New Moon and Sabbath Message by Wade Cox

New Moon 1/12/26/120 and Sabbath 2/12/26/120

Dear Friends,

This month we are going into the final phases of the Passover reconsideration and preparation. That process requires in us a positive capacity to analyse and evaluate our own performance and intellectual values.

There are a number of problems that we are required to evaluate and we must do that in an intellectually honest way. We often see people in our society and unfortunately in a number of countries that have inherited a bias in their thinking and acting which prevents any open and honest approach from taking place. In the Churches of God in these days we have also inherited a superficial and cultic way of reasoning. Many in the Churches of God refuse to honestly evaluate behaviour, or doctrines and performance and insist on clinging to error because the individuals and groups simply are unable to face the reality of their errors, evaluate their impacts and change their views. In short they cannot and will not repent. The mindset is not confined to the religious but is endemic amongst them.

We often get attacked not in analysis of what we say but simply because we say it and by our actions imply a criticism of those that do not do what we do. Often people will find that they are criticised not by any rational evaluation or criticism of doctrine or of any compelling logic of argument but merely attacks on personality. Some of our people were confronted with this last week. Their friends simply dismissed any implied criticism in necessary changes in doctrine by simply saying: “Cox is wrong” or “CCG is wrong.” They attack the man. No example of error or doctrinal misconstruction was or is advanced and never has been. Show us and we will change. They do that because they have been trained to do that, by, for example, the ministry of Herbert Armstrong of the WCG and their offshoots. But the problem is not confined to those organisations. It is a mental process endemic in the US in particular and also in other societies. That is why the world will exchange presents when the witnesses finish their testimony and a good deal of the motivation for rejoicing and the opposition will come from those who say they are the religious.

I wish to refer to the recent awards to Noam Chomsky by the UN association for writers and artists. I make no endorsement of the UN system and its own deep-seated political agenda. I merely refer to the awards because at that award Noam Chomsky made comments to a reporter’s questions. His answers reflect on the intellectual processes and honesty in the American psyche, which unfortunately has entered the Churches of God. Now professor Chomsky is a professor of languages in the US and he is a noted philosopher in the logic of language and the communication of ideas. He has written works criticising the establishment and has written on “The Dumbing Down of America” which he acknowledges to be a real problem, as does any philosopher worth his or his/her salt.

After he was given the award for excellence the following exchange occurred:

AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to the famed linguist and political analyst and activist Professor Noam Chomsky. On Tuesday, the president of the United Nations Society of Writers and Artists, Hans Janochek presented Noam Chomsky with the Award of Excellence at the U.N. Correspondence Association Club, in the United Nations in New York.

HANS JANECK: Professor Chomsky, it is a great honor for us that you accepted our invitation, but even more so that you accept this, our Award of Excellence, which the Society of Writers has been giving annually to outstanding literary and political figures for their contribution to peace and understanding. In fact, over the past 15 or 17 years, so far, and it was previously awarded to international statesmen such as Mikhail Gorbachev and great writers like Norman Mailer. The members of the society, founded in 1989, are diplomats and journalists accredited to the United Nations, as well as individual staff members with a distinguished literary record. We deeply believe that there is a link between politics or diplomacy on one hand, and literary art on the other. Because so many things that you cannot say in a political or diplomatic fashion, you need a literary element. So, this is one of the things that we have admired about you for many years. It's not only what you say it's, how you say it. And you can see what the response that you have. You never raise your voice, you never swear, and you never hit the table with your fist. You always keep calm, but are always persuasive. Persuasive, indeed. This is why the citation for the award, which is a medal on a blue ribbon, on a with an inscription that translates as "from the spirit of the world." There are other interpretations, but what it means really, is the conscience of mankind. That's what it's all about. Professor Chomsky, we honor you today in gratitude. You have kept the flame of reason and common sense alive when they were threatened. You stayed calm in the clash of civilizations, but recorded the conflict in a uniquely somber (sic) and persuasive style. Your voice is heard all over the globe. You have earned the respect of millions, eager to find the truth in a troubled world. There is no better place to express our respect you to than here at the United Nations, whose spirit and principles you represent.

JUAN GONZALEZ: That was Hans Janecek, presenting Noam Chomsky with the Award of Excellence at the United Nations Correspondents Association Club in New York. Noam Chomsky is an institute professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance, 9-11, Power and Terror, and many other books. After the awards ceremony, Chomsky addressed the large crowd at the United Nations talking about US hegemony, Iraq, space travel, and many more subjects. He then took questions from reporters.
REPORTER: Mr. Chomsky, I want to ask you two brief questions. One is, in your view, what is the risk of four more years of Bush, both inside the United States and for international systems, what the impact will be. And secondly, do you think that Kofi Annan should cede to U.S. pressure and send U.N. personnel back to Iraq, and does he have any room to say no?

