World Mission Society Church of God: Observing Feasts

The World Mission Society Church of God (hereafter WMSCOG) is a relatively new religious movement founded in South Korea by Ahn Sahng-hong (1918-1985).¹ In just over half a century since its establishment, the organization claims remarkable growth, boasting over 3.92 million registered members in approximately 7,800 churches across 175 countries worldwide.⁴

However, alongside this growth, the WMSCOG has been widely designated as a 'heresy' or 'cult' by mainstream Protestant denominations both domestically and internationally, including major Protestant council bodies in Korea.⁴ Mainstream Protestant concerns encompass not only doctrinal differences but also allegations of psychological control over members and social controversies (such as family breakdown and apocalyptic predictions).⁷ Central to the criticism are the claims of deification of the founder Ahn Sahng-hong and Zahng Gil-jah, who emerged as a leader after his death ¹, as well as unique teachings regarding biblical interpretation and conditions for salvation.⁸

The fact that the WMSCOG continues to experience significant growth despite persistent criticism and warnings from the mainstream church suggests that their message and approach hold a strong appeal to certain audiences, potentially addressing spiritual needs or longings unmet by existing churches. This rapid growth, coupled with doctrinal differences, can be perceived as a threat by mainstream denominations, potentially intensifying the heresy designations and criticism.

This report focuses on analyzing specific practices within the WMSCOG controversy, namely the observance of the Seventh-day Sabbath and biblical annual feasts (especially the Passover). The analytical framework applied will be the hermeneutical lens of the New Perspective on Paul (NPP), a trend in New Testament studies.

The explicit goal of the report is to examine whether these specific religious practices of the WMSCOG, when evaluated solely from the NPP perspective, can in themselves be definitively judged as constituting inherent heresy.

Consequently, the scope of this report’s analysis is strictly limited. Other core doctrinal conflict points between the WMSCOG and mainstream Protestantism, such as the deification of the founder, interpretation of the Trinity, and eschatology, will be acknowledged for their seriousness and the mainstream Protestant position noted, but they are excluded from the in-depth analysis applying the NPP.

The application of NPP in this analysis stems from its recognition as a scholarly achievement with considerable influence within New Testament studies. NPP challenges traditional interpretations of Paul, particularly those formed since the Reformation era, which tend to view 'faith' and 'law,' 'grace' and 'works' as opposing concepts.²⁹

NPP attempts to re-examine Paul within his historical context of 1st-century Judaism, offering different understandings of key terms like 'works of the law' and 'justification.'³⁰

Therefore, applying NPP to the WMSCOG’s emphasized practices of Sabbath and feast observance provides an alternative analytical framework. It allows these practices to be evaluated not solely through the traditional Protestant critique of 'legalism' or 'salvation by works,' but potentially through concepts like 'covenant faithfulness' or 'boundary markers.'

This report will not include a critical assessment of NPP itself but will focus on utilizing NPP as the given analytical tool.

Unlike the practice of most churches today worshiping on Sunday, the WMSCOG teaches that the seventh day, Saturday, must be observed as the Sabbath according to the explicit teachings of the Bible.²⁴ They argue that the Sabbath was instituted at creation (Gen 2:1-3), commanded in the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:8), and personally observed by Jesus and the apostles (Luke 4:16; Acts 17:2, 18:4). Conversely, they criticize Sunday worship as an unbiblical tradition resulting from the influx of Roman sun-god worship into Christianity, enforced by Emperor Constantine’s decree (AD 321).²⁷

The WMSCOG holds regular worship services on Saturdays.³⁸ Regarding the start time of the Sabbath, unlike the Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDA) which considers it Friday sunset, the WMSCOG follows founder Ahn Sahng-hong’s teaching and uses Saturday sunrise as the standard.²⁷ For them, Sabbath observance is not optional but an essential sign of obedience to God’s command and a way to participate in God’s blessing and holiness.³⁹ It is one of the core elements of the early church truth they claim to have restored.⁶

In addition to the weekly Sabbath, the WMSCOG teaches that seven annual feasts, based on Leviticus 23, must be observed in three sets.¹⁰ These seven feasts are Passover, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Resurrection Day (Feast of Firstfruits), Pentecost (Feast of Weeks), the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Tabernacles.²⁷

They assert that these feasts are not merely Old Testament relics but are 'New Covenant' feasts that Jesus Christ re-established or gave new meaning to through His ministry.⁶ Specific blessings from God, such as eternal life, forgiveness of sins, resurrection, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, are promised for each feast, making their observance essential for salvation, according to their belief.²⁴ The restoration of these feasts, in particular, is considered a sign of the true church in the last days and a core ministry of the Second Coming Christ (Ahn Sahng-hong).³

