A Critique of UCG’s Passover
A Critique of UCG’s Passover
United Church of God
P.O. Box 541027
Cincinnati, OH 45254-1027
President — Victor Kubik
Chairman — Donald Ward
Passover On The 14th or 15th?
A Critique of UCG’s Passover: A Doctrinal Study Paper (45 pages)
The Passover of Exodus 12 — Approved by the Council of Elders in 1999.
Click here for the Study Paper
This is a Critique of UCG’s The Passover of Exodus 12, a 45-paged document approved and posted on UCG’s website under “Study Papers” in November,1999. Besides the main issue of whether the Passover is on the early or late fourteenth of Nisan, of equal importance is whether traditions should be followed. But what exactly is traditions, especially given that Paul says he had followed traditions?
Quoted are UCG’s work, the author is nameless. They are in block form, PINK, and indented so as to differentiate it from my comments. The Scriptures, in RED, must be our primary focus and guide, and sometimes the Scriptures, which include the Septuagint and the Targum, say things very different from what we think!
And so with that in mind, we’ll begin:
The United Church of God, an International Association, teaches the observance of the New Testament Passover on the evening at the beginning of the 14th, following the example of Jesus Christ. (Pg 2).
This writer hasn’t proven anything yet and he had already established his conclusion, garnering Jesus on his side, thinking he is now safe. By saying “following the example of Jesus Christ” his mind is already closed, right at the beginning. But let’s persist, even with a mind that’s closed.
On the night prior to His death, Christ observed what is called the Passover in the synoptic Gospels and instituted the symbols of bread and wine as well as foot washing. (Pg 2).
Again, nothing has been proven. That night, when the disciples sat down and ate, was called “supper” and when Paul later referred back, it was referred to as “the night he was betrayed.” If it was Passover, why didn’t he say “Passover” but used a rather long-winded description?
The morning includes the afternoon?
And the writer wrote, “Evening is associated with darkness and night, morning is associated with day, (pg 9).
Nothing is consistent as a while later he wrote evening means twilight:
The term twilight means: “evening twilight; time of concealment; of refreshment; of stumbling, in dim light.” Twilight is not in the afternoon, but it is when the light grows dim, after sunset, but before complete darkness. (Pg 10).
And then later he came back and wrote it means night again!
Genesis 1:3-5 “Then God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening [erev, darkness, night] and the morning [boqer, light, day] were the first day.” Morning is used in Scripture to refer to the light portion of a day. The Hebrew word for night is layil. It is used as a synonym for the Hebrew erev, which is normally translated “evening.” (Pg 11).
So according to this writer, morning (boqer) would be day, which starts from 6 AM unto 6 PM, including the afternoon? And evening is the whole night, from 6 PM to 6 AM. Think again. Morning includes the afternoon?
And this contradicts a moment later: “Next we find the expression “at evening” or “at even” (Exodus 12:18). This is the Hebrew expression ba ‘erev. In general it means sunset.” (Pg12). Blind and Confusing Guides. The whole body of UCG is sick, full of coronavirus, starting with the head, the whole head is infected.
The truth is, evening (erev), which is the first evening, is the time from “after noon until nightfall”. The second evening (erev) is the first part of the night, from 6 PM to midnight. Also, in Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening (erev) and the morning (bôqer) were the first (24-hours) day. As the evening (erev) were a full 12-hour period, so was the morning (bôqer) a 12-hour period, from midnight to noon. The evening and morning add up to a full 24-hour day.
Or another way of saying: a full day is divided into two halves – erev and boqer – 12 hours each. Half of erev is day (after noon) and half is night (till midnight). Half of boqer is night (midnight till daybreak) and half is day (from sunrise till noon). The Hebrew “between the evenings” is the time between the eves of both evenings. A day is also divided another way into day and night – light and dark, making it a full 24-hour day.
