When God Stopped Blessing the Church

In the March 1953 GOOD NEWS Magazine there appeared an article on pages 7-10 entitled "GOD'S SACRED CALENDAR", written by Kenneth Herrmann. Then the GOOD NEWS Magazine of February 1957 carried an article on pages 3-8 entitled "WHICH IS THE CALENDAR CHRIST USED?", also written by Kenneth Herrmann. This February 1957 article was simply a rerun of his March 1953 article under a new title. The February 1957 article did NOT present any new or additional pertinent information. It was nothing more than a very slightly edited version of the earlier article. So no new information was made available in the February 1957 article.

Both these articles presented the same information that Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong had first presented in his 1940 Good News Letter. Kenneth Herrmann's articles very clearly accepted and expounded the same premises that are found in Mr. Armstrong's letter of 1940. He did nothing more than teach what Mr. Armstrong had taught him.

Then the October 1957 edition of The GOOD NEWS Magazine carried another article by Kenneth Herrmann, on pages 5-6 with a concluding section on page 10, entitled "PROVE GOD'S CALENDAR CORRECT!" Now this article was a response to the question by some people regarding the correctness of the new moons of the Jewish calendar. Thus it presented some new information, and was not a rewrite of any earlier article. But it still showed the same basic premises as the two previous articles.

In Kenneth Herrmann's first two articles Genesis 1:14 is presented, CORRECTLY SO, as the foundation for "God's calendar". The movements of the earth around the sun and the movements of the moon around the earth are presented as the deciding factors for "God's calendar".

Mr. Herrmann then explained that:

A) The "DAY" starts and ends at sunset.

B) The "WEEK" starts and ends at sunset on Saturday evening.

C) The "MONTH" starts with the sunset after each "new moon".

D) The Hebrew word for "month" is the same word as for "moon" and for "new moon".

E) The "YEAR" STARTS IN THE SPRING, not in the middle of winter, as in the Roman calendar.

On page 8, top of column I the 1953 article states: "The first day of this month — WHICH OCCURS AT THE BEGINNING OF SPRING — then would be the first day of the year". This statement is repeated in the February 1957 GOOD NEWS article on page 5, column I.

TO SUMMARIZE WHAT THE CHURCH TAUGHT FROM 1940 - 1957

In 1953, and again in 1957, Mr. Kenneth Herrmann very clearly believed and identified all the key components of a correct calendar. In the process he FREELY expounded all the relevant Scriptures that must apply to a biblically correct calendar, as Mr. Armstrong had also done before him in 1940. Specifically, Kenneth Herrmann was very clear regarding:

A) A DAY starts at sunset.

B) A MONTH starts with the new moon.

C) THE YEAR starts with the new moon in the spring.

He had no doubts about any of these things.

BUT THEN IN THE LATE 1960's HE CHANGED AT SOME POINT!

THE LETTER KENNETH HERRMANN WROTE IN 1969

In a sermon he gave on January 1, 2000, Mr. John Ritenbaugh of the Church of the Great God revealed that he has in his possession a letter that Mr. Kenneth Herrmann had written in 1969 in reply to a question about the calendar from a member of the Church. John Ritenbaugh quoted from this 1969 letter with the impression that this letter would provide further support for the acceptance of the present Jewish calendar.

HOWEVER, when this letter is viewed in the correct context, it actually is very strong evidence AGAINST the Jewish calendar. In fact that 1969 letter by Mr. Kenneth Herrmann is nothing short of THE MISSING LINK in how the Church has dealt with this whole calendar question. This letter actually documents A COMPLETE TURNAROUND in how the Church dealt with questions about the calendar.

So let's examine the quotation from that letter which John Ritenbaugh presented in his sermon. The quotation consists of five short paragraphs.

"The problem of producing a calendar from observations is not at all a simple one. Mr. Albert (that was Dave Albert) brought in your letter and we discussed a number of the variables that enter in. It is easy to look at a table and conclude that maybe God's Church is keeping Holy Days several days late. But consider the basis of time-keeping."

