in the previous interpretation, but in the booklet he wrote that the "seven times" of punishment applied to the lost tribes of Israel. For them, he said the seven times spanned the period from 718 b.c. (the incorrect date of Samaria's conquest) until a.d. 1803 (the date of the Louisiana Purchase). Still, the earlier interpretation continued to affect his thinking. He firmly believed that the times of the Gentiles were over, and that the world was in the Great Tribulation.

Whenever the war news appeared favorable, Mr. Armstrong simply discounted it. He saw all news through the lens of his prophetic viewpoint and his belief in his own unique commission. In early 1944 he wrote to his contributors:

This time is a time of great suspense. Apparently the Allied forces are not prepared, yet, to launch the much-advertised invasion of Hitler's Europe. . . . We have made but the slightest little dents in the Jap defenses in the Pacific, and at the present rate (played up dramatically in news headlines and broadcasts as if actually we're winning the war) it will take us about twenty years, and more resources than we possess, to take enough of these island defenses to smash thru to the central objective and WIN. . . . 

The prophecies of Almighty GOD tell us bluntly that WE ARE GOING TO LOSE —- unless our people will REPENT and turn to ALMIGHTY GOD in real earnest, and in FAITH —- trusting HIM to deliver us! And instead of doing that, we are trusting in the enthusiastic and exaggerated news reports, believing we are WINNING, and meantime as a nation OUR SINS ARE INCREASING AT A TOBOGGAN-SLIDE RATE!

God has called me to the special mission of WARNING THIS NATION. But I cannot do it alone. . . . You are one of my co-workers, and I am depending upon you to remain steadfastly back of me, with your earnest believing PRAYERS, as well as the material help you are sending. We must never let up. . . . This business of SHOUTING and THUNDERING out this warning on which our destiny as a nation depends. (Herbert W. Armstrong, co-worker letter dated, based on its content, to early 1944. Emphasis is his. Notice the emphasis on shouting.)

The success of his work further convinced Mr. Armstrong that his perceptions of himself and his work were correct. How else could you explain his success if God were not behind it? He felt that God backed his prophetic opinions and stood behind him. He believed that he spoke with the authority of God.

As the war drew to its obvious close, Mr. Armstrong's message changed. He dropped all insistence that the war would lead to America's destruction. Gone was the cry that the Tribulation had already begun.

Yet the substance of the message did not change. The Third Angel was present, only transformed.

Despite what our senses told us, the Allies had not defeated Germany. The Nazis had gone underground. Next time, Europe would unite under an evil fascist-papal alliance. It would conquer, subjugate and depopulate the United States. The Church had to warn the Anglo-Saxon nations about God's wrath. The Church had to call them to repentance and urge them to keep God's Sabbath and Holy Days. The Church also must tell the world the good news beyond: God would send Jesus Christ to set up his kingdom.

Following the war, Herbert Armstrong established Ambassador College to provide a trained ministry for the Church. These young men went out, visited people on baptizing tours and established congregations. Through their influence, many lives changed for the better. Yet the prophetic speculations continued. The ministry created various blueprints in attempts to figure out the date of Jesus' return. All prophetic schemata failed.

The Worldwide Church of God Today

In 1986 Herbert Armstrong died. Shortly before his death he published Mystery of the Ages, a book that summarized his core beliefs up to that moment. In it he wrote that the Bible was a coded book "not intended to be understood until our day in this latter half of the twentieth century."60 He claimed that he, in writing Mystery of the Ages, was used of God to decode the Bible so that we could understand it.

In an unmistakable reference to himself, he declared that Isaiah's prophecy about "the voice of him that crieth in the wilderness [Isaiah 40:3]" was being fulfilled.61 The prophesied Elijah was not only John the Baptist, but was also an end-time human messenger. In a clear reference to his many appearances before world leaders, he saw himself fulfilling that role.62

The idea that God had specially commissioned him to "shout" the Third Angel's Message to the whole world —- an idea traceable back to January 1929 when in answer to prayer a woman offered him a job stacking wood —- had grown bigger through the years. Though the phrase "the Third Angel's Message" had long since dropped from his vocabulary, the basic belief that God had given him a unique commission remained. That he continued to see his mission linked to Anglo-Israelism is evident from reading Mystery of the Ages.