In several sermons Dr Donald Ward rightly identified UCG has a Laodicean spirit, with its characteristics — wretched, blind and naked — but his diagnosis by blaming the faithful is misguided. The truth is, the whole head is sick (Isaiah 1:5). Yes, even the whole Council of Elders.
Reading this UCG “study paper” The Passover of Exodus 12 — Approved by the Council of Elders since 1999, here’s a great sinkhole:
The first mention of the name or term Passover in Scripture is found in Exodus 12:11. Instructions in the previous verses describe the killing, roasting, eating and disposing of the lamb. This lamb “without blemish” is defined as “the LORD’s Passover.” (Pg 2).
And this meaning for Passover, this “lamb without blemish” contradicts directly what the writer wrote at the end, the Death Angel’s “passing over”:
What does the term Passover mean? The word Passover is clearly associated with “passing over” the homes of the Israelites. If the Passover has to do with the timing of God passing over the homes of the Israelites while slaying the firstborn of the Egyptians and if the Passover is on the 14th day, then this activity had to be after the beginning of the 14th and not on the 15th. (Pg 45).
My stomach’s churning! The nameless writer is like a loose cannon, he couldn’t figure out whether “Passover” is the “sacrificial lamb” or was it the Lord’s “passing over” the night that killed the firstborns. He is a cannon and shoots in all directions. Can he make up his mind? And this paper had been approved since 1999 and nobody, including any of those sitting on its doctrinal committee or the Council of Elders has noticed it.
This brief summary of events is far from complete. (Pg 41).
The above statement is extremely true as the writer writes in circles. It says one thing here and contradicts it later, which goes on and on. And this makes any reader lose concentration trying to see what the author is saying. They simply give up. And to do a critique is even harder, if it is at all possible. And s/he quotes numerous dictionaries, encyclopedias and authors listed below:
Richard Whitake; The Abridged Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon;
The Works of Philo, The Decalogue;
Kolatch, Alfred J., The Jewish Book of Why
Donin, Rabbi Hayim Halevy, To Be a Jew
Margolis, Dr. Isidore, Jewish Holidays and Festivals
Al-Magribi, 2:1, Karaite Anthology: Excerpts From the Early Literature
Edersheim, Alfred, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services
The Jewish Holidays by B’nai B’rith
Edersheim, Alfred, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services,
Schauss, Hayyim, The Jewish Festivals, A Guide to Their History and Observance
Freedman, David Noel, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary,
Josephus, Flavius, Antiquities of the Jews
Stemberger, Gunter, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash
Weiss, Randall A., Jewish Sects of the New Testament Era
Geldenhuys, Norval, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke
“The Last Blood Sacrifice” Article from The National Geographic, January, 1920
Emil Schurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ
Neusner, Jacob; Green, William Scott; and Frerichs, Ernest S., Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era
Kraft, Robert A., Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults:
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary
Sozomenus, Salaminius Hermia, Historia Ecclesiastica (The Ecclesiastical History
LeMoyne, Jean, Les Sadduceen
Eusebius Pamphii of Caesarea (265-340 C.E.), Historia Ecclesiastica (The Ecclesiastical History)
By going around a gigantic maze of sources, the writer ended up confused, eyes unfocused, contradicting what Passover is. And then suddenly towards the end, on page 41, still dazed as if just waking up from being drunk, this writer draws its conclusions.
It would be much better to adopt Fred Coulter’s “The Christian Passover.” At least, it has gone through numerous revisions and is now standing at 512 pages, “the result and accumulation of studies done by the author over the past fifty years” and “the first book ever written and published that thoroughly explains all aspects of the Passover as recorded in the Bible.”
“All aspects” he claims, and he had over “fifty years” of experience, which sounds impressive, so we will go there and have a look, shall we?
But before doing so, we must tackle a major topic, and that’s on traditions, an important topic for study. Shall we follow traditions, or shall we throw them into the bins?