"When would you begin a day: at sunrise, at noon, at midnight, at 6 p.m., when the sun is due west or when the sun is due east? Revelation is needed. We need an oracle from God to keep time His way. What advantage has the Jew? Much every way. Romans 3. But let's continue with the problem."

"When would you begin the week: with which day? It would have to be revealed. Note, when would you begin the month: with the full moon or the new moon, with the sunset that preceded the molad, which is the conjunction, or with the sunset that followed it? Man can observe, but he is going to need revelation to carry out time-keeping God's way."

"Search out the problem further. When would you begin the year: with the spring equinox, with the summer solstice, with the fall equinox, with the winter solstice or with the new moon preceding or following which of the above four? Or would you allow the Passover to wander 40 days in the wilderness of the other days of the year, as is the present rule?"

"Now all that remains is the question of why. The new moon dates on God's sacred calendar will at times FOLLOW A DAY OR TWO AFTER the astronomical new moons. The question of whether God's Church might just be keeping God's Holy Days a day or two or a month late is not just the proper question."

WHAT AN ABSOLUTELY ABOMINABLE AND DISGUSTING REPLY TO A SINCERE AND INNOCENT QUESTION FROM A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH!

What kind of hypocrisy is this? Do you understand what Mr. Herrmann was doing in 1969 in that letter?

Here is the man who 16 years earlier, and again 12 years earlier, had CLEARLY SPELLED OUT FROM THE BIBLE that:

- A DAY begins at sunset,

- A WEEK begins with the sunset after the Sabbath,

- A MONTH begins with the sunset after the new moon,

- A YEAR begins with the first new moon in the early spring.

Here is the man who in the past had REPEATEDLY given the correct answers to these questions in print. Here is the man who had in the past quoted all the relevant Scriptures to support all of these statements.

AND NOW HE TRIES TO CONFUSE THE ISSUE!

"When would you begin a day: at sunrise, at noon, at midnight, at 6 p.m., when the sun is due west or when the sun is due east? Revelation is needed. We need an oracle from God to keep time His way. What advantage has the Jew? Much every way. Romans 3. But let's continue with the problem."

Did Mr. Herrmann somehow NOT KNOW WHEN A DAY STARTS? That's absurd! He is the one who had repeatedly spelled out that a day starts and ends AT SUNSET! And we most assuredly do NOT need "an oracle" from God to know that! We need nothing other than THE BIBLE to know that with God days start and end at sunset!

Did you need some "special oracle" apart from the WRITTEN WORD OF GOD to tell you that God starts and ends days at sunset? Mr. Herrmann's appeal to "an oracle from God" in the above paragraph is COMPLETELY DISHONEST! It is intended to CONFUSE the common member of the Church, to get the member TO DOUBT what he has until then understood very clearly, that with God days start and end at sunset!

To refer to knowing without hesitation when God wants a day to start and end as "A PROBLEM" is DISGUSTING AND ABOMINABLE! So far there is no problem whatsoever. The only REAL problem here is that a spiritual leader in the Church of God, and one who at that point in time very likely understood more about the Jewish calendar than anyone else in the Church, is clearly trying to confuse a simple Church member about certain facts, to which this spiritual leader knew the answers very clearly. That is the only problem so far!

Let's continue with the next paragraph in that letter.

"When would you begin the week: with which day? It would have to be revealed. Note, when would you begin the month: with the full moon or the new moon, with the sunset that preceded the molad, which is the conjunction, or with the sunset that followed it? Man can observe, but he is going to need revelation to carry out time-keeping God's way."

Did Mr. Herrmann somehow really not know when the week starts? OF COURSE HE KNEW EXACTLY WHEN A WEEK STARTS! It is very simple and very easy to understand! Of course it has to be revealed! But ALL YOU NEED to understand that is THE BIBLE, and not some supposed and totally speculated "oracles"! All you need is the first two chapters of Genesis! The questions are ridiculous in the extreme.

So WHY did Mr. Herrmann present all these questions to which he himself so very obviously knew all the answers? It should be obvious that HE WANTED TO CONFUSE the poor man who had asked the questions!

