Despite the contradictions between what Ahn Sahng Hong wrote in his book Problems With New Jerusalem, The Bride and Women’s Veils and the World Mission Society Church of God‘s belief that “god the mother” exists, members have argued that since Um Soo In was the “fake” mother god, a real one must exist. A member […]]]>
Despite the contradictions between what Ahn Sahng Hong wrote in his book Problems With New Jerusalem, The Bride and Women’s Veils and the World Mission Society Church of God‘s belief that “god the mother” exists, members have argued that since Um Soo In was the “fake” mother god, a real one must exist. A member cited this analogy in the comments below a blog article by WMSCOG missionary Victor Lozada:
“Again, this book actually proves that there is a Heavenly Mother. Can there be a fake Louis Vuitton bag without a real Louis Vuitton bag? No? Then if a false Mother or Bride appears, it is because there must be a real one.”
www.thetruewmscog.com
In order for this analogy to be applicable, Ahn Sahng Hong would have to have written that Um Soo In was a “false god the mother”. Let’s take a look at what Ahn Sahng Hong actually wrote in his book Problems With New Jerusalem regarding this issue.
In Chapter 7 of Problems With New Jerusalem, Ahn Sahng Hong writes:
Uhm Soo In is babbling about how she is the new Jerusalem that came down out of heaven. Uhm Soo In is using the following verse to claim that she is the mother from heaven:” [quotes Galatians 4:22-26]. “Uhm Soo In thinks that Hagar is the actual earthly Jerusalem and Sarah as the actual heavenly Jerusalem.
A missionary of the WMSCOG argues that, “the Holy City Jerusalem is a symbol being used to represent our Heavenly Mother“.
Ahn Sahng Hong goes on to disagree with Um Soo In and the WMSCOG:
These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants as the prophecy of the Old Covenant and New Covenant where Hagar represents physical Israelites because of Mosaic law received on Mount Sinai and earthly Jerusalem and Sarah represents the New Covenant established by Jesus Christ in the upper room of Mark’s house and spiritual Israelites, namely, Jerusalem from above.
Ahn Sahng Hong further disagrees with Um Soo In:
However, Uhm Soo In claims she is the Jerusalem from above that came down to earth. If the verses from Galatians 4:22-24 speak of a prophesy where Sarah is the Jerusalem from above and that Jerusalem is Uhm Soo In then Uhm Soo In must be married to her son. Because Isaac is Sarah’s son and Isaac is also said to be Christ. (Galatians 3:16) Uhm Soo In became the mother of Christ as well as the bride (wife) of Christ. Uhm Soo In referred me as the blind Isaac and herself as the Jerusalem from above or Sarah and is saying to live with Isaac or her son after all so where will you find this kind of extremely disgraceful thing?
Ahn Sahng Hong completely opposed the idea that Sarah represented the Jerusalem from above, but that is exactly what the WMSCOG believes. Ahn Sahng Hong also completely opposed the idea that a woman could be the Jerusalem from above, because according to his interpretation of Galatians 3:16, that would mean that whoever that woman was, she would be the mother and the bride of Christ. Ahn Sahng Hong described this notion as “extremely disgraceful“.
How is this different from the WMSCOG’s interpretation of Zahng Gil Jah being the New Jerusalem and the the bride? It is not different at all. In fact, at the end of Chapter 7 Ahn Sahng Hong goes as far as to say that Um Soo In was a “false prophet” with “weird delusions”. My guess is that Ahn Sahng Hong would have similar things to say about Um Soo In’s copycat, Zahng Gil Jah.
In summary, the only thing that this book proves is that Ahn Sahng Hong opposed both Um Soo In’s and the WMSCOG’s conclusion that there is a “god the mother”, regardless of which Korean woman claims to be her.
]]>
The World Mission Society Church of God (WMSCOG) claims that the practice of women covering their heads during worship is a commandment from God. The WMSCOG actually lists this practice under “Commandments of God” on their website. Here is the direct link to the sermon online. Necessary For Salvation? The WMSCOG supports its claim that the veil […]]]>
The World Mission Society Church of God (WMSCOG) claims that the practice of women covering their heads during worship is a commandment from God. The WMSCOG actually lists this practice under “Commandments of God” on their website. Here is the direct link to the sermon online.
Necessary For Salvation?
The WMSCOG supports its claim that the veil was commanded by God by stating that the practice of women covering their heads with a veil was instituted according to the teachings of the man they mistakingly believe to be the Second Coming of Christ (Ahn Sahng Hong). The WMSCOG goes on to claim that the veil is necessary for salvation, stating on their website:
God gave us this veil regulation as a sign representing God’s authority. Even though this regulation seems minor, it cannot be neglected. None of God’s commands were instituted meaninglessly. All of the regulations were given to God’s people because they are necessary for our salvation and allow us to enter the kingdom of God.
The WMSCOG Says Men With Long Hair Are Ugly?
The WMSCOG says that men with long hair are ugly under their Truth of Life > Fundamental Truths section of their web site. Don’t believe me? It’s right on their official web site under the heading “Woman’s Veil is Shown Through the Very Nature of Things“:
This verse implies that it is not proper for a woman to worship God with her head uncovered. We unconsciously know that if a man has long hair he looks ugly, and it can even become his disgrace. God gave men “the nature” not to cover their heads…Contrary to man, if a woman has short hair, she is not seen as beautiful. This is only because God gave women the “nature” to feel beautiful when their heads are covered with long hair.
There you have it, straight from the official web site of the World Mission Society Church of God: “if a man has long hair he looks ugly”, and “if a woman has short hair, she is not seen as beautiful“. Does your church preach this as a “Fundamental Truth” or a “Truth of Life?” Doesn’t sound anything like the message of Christianity to me.
Paul Said No Such Custom
Now let us examine what the Scriptures have to say about the regulation of the veil. In his first letter to the Corinthians, Apostle Paul addresses the custom of head coverings (1 Corinthians 11:3-16). Apostle Paul appears to be clarifying an issue of contention among the Corinthians regarding the regulation of head coverings during the time of worship.
Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.
Perhaps, it is a little unclear in the NIV (a notoriously poor translation). Let’s look at it in the KJV where the Apostle Paul refers to head coverings:
But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
It is then very clear then that the Apostle Paul is referring to a custom, not a command.
]]>