Among all the feasts observed by the WMSCOG, the Passover holds overwhelming importance.²⁴ The Passover is described as the 'core of the Bible,' the 'promise of eternal life and forgiveness of sins,' 'protection from disasters,' and the 'way to become God’s children,' presented as the central truth of salvation.²⁴

The WMSCOG commemorates the Passover annually on the evening of the 14th day of the first month according to the sacred calendar (Jewish calendar), which falls around March-April in the Gregorian calendar. During this time, they conduct a communion ceremony using bread and wine, just as Jesus did at the Last Supper, teaching that these symbolize Jesus' flesh and blood respectively (Matt 26:26-28; Luke 22:19-20).²⁴

According to their theological claims, this 'New Covenant Passover' established by Jesus gradually disappeared from church history after the apostolic age (citing the Quartodeciman controversy and the Council of Nicaea as evidence ²⁷), and was fully restored only by the founder Ahn Sahng-hong in the last days.³ Therefore, the WMSCOG emphasizes that they are the only church that keeps the Passover according to the Bible, and that eternal life cannot be obtained without observing this Passover.³⁸

The WMSCOG’s extreme emphasis on the exact date and ceremonial method (use of bread and wine) of the Passover functions not just as a theological assertion but as a key mechanism for establishing group identity and setting boundaries with the outside world. By directly linking salvation to the specific act of Passover observance ²⁴, a strong sense of belonging and exclusivity is formed among participants, identifying them as the 'true people of God.' The narrative of restoration by Ahn Sahng-hong further reinforces this exclusivity, solidifying the belief that only their practice is valid.³

The following table summarizes the annual feasts observed by the WMSCOG.

To analyze the WMSCOG’s Sabbath and feast observance practices from the NPP perspective, it is necessary to briefly review the core concepts of this scholarly trend.²⁹

To clarify the unique analytical framework provided by NPP, the following compares the interpretation of key theological terms between the traditional Protestant (especially Lutheran and Reformed) perspective and NPP.

This table illustrates how NPP challenges the traditional 'faith versus law' dichotomy and reinterprets Pauline theology. This interpretive shift opens the possibility of reaching different conclusions than traditional 'legalism' critiques when evaluating the WMSCOG’s Sabbath and feast observance practices.

When evaluating the WMSCOG’s Sabbath observance from the NPP perspective, the first point to note is that the act of keeping the Sabbath itself is not automatically defined as 'legalism,' i.e., an attempt to earn salvation through works.³³ According to NPP, 1st-century Jews observed the Sabbath as a way of expressing their identity as God’s covenant people and demonstrating faithfulness to that covenant.³⁴

Interpreted within the NPP framework, the motivation behind the WMSCOG’s Sabbath keeping could be understood in a form similar to 'covenantal nomism,' aiming to maintain the covenant relationship they believe they have with God and obey His commands, rather than an effort to 'earn' salvation.³³ That is, Sabbath observance could be seen as a required faithful response within the covenant relationship they believe they have already entered by grace.

Therefore, when viewed through the specific lens of NPP, the act itself of Sabbath observance becomes difficult to use as direct grounds for a heresy judgment based on traditional charges of 'salvation by works.' The focus of evaluation shifts from 'earning' salvation to 'maintaining' or 'expressing' covenantal status.

The WMSCOG’s observance of annual feasts, particularly the emphasis on Passover, can be analyzed similarly from the NPP perspective. In the Old Testament, feasts, like the Sabbath, were integral parts of Israel’s covenantal life (Leviticus 23).

From the NPP viewpoint, Paul’s concern might have been less about the act of feast observance itself and more about situations where they functioned as 'identity markers' dividing Jews and Gentiles or were imposed on Gentile believers as conditions for salvation.³⁴

Arguing from the NPP perspective, the WMSCOG’s strict observance of feasts like Passover could be interpreted as an attempt to live faithfully within the structure of the 'New Covenant' they believe has been restored.⁶ It can be seen as an act of defining themselves as God’s people and expressing their identity according to the norms of that covenant.

In conclusion, judged solely within the NPP framework which reassesses the relationship between law and grace, the strict observance of biblical feasts does not automatically equate to the heretical error of 'legalism.'

Passages from Paul’s letters often cited to refute the obligation of Sabbath and feast observance, such as Romans 14 and Colossians 2:16-17, can also be interpreted differently from the NPP perspective.¹¹

From the NPP perspective, these passages allow for an interpretation where Paul is cautioning against these practices becoming divisive identity markers or being imposed as conditions for salvation by external philosophies, rather than commanding the complete cessation of Sabbath or feast observance. This supports the overall argument that Sabbath and feast observance itself is not inherently heretical within this framework. Distinguishing between the weekly Sabbath (potentially seen as a creation ordinance) and ceremonial sabbaths/feasts linked to the OT sacrificial system ('shadow') when interpreting texts like Colossians 2 is a crucial hermeneutical point allowing NPP proponents to oppose the imposition of ceremonial law without necessarily negating all forms of Sabbath/feast observance.