Put yourself into the situation. You are a minister and I am a Church member who comes to you with some questions. Now IF you very clearly know the correct answers to those questions, but instead of giving me those straight answers that are clear to you, you raise a whole host of artificial and irrelevant questions to make the subject seem extremely complicated, with the result that you create a number of doubts in my mind, what are you actually doing?

YOU ARE BEING DISHONEST BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT ME TO KNOW THE CORRECT ANSWERS WHICH ARE VERY CLEAR TO YOU! AND THE REASON YOU DON'T WANT ME TO HAVE THE CORRECT ANSWERS IS BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THE OBVIOUS IMPLICATIONS THAT GO ALONG WITH THOSE CORRECT ANSWERS! AND THAT IS WHAT WE NORMALLY CALL "HYPOCRISY"!

Next, did Mr. Herrmann himself really not know when the month is to start? Did he really consider that there was a possibility that God wants us to start the month with the full moon? Of course not! He was clearly trying to confuse the issue, and he was refusing to give the answer he himself had provided in his 1953 and 1957 articles.

Next, WHY would a minister possibly raise all these questions and never make the slightest attempt to provide some answers FROM THE BIBLE? In his article 16 years earlier he had referred to quite a number of different Scriptures, BUT NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE FEATURED IN THIS LETTER! Did he somehow expect the ordinary Church member to provide the BIBLICAL answers to all of his questions? He, Mr. Herrmann, should have been providing the Scriptures that apply to all these questions; but instead he left it to the member to fend for himself in seeking biblical answers to these questions.

THE REASON why Kenneth Herrmann did not provide the same biblical answers he had freely provided to these questions 16 years earlier is because he had come to realize that those biblical answers actually SHOW WHERE AND WHY THE PRESENT JEWISH CALENDAR IS WRONG! And therefore, instead of facing up to and admitting this fact, he tried his best to create as much confusion around these questions as possible.

THE MOTIVE FOR WHY MR. HERRMANN DID NOT PROVIDE THE ANSWERS HE HIMSELF HAD FREELY GIVEN 16 YEARS EARLIER SHOULD BE EASY TO SEE!

Let's look at the next paragraph.

"Search out the problem further. When would you begin the year: with the spring equinox, with the summer solstice, with the fall equinox, with the winter solstice or with the new moon preceding or following which of the above four? Or would you allow the Passover to wander 40 days in the wilderness of the other days of the year, as is the present rule?"

Did Kenneth Herrmann really believe that there was a possibility that with God the year starts with the summer solstice or with the winter solstice? OF COURSE NOT! So then WHY would he offer those as potential options to some Church member? The only reason was TO FURTHER CONFUSE THE MAN!

Why is it that the man who was at that time considered to be "the calendar expert" in the Church, makes no attempt to provide even a single answer to a Church member who had innocently asked a question? All he does is ask questions, but he offers no answers. His whole intent is very clearly to make the calendar APPEAR TO BE EXTREMELY COMPLICATED!

And most of us suckers have bought that story ever since!

WHY was Mr. Herrmann unwilling to give the clear answer that he had given 16 years earlier, that with God the year starts with the first new moon in the spring? The only possible explanation is that he had come to realize that the present Jewish calendar VIOLATES this godly intention for the yearly cycle!

Let's look at the next paragraph.

"Now all that remains is the question of why. The new moon dates on God's sacred calendar will at times FOLLOW A DAY OR TWO AFTER the astronomical new moons. The question of whether God's Church might just be keeping God's Holy Days a day or two or a month late is not just the proper question."

Here Kenneth Herrmann clearly reveals that he NOW understood that the present Jewish calendar HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH REAL NEW MOON CONJUNCTIONS! Here he clearly exposes that he NOW realized that there are indeed PROBLEMS with the present Jewish calendar. A careful examination of the articles he wrote in 1953 and in 1957 makes very clear that BACK THEN HE HAD NOT UNDERSTOOD THIS FACT!

His opening paragraph makes the same point equally clear. There he wrote:

"The problem of producing a calendar from observations is not at all a simple one. Mr. Albert (that was Dave Albert) brought in your letter and we discussed a number of the variables that enter in. It is easy to look at a table and conclude that maybe God's Church is keeping Holy Days several days late. But consider the basis of time-keeping."