In chapter five, Herbert Armstrong hearkened back to The United States and Britain in Prophecy, "a book I wrote more than 50 years ago."63 The chapter summarized much of what was in that book, quoting it extensively. In Mystery of the Ages, Mr. Armstrong continued claiming that unless the Anglo-Saxon peoples repented of their sins, Old Testament prophecies foretold their horrible conquest by a united Europe. After that, he thought, "communist hordes" would crush Europe.64 America's national sins would soon usher in the Great Tribulation.

Before his death, Herbert Armstrong appointed Joseph W. Tkach as his successor. In June 1988 Mr. Tkach withdrew Mystery of the Ages from circulation. In early 1991 he informed the ministry of his plans to review and perhaps update The United States and Britain in Prophecy. He solicited their comments. All mention of Anglo-Israelism disappeared from the Church's publications. Then, in July 1995, the Church announced in the Pastor General's Report that Anglo-Israelism lacked any credible evidence and that the Church would no longer teach it. This was followed by a study paper sent to the ministry giving detailed reasons why this was so.

The Church had come to believe that Anglo-Israelism had distracted it from giving its full attention to its truly God-given commission —- the preaching of the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ —- and the duty to make disciples of Christ of all nations.

Herbert Armstrong always urged the ministry to be faithful to the Bible. He never claimed that he wrote infallible scripture. He never claimed that he understood all biblical truth. Yet he did claim to have a special understanding of prophecy, and if he was not a prophet, that he at least functioned as one. To many, he appeared to view his ministry more in terms of the Old Testament prophets than the New Testament apostles. He referred to himself as the watchman of Ezekiel. He said he was the Elijah to come. And if he were the Elijah, how was this different from being a prophet? For those who still believe this claim, his failed predictions pose a dilemma.

Today we know that many and varied influences shaped Herbert Armstrong's prophetic teachings. Despite what he believed, not everything he taught came from the Bible. Many things he taught were the products of his life and times.

Are we any different today?

The ministry of the Church of God, to remain credible, must use Scripture correctly. Understanding our denominational history, tied as it is to Herbert Armstrong, can help us do that, especially as it gives insight into what has shaped our thinking. With insight should come wisdom.

We must state, as Paul did: "Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: 'So that you may be proved right in your words and prevail in your judging"' (Romans 3:4, NIV).

Further, we must remember what Peter wrote: "No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation" (2 Peter 1:20).

If we do that, we will remain faithful and true to the God who saved us.

Endnotes

1 A photograph of this letter appears in both the 1967 and 1973 editions of Mr. Armstrong's Autobiography. It is not in the 1986 two-volume edition. Nor does the HWA Personal Papers Catalog by Date list it.

2 J. Gordon Melton, Encyclopedia of American Religions (Wilmington, North Carolina: McGrath Publishing Co., 1978), 447.

3 .B. Grimaldi, "History of the Rediscovery of Israel," The Watchman of Israel, July 1919 (vol. 1, no. 9), 195.

4 Cecil Roth, The Nephew of the Almighty (London: Edward Goldston Ltd., 1933).

5 A.B. Grimaldi claimed that Ralph Wedgwood wrote in 1814 the first truly Anglo-Israelite book, The Book of Remembrance. It was a two-volume work, the only copy of which was said to be in the British Library. Another alleged early Anglo-Israelite advocate was I.H. Frere, whose book The Prophecies of David, Esdras, and John was published in 1815. Reverend B. Murphy in 1816 is said to have authored Proofs That Israelites Came From Egypt Into Ireland, and in 1817 Advocate of Israel and the Isle of Erin (Grimaldi, "History of the Rediscovery of Israel," The Watchman of Israel, July 1919 [vol. 1, no. 9], 193–6). A.B. Grimaldi claimed that Ralph Wedgwood wrote in 1814 the first truly Anglo-Israelite book, The Book of Remembrance. It was a two-volume work, the only copy of which was said to be in the British Library. Another alleged early Anglo-Israelite advocate was I.H. Frere, whose book The Prophecies of David, Esdras, and John was published in 1815. Reverend B. Murphy in 1816 is said to have authored Proofs That Israelites Came From Egypt Into Ireland, and in 1817 Advocate of Israel and the Isle of Erin (Grimaldi, "History of the Rediscovery of Israel," The Watchman of Israel, July 1919 [vol. 1, no. 9], 193–6).