NOAM CHOMSKY: It's very hard to predict the weather, and predicting human fate is difficult. But there is a fair possibility, a possibility beyond what I think any rational person would accept, that another four years of the same policies, could be extremely dangerous for the country, and the world, and could cause, maybe, irreparable harm. Remember, we have a lot of evidence. It's not just the past four years. The same people, essentially, were in office for 12 years from1981 to 1992, and there is a rich record of what they accomplished. It is not discussed in the United States because we have a kind of a principle here that you're not supposed to look into the mirror. That's not unique to the United States, but very striking here. So, anything that happened in the past didn't happen. Because we have changed course, or some miracle has taken place. We are, therefore, not permitted to carry out the rational approach that we would to anyone else. And if Saddam Hussein appears in a trial and says, well, why are you bringing up all of that old stuff from the 1980's...It doesn't mean anything now, I'm a nice guy, I just had a born-again experience and I'm going right to heaven...We wouldn't even bother laughing. But when that is done year after year after year, as it is by our own leaders, we applaud. That's what it means to be a disciplined intellectual. If we don't want to accept that discipline, we can treat the matter just as we would in the case of Saddam's crimes or Stalin's crimes or anyone else's. We can ask, well, what did they do during those 12 years, and what have they been doing in the last four years. It's a reactionary selection from the first 12 years. It's clear enough, they have a domestic agenda, which is not hidden. They're trying to unravel the progressive legislation of the past century to overcome the achievements of popular struggles, hard ones, to gain some benefits for people, what we call minimal welfare state... To transfer power into the hands of unaccountable private tyrannies in one-way or another. Every aspect of the program is like that. Internationally, they have the programs that I have described. They may back off from them because they may find them unfeasible, but the programs are clear, and that's only part of them. I mean, there are also programs about international economic arrangements. I think these could be very dangerous. In fact, the kinds of programs that I just talked about could literally lead to destruction of the species. Again, you cannot put a probability on that. We all know what the likelihood was of a devastating nuclear war in 1962, when the world was literally one word away from a nuclear exchange. One Russian submarine commander countermanded and -- an order to shoot off nuclear-tipped torpedoes during the Cuban Missile Crisis, which very likely would have led to a devastating nuclear response. And then on and on, and then Eisenhower's destruction of the northern hemisphere. One word. That was 1962. January, 1959, 1995, was much more dangerous, far greater destructive capacity. At that point, we were two minutes away. As these threats are being increased, the militarization of space alone is increasing the threats significantly. And you know, rational people don't take chances like that. No matter what their subjective probability is, but it will increase.

REPORTER: And about Kofi Annan and the U.N.?

NOAM CHOMSKY: Basically no one has a right to be in Iraq but Iraqis'. So, they should take the lead in determining what happens. The invasion has left such wreckage that -- how Iraqis might decide to deal with what remains, you know, I cannot say. I mean, we know what they say in polls. You can make your own judgments from that. In recent Iraqi polls, the most favorable rating for a foreign leader is Jacques Chirac-- by about five to one. They regard the U.S. and British forces as occupiers, not liberators. Right after Bush made his speech about how we're changing course once again and going to bring democracy to the world, that's reiterating what Reagan had said 20 years earlier and everyone else. After that speech, which was greeted with the usual reverential awe in the United States, there was a poll in Iraq about asking Iraqis why they thought the U.S. was in Iraq, and some agreed with President Bush and the commentators here. 1% thought that the goal was to bring democracy to Iraq. About 70% thought it was to control Iraq's resources, and to reorder the Middle East consistently with the goals of the United States and Israel. Actually, their responses were more nuanced and sophisticated. When it went further, it turned out about half, although 1% thought the U.S. was trying to bring democracy, about half thought that the United States wanted democracy, if the U.S. could control it. Now, that's the sophisticated response. The one that's based on history. The one that is understood by everyone in Latin America, for example.