Note that as far back as 1969 Kenneth Herrmann volunteered the information that ... "IT IS EASY ... TO CONCLUDE THAT MAYBE GOD'S CHURCH IS KEEPING HOLY DAYS SEVERAL DAYS TOO LATE"!

What an honest admission by someone who was defending the present Jewish calendar! Which of the present-day "defenders of the Jewish calendar" would be willing to make a similar statement, that it is EASY to conclude that we are NOT keeping the correct days if we go by the Jewish calendar?

The statement "BUT consider the basis of time-keeping" then introduces the deliberate attempt to confuse this whole subject. So the previous statement tells us WHY he deliberately confused the whole matter and why he refused to give the answers he had given previously, because there are real problems with the Jewish calendar. So he artificially raises questions, while avoiding to give the answers he himself knew very well.

When you don't want to give the answer you know is right, but which answer destroys your own position, then it is a very cheap cop-out to say: "that is not just the proper question"! All that says is: I just don't want to face up to that question, because it destroys my own position.

GOD HATES DECEPTION!

It would be one thing to consider giving the author of such a letter the benefit of the doubt, that he was only explaining the subject as he himself understood it. But it is something altogether different when you know that the same author EARLIER provided clear answers, with scriptural support, to all of these questions. When the same man earlier CLEARLY ANSWERED ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS HIMSELF, then it is clear that he is now, in 1969, writing with a totally different motivation!

Where in his earlier articles THE SCRIPTURES had been the important evidence for all of his statements, NOW all these Scriptures are ignored, and everything is reduced to "the oracles"!

Since 1969 Romans 3:2 has been used as THE MOST IMPORTANT SCRIPTURE by all those who wish to defend the present Jewish calendar with all its flaws and violations of God's biblical instructions. All of the rest of the Bible is made subservient to that one verse.

Now I don't for one minute believe that Mr. Herrmann made this decision to reject all of the evidence against the Jewish calendar all by himself! I do not doubt that at some time prior to writing this letter Mr. Herrmann had brought the discrepancy between the Jewish calendar and REAL new moon conjunctions to Mr. Armstrong's attention. It would have been Mr. Armstrong who made the decision that "we will stick with the Jewish calendar", irrespective of how much or how little Mr. Armstrong grasped the problems with the Jewish calendar. [Today those problems are in far greater and far clearer focus than they would have been over 30 years ago.] And Kenneth Herrmann would have been "obeying church government" in going along with Mr. Armstrong's decision.

Let's review the whole process.

1) Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong never examined the actual workings of the present Jewish calendar. In 1940 he simply ASSUMED (like Joshua with the Gibeonites) that the present Jewish calendar is so accurate that it achieves the time of first visibility. That is clear from Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's appeal to an almanac and the actual time of the REAL new moon. He knew nothing about "postponement rules" designed to avoid "inconvenient days of the week". He really believed the present Jewish calendar was ACCURATE and in harmony with all biblical requirements.

2) In this he was sincerely deceived. He acted in the integrity of his heart, not knowing any better.

3) The same was still true 13 years later, when Kenneth Herrmann wrote his first calendar article. His REPEATED references to "visibility" make quite clear that in 1953 Kenneth Herrmann also was still DECEIVED! He was under the wrong impression that the present Jewish calendar really DID abide by all the BIBLICAL instructions for a calendar. Because he did not realize that the present Jewish calendar does NOT always start in the spring, and that the month does NOT always start with the new moon, THEREFORE he was quite free in spelling out these biblical requirements for a correct calendar. He was innocently providing the very information that would EXPOSE THE WAYS IN WHICH THE JEWISH CALENDAR BREAKS GOD'S INSTRUCTIONS!

4) Even as late as 1957 Kenneth Herrmann did not realize that the present Jewish calendar does not meet the requirements and conditions he THOUGHT it met. He was still deceived in 1957. Thus his article AGAIN presented the very information that condemns the present Jewish calendar.