ON TRADITIONS
But there are others who believe that the lambs were slain at the beginning of the 14th (at “twilight”) and eaten the same night, one full day prior to the departure from Egypt. Which view does the Bible support? We know that Christ condemned the Jewish leaders of His day along with many of their traditions. (Pg 2).
Yes, yes, traditions can be bad, but they could also be good as Paul himself says so. Only the wise know how to discern the good from the bad. According to Strong’s Concordance “traditions” is G3862 – paradosis:
Outline of Biblical Usage
(I) . . .
(II) a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, etc.
(A) objectively, that which is delivered, the substance of a teaching
(B) of the body of precepts, esp. ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence.
The second precept is what it is meant to be: a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, which are orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations and they are expected to be obeyed with equal reverence as the written law.
Yes, there are references to Moses, who wrote the book of Deuteronomy:
Deuteronomy 1:15 So I took the chief of your tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads over you, captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, and captains over fifties, and captains over tens, and officers among your tribes. 16 And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. 17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.
Deuteronomy 16:18 Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment.
Judges were appointed by the Great Assembly, later the Sanhedrin, and officers were masters of the staff and whip, and they stood before the judges, and went into markets, streets, and shops, to ensure that rules were obeyed, and to punish all that disobeyed.
In the Great Assembly, later the Sanhedrin, they placed only men wise and understanding, expert in the wisdom of the law, and masters of great knowledge that they may know how to judge them; and they set in the Great Assembly or Sanhedrin only priests or learned Levites, and of a good stature. And they shall judge the people with just judgment; give a right and just sentence in all cases that come before them, according to the laws of God, and the rules of justice and equity.
And thou shall put away the evil from Israel; the evil man that is rebellious against the supreme legislature of the nation, and the evil of contumacy he is guilty of, deterring others from it is by his own death. And all the people shall fear the Lord. All the people of Israel in their own cities, and particularly the judges in those cities; they shall hear of what is done to the obstinate and disobedient person, and shall be afraid to commit the like offence, lest they should come into the same punishment.
It would be foolish to blanket all traditions as bad. Blind Guides. Here is what Paul says:
“I profited in the Jews’ religion beyond many of my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions G3862 of my fathers” Galatians 1:14.
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold to the traditions G3862 which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle” II Thessalonians 2:15.
“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother who walketh disorderly and not according to the tradition G3862 which he received from us” II Thessalonians 3:6.
Another word for traditions used by Strong is patroparadotos G3970 – it is something handed down from one’s father or ancestors:
1 Peter 1:17-20 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear. 18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition G3970 from your fathers; 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, 20 who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.
To say all traditions are bad is just too simplistic. Good traditions are good precepts, derived from judicial cases, one that has been acquired and accumulated from judges and their cases developed since the days of Moses.
Deuteronomy 17:18 Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment. 19 Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, nor take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.
Deuteronomy 17:11 According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall shew thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. 12 And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel.
Deuteronomy 17:12 The man who shows contempt for the judge or for the priest who stands ministering there to the LORD your God must be put to death. You must purge the evil from Israel.” — These understandings derived from judges and cases were passed from one generation to the next, and collectively they were known as the Oral Law. To disregard the Oral Law, Precepts and Judgment or showing any contempt for these judgements is considered evil before God; they shall be purged of such evil. The Kingdom of Judah was cleansed of those who show contempt to Biblical laws by its judgement from AD 66 to AD 70.
NKJ Now the man who acts presumptuously and will not heed (1) the priest who stands to minister there before the Lord your God, or (2) the judge, that man shall die. So you shall put away the evil from Israel.