(The report is produced verbatim and so apologies are extended to Hans Janocheck for the variations in his name. Published from Democracy Now web site at

Noam Chomsky is correct in that the agenda to hand over power is proceeding now at a great rate. The governments of the US and the British Commonwealth are aiding in the erosion if not contemplated destruction of the hard won freedoms of the people. What we are seeing is the deliberate attempt by the vested interested and I include the UN organisation in the process also. We are faced with a serious attack on human freedom by the demons in these last days and we will not survive it without the direct intervention of Jesus Christ.

We are unable to intellectually internalise criticism and correct error with this sort of mindset. It is endemic now among our people and the people love to have it so. In short we cannot repent because we cannot admit and correct error. For example look at the news media and Internet based news coverage and ask yourself honestly if that is an honest and diligent coverage of the world issues. If you performed at your job like most of the journalists in the US media you would be fired. They perform like they do because if they genuinely worked at news coverage and produced informed critical comment their controllers would fire them. The BBC is marginally better but still in the control of the British government who pays their wages through the secret service offices of the government.

The Churches of God have become a microcosm of the intellectual failures of the society in which they live. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the North American continent. The US effect on the world is so great because it exercises power now in place of the British Commonwealth and has adopted the same weaknesses in analysis that became endemic to that power structure prior to its demise in the UK. The problems endemic in Africa and Asia are merely extensions of what has been going on there for centuries. The problem is that the world cannot survive with wholesale thinking like that but it is getting to be that way.

There is no capacity to repent in this way of thinking. I see no intellectual honesty in the religious edifice of the last days and that corrupt edifice now incudes the Churches of God many of whom are either dead or so lukewarm they may as well be dead.

In this Passover period, we of the CCG will be keeping the Feast of Unleavened Bread for seven days. Because we are told to go out of our homes for the Passover and that we may not consume the Passover within any of our gates does not mean we can simply return to our homes after thirty-six hours on the morning of the first Holy Day and not participate in the services for the full period (cf. Deut. 16:1-8). If we do that we are not obeying God and the spirit of the Law. We should examine our attitudes against what we did fifty years ago and not on what the world does now. Fifty years ago the entire Church kept the feast of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread for seven days and went away to be together the whole time. Now often the same people who did it then don’t do it now and the ministry trained since then don’t care what is true. If you are with CCG and are thinking that way you should repent.

We should all be trying to obey God and not simply lowering the goal posts of our standards every time we find it convenient.

I would like to go on now to deal with the matter of aberrant sexual practices in our society.

Both in the US and in Australia and elsewhere it is emerging as a very serious social issue and one that will ultimately destroy our society. We are conditioning our society to accept this form of behaviour and we are placing our younger people in the firing line of the process.

In the US we are shaping up to see the legal showdown based on the activities in California and in New England regarding the ordination of homosexuals and now marriage of same sex couples.

A recent news item said that:

“Opponents of Mayor Gavin Newsom's decision to defy state law and have marriage licenses issued to gay and lesbian couples were to have their day in court Tuesday, with hearings scheduled on the petitions of two groups.

By Monday night, 2,340 same-sex couples had taken their vows at City Hall since the county clerk, under Newsom's directions, started issuing ''gender-neutral'' marriage licenses Thursday.

Hundreds of couples, aware their opportunity may be fleeting, spent a rainy Monday in a three-block-long line outside the ornate building waiting for the historic chance to wed with the city's blessing.
In a brief submitted for a court hearing Tuesday, lawyers for one of the groups seeking to block gay weddings said Newsom was in blatant violation of state law when he ordered marriage licenses for gay couples.…

Newsom has argued that the equal protection clause of the California Constitution makes denying marriage licenses to gay couples illegal. But lawyers for a group formed to defend Proposition 22 - a 2000 ballot initiative that says the state will recognize only marriages between a man and woman as valid - contend the mayor lacks the authority to make that decision.

''What the mayor and his cronies have attempted to do is short-circuit the legal process by being both judge and jury themselves,'' said Alliance Defense Fund attorney Benjamin Bull.

The city's lawyers said they will argue that local government agencies or officials are not barred from advancing their own interpretations of the state constitution. They also claim the plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that continuing to issue licenses for same-sex couples would cause the irreparable harm necessary to obtain a court stay.
''Same-sex couples denied the right to marry face far greater harm than the petitioners here,'' stated a legal brief filed by the city Monday.”