5) THEN, some time after 1957, probably early in 1969, Kenneth Herrmann learned that the present Jewish calendar in actual fact doesn't do at all what he had thought all along. It DOESN'T always start the year in the spring; it DOESN'T always start the first month with the sunset after the new moon; etc..

6) THEN he realized he could no longer defend the Jewish calendar by appealing to biblical standards for a correct calendar, as those biblical standards only condemned the present Jewish calendar.

7) SO THEN, when he received an honest question in 1969, then he tried to confuse and to complicate the whole matter. It seems like he succeeded in doing this in 1969, since back then most of us bought into this explanation.

8) THE VERY FACT that Kenneth Herrmann took the approach of trying to raise questions about SIMPLE MATTERS, to which he himself had previously published the correct biblical answers, IS PROOF that he knew that he could no longer defend the present Jewish calendar by appealing to the biblical requirements for a correct calendar. He knew that IF the clear biblical instructions were examined, the present Jewish calendar would have to be rejected! His opening and closing paragraphs in the above quotation make quite clear that he had become aware of a very real problem with the Jewish calendar.

CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?

There is no other reason for trying to obscure and to confuse a simple subject, to which he had 16 years earlier with the greatest clarity given biblical answers. In 1969 he simply was not dealing honestly with information HE had at his disposal.

9) Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was in charge at that point. I don't believe that Kenneth Herrmann would have intentionally kept any information he had away from Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong. It must have been brought to Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's attention in some way or other. And the response must have been: we will stick with the present Jewish calendar REGARDLESS OF THE FACTS you may have found out.

AND FROM THAT TIME ONWARDS GOD STOPPED BLESSING THE CHURCH!

As long as Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was acting in the integrity of his heart, God blessed his labour with 30% growth per year for 35 years! But once Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong refused to change on something that had been pointed out to him, then that 30% growth per annum stopped! And it was never again, right up to Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's death, achieved!

God is not a respecter of persons. God used a sincere, but deceived, man to heal people back in the 1920's. Even Mrs. Loma Armstrong was healed by God through this man's prayers. Yet once this man rejected truth that Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong brought to him, God stopped answering the man's prayers. The thing to also remember is that this man could never understand WHY God had stopped using him, even though Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong tried to explain this to him.

Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was likewise very sincere and deceived in his acceptance of the present Jewish calendar. It wasn't till 1969, 35 years after starting this phase of "the Work", that real problems with the present Jewish calendar were brought to his attention. It would be another 5 years before he was willing to face his personal error with counting Pentecost. But from 1969 onwards God withdrew his blessings, BY MR. HERBERT W. ARMSTRONG'S OWN WITNESS!

Notice.

A) Co-Worker Letter: November 5, 1975

Dear Co-Workers with Christ:

Let's GIVE OUR FINAL SUPREME EFFORT from now on to finish this great Work to which the Creator GOD has called us. PRAY earnestly that God will again give us an increased income for His Work of 30 percent a year, as He did FOR 35 YEARS!

B) Co-Worker Letter: Tucson, Arizona December 19, 1980

Dear Brethren and Co-Workers with Christ:

Soon we were on a very large number of the nation's most powerful radio stations SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. The radio program was going out over more wattage of radio power than any program on earth. We became first, worldwide, in our field. Church membership became worldwide with hundreds of local churches pastored by hundreds of Ambassador-trained ordained ministers. The Church's Work grew at the unmatched incredible rate of 30 percent per year on the average FOR 35 YEARS!

C) Co-Worker letter: Pasadena July 14, 1981

Dear Brethren and Co-Workers in Christ:

YOU RESPONDED LOYALLY! Financial income began to increase. We were nearing 30 percent increase once again for the first time in 12 years. I stepped up the recording of TV and radio programs in advance of airing.

COMMENT: "We were NEARING 30 percent increase ..." for a short time in a period of severe crisis, BUT NEVER ACTUALLY ATTAINED IT. As the following letter shows.

D) Co-Worker Letter: Pasadena December 20, 1982

Dear Brethren and Co-Workers with CHRIST:

Do you realize that with the ending of 1982 we are completing 50 YEARS in the PHILADELPHIA era of the CHURCH OF GOD! Nothing could have started smaller. But God's Church and its work grew at the rate of approximately 30 percent a year FOR 35 YEARS.