We should be learning how to judge and how to be good judges. A good judge has to filter through all sorts of “evidence” and “testimonies” to arrive at a correct final decision. This means our rationale, logic, and emotions must be shielded from the illogically absurd, ridiculous, unfounded, and unbalanced thoughts that tried to muddle our filtering process. Which tradition is Biblical, which tradition is shaky and without foundation. Without a sound filtering process we will fail to be good judges. Consequently those laws, statutes, and legal interpretations that became known as the “Torah that is on the mouth” and became Oral Law. According to Jewish records, the Oral Torah was passed down orally in an unbroken chain from generation to generation until its contents were finally committed to writing following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, when Jewish civilization was faced with an existential threat.
In the British common law system, we have an equivalent to what the Jews call the Oral Law, namely, judicial precedent for judges-made law. How they were derived from were similar — from precedents. Common law (also known as judicial precedent or judge-made law) is the body of law derived from judicial decisions of courts and similar tribunals. Following the Norman Conquest in 1066, the British Empire spread the English legal system to its colonies, many of them retain the common law system we have today. These “common law systems” are legal systems that give great weight to judicial precedent, the style of reasoning inherited from the English legal system. This common law — so named because it was “common” to all the king’s courts across England — originated in the practices of the courts of the English kings in the centuries to follow.
The defining characteristic of “common law” is that it arises as precedent. In cases where the parties disagree on what the law is, a common law court looks to past precedential decisions of relevant courts, and synthesizes the principles of those past cases as applicable to the current facts. If a similar dispute has been resolved in the past, the court is usually bound to follow the reasoning used in the prior decision (a principle known as stare decisis). If, however, the court finds that the current dispute is fundamentally distinct from all previous cases (called a “matter of first impression”), and legislative statutes are either silent or ambiguous on the question, judges have the authority and duty to resolve the issue (one party or the other has to win, and on disagreements of law, judges make that decision).
The court states an opinion that gives reasons for the decision, and those reasons agglomerate with past decisions as precedent to bind future judges and litigants. Common law, as the body of law made by judges, stands in contrast to and on equal footing with statutes which are adopted through the legislative process, and regulations which are promulgated by the executive branch. Stare decisis, the principle that cases should be decided according to consistent principled rules so that similar facts will yield similar results, lies at the heart of all common law systems.
Today, just as the Oral Law is not “unwritten” so is the common law. Common law exists in writing, just as the Oral Law — as must any law that is to be applied consistently — by the written decisions of judges.
But sometimes, precedents were taken in the wrong direction, and a Parliament action is needed to turn the law back on course. Lord Denning (1899-1999), described as “probably the greatest English judge of modern times” according to Margaret Thatcher, was one who boldly argued against existing precedents in numerous cases while in the Court of Appeals. Although many of his decisions were overturned by the House of Lords a significant number of them were confirmed by Parliament, which passed statutes in line with his judgments.
Likewise, when the Son of God was on the earth, and running contrary to the teachings of those who sat on Moses’ seat, the Pharisees, it was because some of the precedents of the Pharisees had gone off tangent from what it was intended. Being the Son of God, He was and is, of course, a higher Judge. Hence He has that power to restore the right teaching about how the laws and precedents that the Pharisees were accustomed to, should be interpreted.
The 613 mitzvot may seem overwhelming, but nothing was said about healing on the Sabbath. Because the Torah was silent on this issue the Pharisees set the precedence that no healing be allowed. The Son of God, sitting as a higher Judge, has the power to correct this misconception, and He did so on numerous occasions, raising numerous conflicts.
And we can draw a conclusion from an event that took place some forty years later. If the AD 70 inferno was only a mini-judgement, the result was that the Pharisees, despite their hypocrisies and frailties, were deemed worthy of escape to Yavna and survived. The Sadducees and Boethusians couldn’t escape John’s fire warning and finished themselves in the inferno? Isn’t this a repeat to the days of Sodom and Gomorrah? And also its fate? And why is it so coincidental that the end-time lackadaisical churches were described as “wretched” and “blind” and “naked”?
