Is GCI condoning evolution? Read the following letters from John Miller, Jr., former member who tried to tell them that they were. Includes responses from Paul Kroll.

(Note: Worldwide Church of God changed their name to Grace Communion International in 2009.)

Read: Grace Communion International Promoting Evolution (June 28, 2011 letter) and Quotes Proving Grace Communion International is Endorsing Evolution (June 30, 2011 letter)

“…avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science
falsely so called” ~I Timothy 6:20

Dear Michael Morrison,

Once again the WWCG has spoon fed their congregations an idea from the Bible that is completely full of speculation, a problem that seems to follow them wherever they go. Your article, “The six Day Creation literal or figurative?” plants the seed of doubt in those that are in your congregations. Your article is full of the word “perhaps.” “Perhaps” as defined in the Webster’s dictionary means, “possibly but not certainly, something open to doubt or conjecture.” According to this definition of “perhaps,” you are wrong.

Why is a literal translation of the account of creation so difficult for you to accept? Is it because a literal creation of six days goes against what evolutionists say? Do you believe that everything evolved over a period of millions of years, that life crawled out of the slime pits of the new earth, and that men were at one time monkeys? Do you believe that this earth and all of the universe began with a “big bang?” You cannot sit on a fence between what God says He did, and what man says.

All the “could it be” and “perhaps” that seem to take on some sort of authority in your article are nothing more than mere speculations of men. The fact is, you can never prove by using the Bible as your only source–which by the way is the only source a Christian should use–that creation was anything other than in six literal days.

The creation account tells us in Genesis 1:31, “And God saw everything that he made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” Notice, “it was very good,” God does not say, “it will become very good.” The word “good” is the word “Tobe” in the Hebrew, and it means “good, beautiful, best” and is taken from the word “Chesheb” meaning a belt or strap, being interlaced.

The earth was created in such a way that it was the “best” it could be from the very beginning. God made it “ready” to serve His purpose. God made it “beautiful.” It did not become all these things over millions of years. This fact flies in the face of science and critics who say that the account of creation in Genesis is merely figurative and poetic, nice to tell small children but is no more then a fable. To say that the account of creation in Genesis is figurative is to say that He did not set the Earth, the moon, and the sun in their places, at the same time that He made the first day. This we know would have been impossible, because we know without the moon and the sun, there would be no Earth, and therefore no time, no existence at all of anything.

God asks Job a question in Job 38: 2-3. It is the same question we must ask ourselves whenever we think we have all the answers concerning God and what He does. “Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?” The Bible, the Word of God, and only the Word of God is our knowledge and our counsel. Anyone that uses any other words other then God’s word “Darkeneth” it. The Hebrew word here is translated “Chashak,” meaning to hide. We are to seek counsel that does not hide God’s true counsel. Your article does that; it attempts to cover up the truth of God and only God as sole creator. God did not need “millions of years” to create everything. He says He did it in six days.

In closing, God says He created everything in six days; man says He did not. Who do you think we should believe? Your article says “Faith should be built on the correct foundation, not on an overly specific interpretation when other interpretations make better sense.” I must point out to you that faith is not built upon the foundation of things that make sense, but rather in most cases to the human understanding faith make no sense at all. Heb.11: 1, “Now faith is the substance hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Vs. 3, “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” To human understanding, this makes no sense at all.

Yours Truly,

John E. Miller Jr. (former WCG member)

John Miller, Jr.’s letter sent to WCG headquarters:

Dear Sir,

In your article on the net entitled “What are Human Beings?” you say, whether God created everything “in one day, six days, or six billion years is not as important as the fact that He did.” While it is most important to know that God created everything, I believe it is equally important to know that His word is true. In my opinion we must be careful with the idea that the time span that God said He did it in isn’t reduced to mere allegory, as I believe you think it is. Am I right? If we believe God “did it” and that part is not an allegory, why do you not believe the time period God says He did it in is any thing else but true and not? After all, how long does it take to “speak some thing into existence?”

Is the story of Adam and Eve an allegory; is Noah and the Ark allegory; is Daniel and the lions Den an allegory; is Samson’s strength; the parting of the Red Sea; David and Goliath; Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection; all allegory? If not, what separates actual happening from allegory, do you know? Is it allegory because it seems impossible to believe, or because the unbelievers in the world might scoff at the idea that we might believe such a childish idea?

