Angus Buchan, Benny Hinn en God TV

Ek het onlangs n artikel deur Prof. Johan Malan gelees waarin hy sy besorgdheid uitspreek oor Angus Buchan. Hy sê ondermeer die volgende in sy artikel, Geetselike Misleiding en Angus Buchan — Prof. Johan Malan, Suid-Afrika (Mei 2010)

Dit is duidelik dat die Suid-Afrikaanse herlewingsprediker, Angus Buchan, weliswaar n verhouding het met Jesus Christus en Hom as n lewende werklikheid in sy lewe ervaar. Hy waarsku mense ook om hulle te bekeer en help families om met mekaar versoen te raak, wat prysenswaardig is. Aan die ander kant is daar besorgde stemme wat opklink oor sy groot onkunde m.b.t. verskeie aspekte rondom Bybelse leerstellings—in so ‘n mate dat hy hom begewe het op die terrein van die koninkryksteologie, die ekumeniese beweging en selfs ook die bevordering van twyfelagtige tekens en wonders. Hy het by sekere geleenthede positiewe opmerkings gemaak oor Benny Hinn en Kathryn Kuhlman. Sy opmerklike onkunde oor hierdie sake is kommerwekkend en selfs verbysterend . . . Die ander kwessie het betrekking op die koninkryks-misleidings wat Angus aan die skares opdis. Hoe kan hy, volgens sy eie insigte, mense belowe dat Suid-Afrika en Zimbabwe geheel en al herstel gaan word? In hierdie verband tree hy lynreg tweenstrydig op met Jesus Christus self, wat gesê het daar sal ‘n groot verdrukking op die aarde wees soos nog nooit tevore nie (Matt. 24:21). Iemand wat die Bybelse boodksap omtrent die eindtyd verstaan, sal sy volgelinge waarsku teen ‘n tyd van groot spirituele en morele afvalligheid terwyl hy ook die moontlike vervolging en verwerping van Evangeliese Christene uitlig. Hierdie dinge is nie deel van Angus se boodskap nie. So-ook verkondig hy nie die salige hoop van die Wegraping aan Christene nie, om hulle te bemoedig om vas te staan totdat die Here Jesus ons wegneem na sy hemelse woning (1 Thessalonicense 4:16-18). Die feit dat soveel mense na Angus se byeenkomste stroom, is ‘n bewys van die gebrek aan leierskap wat die blankes in beide die politieke en godsdienstige arenas ervaar. Hulle soek iemand wat die Boere kan lei. Selfs sommige van die Israel- groepe (Britse Israelisme of Wit Teologie ondersteuners) beweer dat Profeet van Rensburg verwys het na ‘n leier wat die Boere na ‘n Boerestaat sal lei waar hulle vry kan wees van swart oorheersing. Kan dit nie miskien die rede wees vir die gewildheid wat Angus geniet nie  . . . Hy kan nie naastenby in dieselfde asem genoem word as die herlewingsprediker Andrew Murray nie. Om die waarheid te sê dit is hoogs twyfelagtig of die beweging wat hy as n herlewing beskryf so genoem kan word.

As ‘n menigte mans na Angus Buchan se byeenkomste stroom omdat hulle hunker na ‘n leier wat hulle na hulle “Beloofde Land” kan lei, dan moet ek onomwonde byvoeg dat hulle byeenkomste, in die geestelike sin van die woord, van meet af ‘n volslae mislukking was, ten spyte van die feit dat honderde duisende mans dit in die afgelope paar jare begewoon het. Motief speel ‘n ontsettende belangrike rol in God se ekonomie van herlewings. ‘n Verkeerde motief sal nooit God se hand beweeg om ‘n herlewing te stuur nie. Ek twyfel baie sterk of Hy ‘n herlewing sal stuur wanneer dit die motief is om ‘n leier te vind wat in staat is om die Suid-Afrikaanse Boere na hulle “Beloofde Land” van hoop en glorie en vrede en voorspoed te neem net om die swart gevaar te ontsnap. In baie gevalle in die verlede het herlewings gedy toe omstandighede baie gevaarlik en lewensdreigend was. Die motief van die Christene wat vir hierdie herlewings gebid het, was nie dat God hulle lyding moet versag nie of om hulle na ‘n plek van veiligheid te neem nie. Hulle enigste motief was dat God mans, vrouens en kinders oortuig van hulle sondes en verlore toestand en om hulle op te roep tot ‘n Bybelgefundeerde bekering en ‘n ferm geloof in die Evangelie van Jesus Christus (Markus 1:15). Maar is dit nie Angus Buchan se hoofdoel nie, om die sondes van sy Mighty Men en van ons mede landsburgers op die naam te noem nie? Dit mag miiskien so wees maar wat is sy motief? Om ‘n wortel van hoop, liefde, vrede en ‘n voorspoedige toekoms (God se Koninkryk in hierdie lewe, hier en nou) voor die neuse van sy Mighty Men te hou en aan hulle te vertel dat dit ‘n belofte van God is as hulle sou ophou om met hulle sekretaresses te slaap en om die Ontvanger van Inkomste te verneuk, om op hulle knieë voor hulle vrouens te gaan en hulle om verskoning te smeek, is nie herlewing nie. So-ook is dit nie wanneer hy hulle leer dat hulle die gemanifesteerde seuns (en dogters) van God is in Romeine 8:19. Dit is nie eens die Evangelie volgens Jesus Christus nie. Bekering met die doel om jou materiële en fisiese welvaart in hierdie wêreld te verbeter, neig jou daartoe om jou oë op jouself en jou selfsugtige behoeftes te fokus.