In Exodus 12:6 the Hebrew phrase translated “twilight” is bein ha- ‘arbayim. The lambs were to be slain during twilight or “between the two evenings”—the literal translation of bein ha‘arbayim. Jewish tradition claims that this was between noon and sunset. (Pg10)
That’s right. Jewish precepts state that bein ha‘arbayim is between noon and sunset or “after noon until nightfall.”
Traditionally, the Jews adopted the position that the lambs were to be slain at the temple and then taken to a home or room to be consumed. According to this tradition the lambs were slain on the afternoon of the 14th and eaten on the night of the 15th. We have no reason to believe that the majority of the Jews did not follow this pattern beginning during the Intertestamental period (or earlier). It is claimed that this is the one and consistent practice throughout the years. (Pg19)
The lamb were indeed killed on the afternoon of the fourteenth and eaten on the night of the fifteenth. The Targum (530 BC to 500 AD), whose origin was during the intertestamental period, translates and explains the eating of the Passover from the Hebrew in Exodus 12 into the vernacular, in a very simple language, and verse 8 is extremely clear: “And you shall eat the flesh on that night, the fifteenth of Nisan . . .”
When the Exile returned from Babylon, Ezra, a Levite and high priest, read and translated the Torah in Hebrew into the common Aramaic language, and he, or other Levites, explained the Torah so the people could understand.
“The Levites … instructed the people in the Law while the people were standing there. They read from the Book of the Law of God, making it clear and giving the meaning so that the people understood what was being read” (Nehemiah 8:7–8).
Another way of saying: The Law was read by Ezra, verse by verse, and each verse was followed by a recitation by the Levites into the Aramaic version. Hence in Nehemiah 8:8 Ezra narrated not only the reading of the Law, but the Levites interprete and explain the Torah from Hebrew into the vernacular in Aramaic.
Here is what the Encyclopaedia Britannica says about the Targum:
For it was in the synagogue that the practice of reading from the Old Testament became widely observed, along with the custom of providing these readings with a translation into Aramaic. When Scripture was read aloud in the synagogue, it was translated aloud by a meturgeman, or professional interpreter (hence the name Targum), for the benefit of the congregation. The translator tried to reproduce the original text as closely as possible, but since his object was to give an intelligible rendering of the biblical text, the Targums eventually took on the character of paraphrase and commentary, leaving literal translation behind. To prevent misconceptions, a meturgeman expanded and explained what was obscure, adjusted the incidents of the past to the ideas of later times, emphasized the moral lessons to be learned from the biblical narratives, and adapted the rules and regulations of the Scriptures to the conditions and requirements of the current age. The method by which the text was thus utilized as a vehicle for conveying homiletic discourses, traditional sayings, legends, and allegories is abundantly illustrated by the later Targums, as opposed to the more literal translations of the earlier Targums.
Though written Targums gradually came into being, it was the living tradition of oral translation and exposition that was recognized as authoritative throughout the Talmudic period of the early centuries of the Christian Era.
Yes, Ezra read the law of the Bible in Hebrew, then the Levites assisted him by translating it sentence by sentence into the Aramaic, the vernacular dialect which the Exiles spoke in Babylon; sometimes explaining to the people, many of whom had become very ignorant of what Ezra had read. The Aramaic Targum was originally an oral translation, then slowly it was committed in writing. As an interpretation of the Hebrew text, the Targum eventually found its place both in the synagogal liturgy and in instruction after the return of the Exiles.
According to the rabbinical interpretation of Exodus 34:27, that besides the written law, God gave Moses other laws and maxims, as well as verbal explanations of the written law, enjoining him not to record these teachings, but to deliver them to the people by word of mouth. This Oral Law was a necessary supplement deduced from the character of the written law as well as of the other books of the Old Testament. Many of the Mosaic laws are worded very briefly, and are almost unintelligible without certain presuppositions which were assumed to be generally held; and some of the laws even contradictory to each other (eg, Exodus 13:6 and Deuteronomy 16:8).
Exodus 13:6 Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, and in the seventh day shall be a feast to the Lord.