It must be clearly stated that the WMSCOG teaches that founder Ahn Sahng-hong is the Second Coming Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and God the Father who came in the flesh, and believes in and worships Zahng Gil-jah as the 'Bride of God,' 'Heavenly Mother,' i.e., 'Mother God.'¹ They present passages like 'Elohim' (the plural Hebrew word for God) and Galatians 4:26 ("But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother") as the basis for this doctrine.⁸

Mainstream Protestant denominations and research institutions identify this very deification claim as the most central and decisive reason for designating the WMSCOG as heretical or a non-Christian group.⁷ Such claims are considered blasphemous, directly denying fundamental Christian doctrines like the unique divinity of Jesus Christ, the Trinity, and monotheism.⁸ Ironically, claims have also been made that Ahn Sahng-hong himself criticized the 'Mother God' doctrine during his lifetime as delusional and false teaching.¹

It is explicitly stated that the NPP analysis conducted in Section III of this report was limited to the issues of Sabbath and feast observance, and this deification claim was not included in the scope of analysis.

Beyond the deification claims, the WMSCOG exhibits significant differences from mainstream Protestantism in several areas. These include a unique understanding of the Trinity often criticized as modalism ³, a distinctive eschatology involving failed prophecies ³, the assertion that baptism must be performed in the name of Ahn Sahng-hong ²⁰, and the mandatory wearing of head coverings for women during worship.¹⁰

These doctrinal differences also serve as important factors in how mainstream Protestantism evaluates the WMSCOG, but they are not the subject of the NPP analysis in this report.

It is reiterated that the NPP analysis in this report was intentionally limited in scope to the issues of Sabbath and feast observance.

It must be acknowledged that the mainstream Protestant designation of the WMSCOG as heretical is based on a comprehensive evaluation of their entire doctrinal system and practices, with the deification claims regarding Ahn Sahng-hong and Zahng Gil-jah being the decisive criterion.⁷

As requested, it is emphasized that from the perspective of historical orthodox Christian faith, the WMSCOG’s claim that Ahn Sahng-hong is the Second Coming Jesus and Zahng Gil-jah is 'Mother God' is considered an extremely serious and fundamental deviation, going beyond mere doctrinal difference.⁷ This issue relates to the core identity of Christianity and is generally a non-negotiable point in discussions of orthodoxy.

The fact that the WMSCOG directly links the restoration of the Sabbath and feasts to Ahn Sahng-hong’s messianic identity ³ suggests that although this report analytically separated these elements, they are inextricably intertwined within their actual theological system. One reason mainstream Protestant criticism often targets feast observance itself is the view that it ultimately functions as a means to justify the deification of Ahn Sahng-hong.⁸ While this report artificially separated them for analysis based on the specific analytical framework of NPP, this inherent connection is an important background tension in understanding the issue.

The analysis conducted in Section III of this report concludes that when evaluated through the New Perspective on Paul (NPP), which reinterprets the relationship between Paul, the Law, and 1st-century Judaism, the act of observing the Seventh-day Sabbath and biblical feasts, including Passover, is difficult to automatically condemn as the heretical error of 'legalism' or 'salvation by works.'

NPP offers the possibility of reinterpreting these practices not as means of earning salvation but as expressions of faithfulness or ways of maintaining identity within the covenant community, presenting a different perspective from traditional Reformation critiques. Furthermore, NPP-based interpretations of Pauline passages like Romans 14 or Colossians 2 suggest they might be understood as opposing the imposition of specific practices as divisive identity markers, rather than mandating their complete abolition.

However, it is clearly stated that the findings of this limited, NPP-based analysis of Sabbath and feast observance do not mitigate or justify the other fundamental and serious theological conflicts existing between the WMSCOG and mainstream Protestantism.

Specifically, the deification claims regarding founder Ahn Sahng-hong and Zahng Gil-jah are still considered the most significant and decisive grounds for heresy by mainstream Protestantism, and the analysis in this report does not alter this assessment.

In conclusion, evaluating a specific religious group is recognized as a complex task. Specific practices like Sabbath and feast observance can be interpreted differently depending on the applied theological framework (NPP in this report’s case). However, a complete assessment of any group requires comprehensive consideration of its entire doctrinal system and practices, and how they align or conflict with the core teachings of historical Christian faith.

This report conducted a specific analysis, concluding that Sabbath and feast observance itself cannot be designated as heretical from the NPP perspective. Simultaneously, however, it finally states that the core doctrine of the WMSCOG, claiming Ahn Sahng-hong as the Second Coming Messiah and Zahng Gil-jah as 'Mother God,' constitutes an extremely significant theological problem from the standpoint of historical Christian orthodoxy.