How much weight should we give to this evidence? The problem with using Grimaldi as our source is that he is an uncritical advocate of the Anglo-Israelite position trying hard to give his beliefs a degree of acceptability by showing their antiquity. In so doing he uncritically lumps Brothers and Wilson together. He makes no mention of Brothers' insanity, nor the extremes to which Brothers' insanity took him. He leaves unanswered the questions, Were the above authors influenced by Brothers? Did they in turn influence Wilson or did Wilson develop his ideas independently? Further research is needed for us to know.

6 John Wilson, Our Israelitish Origins, 1st American ed., 1850, Millerites and Early Adventists (University Microfilms), Section 3, Reel 15, part 24.

7 Louis Billington, "The Millerite Adventists in Great Britain, 1840-1850," The Disappointed: Millerism and Millenarianism in the Nineteenth Century, Ronald L. Numbers and Jonathan M. Butler eds., 2nd ed. (Knoxville, Tennessee: University of Tennessee Press, 1993), 59, 66.

8 The Jehovah's Witnesses are considered an Adventist sect because their founder, Charles Taze Russell, was a disciple of the Adventists Jonas Wendell and Nelson H. Barbour, from whom he learned the conditional state of the dead.

9 A.N. Dugger and C.O. Dodd, A History of the True Religion (Jerusalem, Israel: 1968), 296. Prior to 1923, the Church of God (Seventh Day) was called the Church of God (Adventist). Despite the name change, the 1926 U.S. census continued to call the Church by its older name. The older name clearly identifies its origin among the Adventist movement. For the sake of clarity I have used the current name, Church of God (Seventh Day) throughout the article. However, those doing historic research on this sect should be aware of the variety of names the local congregations of this sect have been known by throughout its formative period from 1863-1923. See endnote .

10 Restorationism should not be confused with the modern Christian Reconstructionist movement, which seeks to order America's government along the lines of the old covenant. Christian Reconstructionism is post-millennial, while restorationism is pre-millennial.

11 R.V. Lyon, The Scattering and Restoration of Israel, Thomas G. Newman publisher (Seneca Falls, New York: 1861), 31, 33, 34. This tract explains Lyon's basic teachings on prophetic Israel. Many of his tracts can be found in the Jenks Memorial Collection in the library of Aurora College in Aurora, Illinois.

12 Richard C. Nickels, A History of the Seventh Day Church of God (Portland: Giving and Sharing, 1973), 252–4, 248–9.

13 Up until the 1880s, congregations that later became the Church of God (Seventh Day) called themselves by several names. The Church of Christ probably was the most common name used, while the names The Church of God and the Church of the Firstborn can also be found.

14 The Hope of Israel, 28 January and 5 May 1868.

15 The Advent and Sabbath Advocate, 9 December 1884.

16 The Advent and Sabbath Advocate, 5 May 1885.

17 Perhaps The Bible Banner of 1884 was another independent Church of God (Seventh Day) periodical. A newspaper with that same name was later published by a 1905 offshoot of the Church, perhaps harkening back to the earlier paper.

18 The Advent and Sabbath Advocate, 19 May 1885.

19 Nickels, 251.

20 During A.F. Dugger's association with the Church paper, it underwent several name changes. Originally called The Hope of Israel, it later became the Advent and Sabbath Advocate then the Sabbath Advocate and Herald of the Advent. Not until late 1900 was it decided to call the paper The Bible Advocate and Herald of the Coming Kingdom. That has since been shortened to the simpler Bible Advocate.

21 Nickels, 153–4. Nickels' sources are tracts published by A.N. Dugger from Jerusalem sometime between Dugger's move there in the early 1950s and 1975. See also "The Chastisement of the Jewish People," The Bible Home Instructor. My copy is a 1982 reprint with a few editions to bring it up to date and the deletion of most of the illustrations. Reprinted by George L. Johnson, Decatur, Michigan. Nickels, 153–4. Nickels' sources are tracts published by A.N. Dugger from Jerusalem