What makes some things that are written in the Bible an allegory and other things not? Do you see my point? It seems to me that any one of these stories are just as difficult to understand as God creating everything in 6 days as the Bible says. One other point is important to ask. What part of creation was written as allegory and what part as in actual time periods? I was under the impression that all of God’s creation is dependent on each other. Did he make all animal life at the same time? Did the plant life get created later? When did He create the light and dark; when did the sun come into being? Are we to understand God’s speaking things into existence is an allegory, or is that what He actually did?

Finally, how are we to teach are children about what the Bible says? Should we teach them to treat the Bible as a book written full of allegories, when they ask us, “Did God really create everything in six days?”

I believe there are things that are written in the Bible that are not to be taken literally; however, I do not believe the facts of creation recorded for us by Moses were anything but actual time periods.

You may respond to my questions by e-mail.

John Miller, Jr. (former WCG member)

2nd Email to Paul Kroll of WCG, Personal Correspondence, after John mailed him his article Six Days of Creation:

October 21, 2002

Dear Paul.

Thank you for responding so quickly. Yes I do believe that God created every thing in 6 days. Unlike some, however, I do not believe that the earth was only created a few thousands years ago but I believe it all began in 6 days. I have no other accurate proof to go by other than the Bible. I don’t know why the article even went into the time it took God to create every thing because like you said, it really was unrelated to the main point of the article. May I ask why doesn’t the wwcg make a stand concerning this matter? I would be interested to know. It doesn’t bother me in the least to be in the minority about a certain belief I might make a stand on. As a one time wwcg church member I have had to change many of my beliefs in the past to get to where I am now and I’m sure that there will be more things that God will lead me to see that need to be changed.

I am not writing this e-mail to you to be argumentative, but only to find out why the wwcg believes what they believe. One other thing I’d like to ask. Somehow in your response I was lead to believe that you think that it is acceptable to believe God is He or she. [emp. ours] Was I correct in that observation? If the wwcg believes that where can you point me to in the Bible that makes that clear?

I believe one must be very careful in taking anything away from or adding to the Word of God. The Bible tells us in 1 Timothy 3:16-17. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” How do these verses have any weight if what God says in Gen. 1 is not anything but actual events that happened and in the time He said they happened in?

Again, thank you for taking the time to correspond with me. I am quite willing to change any belief that I might have when confronted with some thing that I did not know before or some thing I did not understand.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

John E. Miller Jr. (Former WCG member)

Excerpts From Paul Kroll’s Reply:

Notice how parts of Paul Kroll’s 2nd email response to John included spin control:

“Regarding Genesis 1 specifically, no doubt, our members have varying beliefs about whether Genesis 1 means to give us a time-line of creation of 144 literal hours or not. The church does not have a litmus test requiring members to accept any view of this chapter in regards to the time issue. …. I’ve also attached an article that explains why we do not necessarily need to view the “days” of Genesis 1 in a literal fashion and another article that argues that the literal view is the wrong one. … That is your privilege to take the literal view, of course, but you should understand that is your assumption. … Science tells us the moment of creation of the universe was instantaneous; it didn’t take 6 days. … God is neither “he” nor “she” in his essential being.”

It seems that what Paul Kroll is saying is, “Take your pick.”

It is vital for our readers to understand that “info control artists” are trained in propaganda and spin control. (See: OIU Newsletter, Vol. 4, Pt. 1, which covers Propaganda and Dialectical Materialism.)

Kroll never wrote back again.

When one reads “Evolution vs. Creation Controversy” “Genesis 1: The Six Day War” it appears that the WCG does not take the Bible literally and are interpreting it symbolically. Will this lead members away from believing that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God?

John Miller, Jr. stated to ESN:

“He [Kroll] seems willing to correspond with me, but when I don’t agree with him he wants to drop whatever we are talking about. The WWCG [GCI] would rather believe science than the Word of God. That’s really nothing new; that is exactly what an unbeliever does. He must have physical proof rather than faith. His mind is closed.”

Charles Darwin, himself the father of evolution in his later days, gradually became aware of the lack of real evidence for his evolutionary speculation and wrote: ‘As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them embedded in the crust of the earth? Why is not all nature in confusion instead of being, as we see them, well defined species?’  ~H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation, p. 139.


Read 2nd letter by John Miller, Jr.:

Grace Communion International and Their Universalism Views (sent to HQ)

Read article by John Miller, Jr.:

The Six Days of Creation

Recommended Website:

The Creation Guys


Back to Worldwide Church of God Expose` (GCI)