COMMENT: The 30 % hadn't been achieved in 1981 at all. Now it's back to the "35 years", FROM 1934 - 1968 INCLUSIVE.

Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was able to see very clearly that for 35 years (1934 to 1968 inclusive) God had blessed him with 30% growth per year. THEN IT HAD STOPPED!

It stopped with the year in which Kenneth Herrmann, on behalf of the Church at that time, gave AN EVASIVE ANSWER TO A GENUINE QUESTION from a sincere member of the Church about the calendar. The articles he had written previously make clear beyond any doubt that Kenneth Herrmann knew better than to try to raise totally artificial questions about the calendar. He used these questions in order to avoid giving a clear answer to the man.

The crafty thing is that Kenneth Herrmann hadn't actually said anything (and he was speaking on behalf of the leadership of the Church at that time) that was wrong! He had simply managed to put off the questioner without actually ever answering the question, a question to which he himself had the correct answer at his fingertips. He had managed to create some confusion in the questioner's mind.

And from then onwards the Church was no longer blessed as previously. From then onwards Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong had to contend with rebellions and other problems till the day of his death.

Until 1968 the Church followed the Jewish calendar in ignorance, which God "winks at", but NOW commands us to repent. For over 40 years Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong had never been motivated to PERSONALLY examine the present Jewish calendar against the standards of the Bible itself. But by 1969 the Church's "calendar expert" knew there were problems with that calendar. But that knowledge was never acted upon. Five years later, in 1974, Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong reluctantly came to grips with his wrong way of counting Pentecost, but he never did examine the present Jewish calendar as a whole.

He looked everywhere for a cause for God having withdrawn His blessing of 30% per year. But he didn't consider that HE HIMSELF WAS REJECTING NEW UNDERSTANDING, even as the Billy Sunday tabernacle caretaker (the man who prayed for Mrs. Loma Armstrong) had done in the late 1920's. He never understood the real cause for the split-offs that started around 1970 or so. He couldn't see WHY God had withdrawn His blessings.

However, can YOU now see what really happened back in 1969, the year in which God by Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's own acknowledgment withdrew His blessings?

It is simply incorrect to claim in a carte blanche way that "God blessed Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's work". The truth is that God blessed Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's work FOR 35 YEARS, until he was faced with problems with the present Jewish calendar.

From 1969 onwards Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's work was NOT really blessed in the same way as before. From then on there were problems on a large scale, one major problem came on the heels of another. His efforts at "putting the Church back on the track" never really succeeded. And in the last years of his life he didn't really have too many men around him, whom he could really trust. On one occasion he referred to those around him being "like circling vultures waiting for him to die". Those last years were at best a struggle for Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong, hardly a blessing. That is not intended as a criticism but as an objective observation. By no means do I somehow think that I am "better" than Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong. But his last years were certainly not what could be called "a blessing".

I believe Kenneth Herrmann's 1969 letter shows that THE CHURCH WAS KNOWINGLY IGNORING FACTS ABOUT THE JEWISH CALENDAR that had come to light since the last article had been written in 1957, facts that contradicted many of the things which had until then simply been ASSUMED about the present Jewish calendar. And by Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's own admission it is a fact that from 1969 onwards God no longer blessed the Church in the same way that He had blessed it before then. IF you want to claim that the withdrawal of God's blessing from 1969 onwards is NOT related to the Church ignoring the truth about the present Jewish calendar, THEN the onus is on you to tell me ANOTHER REASON for why God withdrew His blessings. There HAS TO BE a cause, and it cannot be some insignificant unimportant thing. It MUST relate in some way to acting or not acting in integrity and good conscience, because that is what God is always looking for in us human beings.

Also, I don't at all mean to be unduly hard on Mr. Kenneth Herrmann. He in one way was no different from everyone else who was willing to defend the Jewish calendar against any and all criticisms. But I don't accept it when a simple issue is intentionally made confusing and complicated for God's people. He knew full well, better than anyone else in the Church at that time, that the biblical principles that apply to the calendar are easy to understand and to apply. And I am most thankful for the existence of this letter, because THAT LETTER PROVIDES THE MISSING LINK in the whole calendar question.