Deuteronomy 16:8 Six days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day shall be a solemn assembly to the Lord thy God.
Some may quote Deuteronomy 4:2, objecting to adding anything further to the Scriptures but that’s restricted to the laity. The Jewish Encyclopedia explains further:
Moreover, the interdiction against adding to the law was directed only against individuals, not against the Sanhedrin or the judges, who were expressly empowered (Deut. xvii. 9-11) to expound and interpret the laws and to make new statutes; for the Sanhedrin or any other court would formulate their decisions only after examining the traditions preserved among the people and in conformity with certain logical and hermeneutic rules deduced from Scripture.
In addition, here is a parable to validate these Oral Traditions:
The Talmud tells the story of a Gentile who went to Hillel the Elder and said to him, “I want to convert, but I want to accept only the Written Torah, but not the Oral Torah. Just teach me the Written Torah.”
But Hillel knew that the man wanted to do the right thing, but he didn’t understand the purpose of the Oral Torah. So Hillel began to teach him the Aleph Bet. The first day, Hillel taught him the first two letters, aleph and bet.
The next day, Hillel taught him the same two letters in reverse. He showed him the letter aleph, but called it “bet.”
The man objected, “but yesterday you taught it the other way!”
“Well, then, you need me, a Rabbi, to teach you the Aleph Bet? So you have to trust my knowledge of the tradition of the letters. What I tell you is the Oral Tradition. You can’t read the alphabet if no one tells you how they are pronounced. And you think you don’t need the Rabbis’ knowledge of Jewish Tradition in order to understand the words of the Torah? Those are much more difficult! Without an Oral Tradition you will never be able to learn the Torah.”
So it is clear that an Oral Tradition is needed, and that one exists. Hebrew bein ha- ‘arbayim literally means ‘between the two settings.’ Rabbinic sources take this to mean ‘from noon on.’ According to Rashi, a renowned Jewish Rabbi, the first ‘setting’ occurs when the sun passes its zenith just after noon and the shadows begin to lengthen, and the second ‘setting’ is after sunset. If we don’t agree with their Oral tradition, try these challenges: (a) what is circumcision, and (b) when is the day Sabbath — from the Bible alone and without tradition! and (c) how do we pronounce the 22 Hebrew alphabets when we don’t have the Oral Traditions?
And lastly from the UCG Study Paper:
3. Can the Hebrew term for morning refer to the few hours after midnight, thereby allowing the Israelites to leave their homes before daybreak? There is no example of the Hebrew term boqer (morning) ever meaning anything but “daybreak,” “dawn” or “towards dawn . . . The term boqer is used for the light portion of the day in Genesis 1 and is never used in the place of night. In Exodus 12, the firstborn were killed at midnight (middle of the night and not the dividing line between night and morning). The Israelites were told not to leave their homes until morning, not after midnight, or after the firstborn have died. God was very clear in the command that they were not to go out until morning—daybreak.” (Passover of Exodus 12, Study Paper by UCG, pg 42).
According to the teachings of UCG and other CoG Communities, if Jesus and His disciples were to leave their houses before the morning, they would be breaking one of the most important Passover ordinances! But Jesus and His disciples left around 9:30 PM that night, and these churches preached that it was the Passover night. Can you believe such blatant heresy in His church today?
The whole head is beaming with coronavirus. They don’t say it directly, but just imply it, a BLASPHEMY of blasphemies. Now they have even implied our Saviour is a sinner.
Donald Ward, Chairman of UCG, had preached a couple of sermons on the Laodiceans but like any other blind, wretched and naked, he has no idea what’s wrong with his church. Like in the Garden of Eden, it kills the redemptive process. It kills the work the Son of God is doing. It has the smell of a rat: “thou shalt not surely die.”
((( CRITIQUE OF UCG PASSOVER )))
{}{}{}
Joel Huan
The Mystery of Ephraim 