The Churches of God has never and can never recognise such unions and remain part of the Churches of God. The process of educating the society into this form of thinking is now taking effect in many nations. It accompanies the destruction of morals in the community in general. One of our people was in hospital in UK having a baby and the doctor asked her what Rh factor the father of the child was. She said: Oh there won’t be a problem as my husband is the same factor as I am. The doctor said: “Madam I asked what factor the father of the child was not what factor your husband was”. She was so amazed and he was very serious she simply laughed. He looked at her and said: “Only an Australian would laugh at that question.” In the UK the rate of moral decline is so great that it is a serious problem. The fathers of a large percentage of children are not the husbands of the women having the children. The problem has never been as great as it is now. The complex moral degeneration is also enabled in part by the communications media of the current social structure.

In a recent move in Australian schools a questionnaire was handed out to year 9 students in a Victorian school. That asked questions which appear designed to condition young students to accept homosexuality as part of their lifestyle.

Question 4 was reported as:

“If you have never slept with a person of the same sex is it possible that all you need is a good gay lover?”

Question 14 was listed as:

“How can you expect to become a whole person if you limit yourself to compulsive exclusive heterosexuality?”

The questionnaire is part of an anti-bullying document on the Tasmanian Department of Education Web site.

The Human Rights system is now geared up to defend all aspects of Gay and Lesbian Relationships as normal marriages in the same way any de-facto relationship is regarded as legally entitled to the same protections afforded married couples.

The anti-homophobia section of the work on the Tasmanian Department of education site is entitled “Challenging Homophobia.” The document was allegedly developed by a homosexual activist in conjunction with La Trobe University but is now advanced to schoolchildren.

The homosexual lobby is now reported as actively circularising Victorian schools in a bid to recruit people to homosexuality. The teachers appear to be supporting the drive. Whilst the condemnation of bullying is necessary and needs to be vigilantly enforced to prevent it, the active encouragement of the perversion of young people under this guise is to be condemned. The South Australian school system also has much to say also about normalising homosexuality.

These people are minors. The teachers encouraging this thought process are engaged in the corruption of the morals of minors. That conduct is a breach of the law. It was once punishable by terms in prison. Once again the capacity to repent must be encouraged but the encouraging of the immorality must be suppressed. We are trying to get our young people to remain wholesome and chaste until marriage. These activities simply erode the fabric of our society and destroy the values and the capacity of the children to remain chaste and prevent disease. It is to be noted that no mention is made of the dangers of anal sex and the problems of venereal disease and the high incidence among homosexuals.

The propaganda is reported as being issued by the Gay and Lesbian Lobby. The argumentation is based on the biased or skewed documentation produced by Kinsey in the US in 1948. He used a limited population for his research. The use of prison inmates for his research badly skewed his results. Kinsey himself was a homosexual and seemed to know what he wanted to achieve. The analysis of the prison groups would have thrown other light on the problem but it was never treated that way.

Examples of false and discredited statistics used are:

  1. 50% of adult males admitted to being attracted to other men.
  2. 10% of married men in the 20s make homosexual contact after their marriage.
  3. 60% of all men had some type of homosexual contact before they were sixteen years of age.
  4. Kinsey’s report is usually cited as the basis for the estimation that 10% of the populace is lesbian or gay.

Reading the government web sites will give you a good idea of the transition to normalcy of the homosexual condition. Now we are led to believe that Homosexuality is a natural condition that the individual is born with and cannot be helped in their sexual orientation. In other words the creation is impaired and it is the luck of the draw that made you different, just like blue and brown eyes. The body and its entire orientation to heterosexuality are ignored and the trite simplifications are advanced one on another in this form of propaganda. The Bible is clear you cannot be a Christian and a homosexual or lesbian. The terms are mutually exclusive.

There is no difference in this aspect in the failure to keep the Laws of God in sin, as sin is transgression of the Law. Homosexuality is the same in that respect as any other form of fornication. It is also specifically forbidden as a sexual abomination. History is littered with the remains of such societies.

The failure of the Churches of God to recognise or even properly examine their responsibilities is a condemnation of the intellectual process of the churches and the way in which they educate their members and encourage genuine examination of doctrines. We all are sinners and we all must repent of our sins. It is not enough to say that you must not be criticised for the problem or the way you think and act. It is also the same process if you are keeping the wrong calendar or the wrong system. You are in sin and repeatedly so. If you think we are wrong then show us and we will repent and change. We expect the same of you.

The Witnesses will correct the errors strongly enough when they get here (see the paper The Witnesses (No. 135)). Our job is to promulgate the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. The elect are to get it straight and keep the Commandments of God and the Testimony or Faith of Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:17; 14:12). Look at what you are doing and repent and obey God.

Wade Cox

Coordinator General


© Copyright 2004 Christian Churches of God, All Rights Reserved