So now let's put the whole picture about the calendar together:

1) In 1927 Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong simply accepted the Jewish calendar just as he simply accepted the trinity doctrine at that time. But he was sincere and didn't know the problems associated with the present Jewish calendar.

2) So God blessed Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's efforts with 30% annual growth for the next 35 years (from 1934 - 1968).

3) When circumstances forced him in 1940 to examine which of two new moons should be used for the first month of the year, he still did not really see the actual problems with this calendar; he only correctly discerned that one new moon was too early.

4) At that same time someone pointed out to him that Sivan 6 simply could not be the right way to determine Pentecost. So he changed the date for Pentecost, but STILL ended up counting the wrong way. It took him three years before he finally explained his reasons for his wrong way of counting to the Church, and he stuck with this wrong way of counting for another 34 years after 1940. But he was still sincere. His prejudice towards his way of interpreting "count FROM ..." precluded him from understanding the Scripture concerned correctly. And because he was still acting in sincerity, therefore God continued to bless his work.

5) However, the very fact that this 1940 "study into the calendar" resulted in a biblically wrong conclusion (having Pentecost on a Monday) is PROOF that this study did not have God's guidance. It was a sincere effort, but relying on their OWN understanding, like the Israelites in the matter with the Gibeonites; but God was not involved in the conclusions that were reached.

6) When Kenneth Herrmann wrote his calendar articles in 1953 and in 1957, he was just as sincere and just as deceived as was Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong at that point in time. Because he was oblivious to the real problems with the present Jewish calendar, therefore he freely presented most of the biblical requirements for the calendar, simply assuming that the present Jewish calendar would "OBVIOUSLY" be in agreement with all of those principles.

7) At some point in 1968 or 1969 Kenneth Herrmann came to understand that the present Jewish calendar actually goes against clear biblical instructions. This must have been discussed in some way with Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong. It was decided to stick with the present Jewish calendar regardless; Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was never one to act quickly on new understanding that someone else understood before he himself came to also understand it. He only acted QUICKLY on new understanding when he himself was the one who had thought of it.

8) So when someone wrote in with a calendar question in 1969, then, instead of honestly answering the question with the answers he had provided in his earlier articles, Kenneth Herrmann tried his best to create confusion and uncertainty in the mind of the questioner.

9) THIS GOD DID NOT APPROVE OF! THEREFORE GOD STOPPED IMMEDIATELY WITH THE 30% P.A. BLESSING HE HAD PROVIDED FOR THE PREVIOUS 35 YEARS!

10) From then onwards Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong's efforts were plagued by rebellions, dissension, strife, intrigue and hardships, which made his life unpleasant. He did not readily discern how many people used him for their selfish ends. He recognized that God was no longer blessing his efforts with 30% p.a. growth, but (like the Billy Sunday tabernacle keeper) he himself never did figure out WHY God had withdrawn His blessings. His last few years were anything but a joy to him.

11) Since the Church had actually REFUSED to act on correct knowledge about the calendar in 1969, THEREFORE the calendar itself became a cause of division, and has continued to be such right to the present.

12) The only real solution to the problem is: the Church must squarely face up to the clear biblical requirements for a calendar, and then make whatever changes are needed, in order to be in agreement with all biblical requirements. NOW God holds us accountable for what we know; NOW we can no longer plead ignorance. It is adherence to the errors of the present Jewish calendar that is the cause for division. Eliminating those errors is the road to unity. God's people can only rally around something that is true and correct, not around something that is flawed and in violation of biblical instructions.

Mr. Kenneth Herrmann's 1969 letter is a vital historical document, because it shows very clearly where the Church of God SWITCHED DIRECTION in its acceptance and defence of the present Jewish calendar. That switch has not gone unpunished from God.

I have also presented the entire unaltered text of that 1969 3-page letter in the article "The 1969 Calendar Letter by Kenneth C Herrmann". That article is located in the "Calendar Articles" directory, under the keywords "1969 Letter". The article is about 8 pages in length.

Frank W. Nelte