1. Ahn Sahng-hong’s Baptism and Adventist Roots
The founder of the World Mission Society Church of God, Ahn Sahng-hong, was baptized in 1954 at a Seventh-day Adventist church in Haeundae-gu, Busan, becoming an official member. Prior to this, he had moved between various religions and denominations, immersing himself in Bible study, but ultimately rooted his faith in Adventism. He was particularly captivated by the doctrines of Ellen G. White, the founder of Adventism, and directly adopted her eschatology and feast day teachings, adding his own interpretations. The Old Testament feast doctrines, prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, and communion teachings that Ahn claimed to have studied were, in reality, imitations of doctrines originally devised by Ellen G. White for the Adventist Church.

2. Ahn Sahng-hong’s Eschatology — Recycling the 1844 Prophetic Framework
Ahn Sahng-hong adopted 1844—the most critical year in Adventism—as the basis for interpreting biblical prophecy. Adventists regard 1844 as the “year of the cleansing of the sanctuary,” using it as the anchor for their end-time timeline. Ahn followed this tradition, using 1844 as a starting point for various calculations and interpretations. As a result, he added or subtracted specific numbers of years (such as 167, 40, etc.) from 1844 to predict that the “end of the world” would occur twice: once in 1971 and again in 2012. This apocalyptic approach, entirely unrelated to the biblical context, simply borrowed Adventist end-times arithmetic and force-fit prophecy to his own needs—a textbook case of date-setting eschatology. Both predictions failed, leaving only confusion and disappointment among his followers.

3. Manipulation of Baptismal Date and the Birth of the “Second Coming Jesus” Doctrine
A critical point is that Ahn Sahng-hong’s claim to have been baptized in 1948 only appeared after 1977. Until then, he had not emphasized his baptismal year or the doctrine of “David’s throne.” The shift came in 1977, when his disciple Eom Soo-in published the book God Who Came in the Flesh, which took Israel’s 1948 independence as a prophetic marker. It combined the formula that Jesus began his ministry at age 30 and ministered for three years before ascending with a new doctrine: “the Second Coming Jesus begins at age 33 and preaches for 37 years”—the so-called “David’s throne.” After this book’s publication, Ahn began to testify that he was baptized in 1948, that due to the Korean War he could not study the Bible properly until 1951, and that he began seeking the truth at age 33. His sermon notes included calculations such as, “From 1951, preach the gospel for 37 years and complete the work in 1988 at age 70, like David.” Thus, the 1948 baptism theory, “David’s throne,” and 1988 fulfillment were artificial constructs, created to deify Ahn as the Second Coming Jesus and tailored to fit Eom Soo-in’s logic and the times.

4. Eschatology, “David’s Throne,” and Doctrinal Manipulation
Ahn Sahng-hong explicitly declared in his sermons and notes that, based on the “Elijah prophecy,” he and his followers would be alive and ascend together in 1988. This prophecy was central to Ahn’s deification, and followers believed 1988 would mark “the end of the world” and “eternal ascension.” However, Ahn Sahng-hong died suddenly in 1985, three years before the prophesied date, which was both shocking to his followers and a theological crisis for the leadership. At this point, Kim Joo-cheol and other leaders of the church retroactively moved the “beginning of David’s throne (37-year ministry)” from the originally stated 1951 to 1948, the year of Israel’s independence. With this change, “37 years from 1948” ended in 1985, allowing Ahn’s death to be spun as “fulfillment of prophecy.” This logic did not last long; Kim Joo-cheol publicly announced that Ahn would return to take his followers in 1988 and that the world would end. When the world did not end, he claimed, “It will not go beyond 2012,” thus introducing yet another date-specific doomsday prophecy. The church leadership has repeatedly manipulated doctrinal benchmarks whenever prophecies failed, continually instilling new apocalyptic expectations and anxiety among followers to maintain organizational control.

5. Conclusion — The Doctrinal Evolution and True Nature of the WMSCOG
The doctrinal history of the WMSCOG is thus riddled with manipulation of baptismal dates, repeated failures of apocalyptic predictions, doctrinal alterations, and ad hoc teachings such as “David’s throne.” Early Ahn Sahng-hong doctrines were mere imitations of Adventism, while after 1977, continual doctrinal inventions and false claims were added to promote the deification and self-justification of the leader. The true standard of faith should not be these manipulated doctrines but rather the objective facts of history and the biblical truth. Given this history of doctrinal evolution in the WMSCOG, believers must develop discernment based on the essence of scripture and historical reality.