Rory en Wendy Alec van God TV wat al baie van Angus Buchan se Mighty Men Konferensies uitgesaai het, is ook alewig besig om ‘n wortel van voorspoed voor hulle kykers se neuse te hou. Op die oomblik flikker die rooiligte vir hulle omdat hulle desperaat is vir ‘n deurbraak in hulle finansies en om die kettings van hulle ontsaglike groot begrotingstekorte te breek. Om dit te kan doen, pleit hulle by hulle kykers om hulle geld in oorgawe (offervaardiglik) te gee. Ten einde hulle so ver te kry om hulle hande nog dieper in hulle sakke te steek, gebruik hulle wêreldbekende predikers soos Benny Hinn, Steve Munsey en Cindy Jacobs om hulle kykers te vertel dat hulle eie deurbrake alleenlik sal kom wanneer hulle hul geld offervaardiglik gee. Dieselfde ou boodskap is op hulle lippe elke keer wanneer jy inskakel op God TV: “God sal jou eer en voorspoedig maak NET wanneer jy jou saad offervaardiglik saai.” Benny Hin het met groot bravade verklaar dat God se beloftes vir jou SLEGS vrug sal dra wanneer jy jou saad in die geloof saai. Dit is ‘n infame leuen uit die onderste dele van die hel. Jou geloof is nie afhanklik van hoe jy gee nie. Jou offers bepaal nie hoe groot of hoe klein jou geloof is nie. want God sê: “. . . Want hoeveel beloftes van God daar ook mag wees, in Hom is hulle ja en in Hom amen, tot heerlikheid van God deur ons. (2 Korinthiërs 1:20). Hierdie belofte het nie betrekking op tydelike goeters soos gesondheid, rykdom, voorspoed en ‘n land vry van misdaad, korrupsie en armoede nie. Die beloftes van God wat deur Christus gemaak word, het betrekking op die vergewing van sondes, die heiligmaking van sy kinders, onderskraging in versoekinge en beproewinge, leiding in moeilike omstandighede, vrede in die dood en ‘n ewige heerlikheid anderkant die graf. Al hierdie dinge word moontlik gemaak deur ‘n Groot Verlosser en nie een van hulle sal faal nie (Albert Barnes se Notas opde Bybel)

 

Een van hulle grooste geldinsamelingsfoefies om jou te por om £1,000 (+- R10,000), €1,000 (+-1 R11,000), or $1,500 (+- R11,000) te gee, is om jou vrygewigheid te beloon deur jou naam op ’n fondasiesteen in hulle uitsaaisentrum in Jerusalem te grafeer. Wanneeer jy £30,000 (+- R330,000) €30,000 (+- R280,000), $50,000 (+- R380,000) of meer skenk, plaas hulle jou naam op ‘n Mezuzah in een van die sewe inange in hulle uitsaaisentrum. Wee jou egter as jy ‘n Suid-Afrikner is; jou Europese, Amerikaanse en Engelse God TV families het ‘n baie beter kans as jy om jou naam geplaas te kry op ‘n Mezuzah in een van die sewe ingange na God TV se uitsaaisentrum. Hulle geldeenhede is baie sterker as jou rand. Maar wees gerus, as jou naam geskryf is in die Boek van die Lewe omdat jy jou heelhartig en met oorgawe van jou sondes bekeer het en in Jesus Christus en sy Evangelie glo (soos die Skrif sê en nie soos God TV sê nie) dan het jy sekerheid oor jou ewige lewe. Jy het nie nodig dat jou naam gegrafeer word op ‘n plaat of fondasiesteen in Rory en Wendy Allen se uitsaaisentrum nie omdat jy hulle R300, 000 of meer gegee het sodat die evangelie na bewering oor die hele aarde versprei kan word nie. Bowendien hoef jy nie ‘n enkele sent te betaal om jou naam opgeteken te kry in die Boek van die Lewe nie omdat God se verlossing gratis is. Dit is ‘n geskenk aan elkeen wat dit deur die geloof in Jesus Christus wat die volle prys vir ons sondes en oortredinge betaal het, ontvang. As iemand jou enigsins iets anders wysmaak en sê dat jy iets moet gee of betaal om God se seëninge te ontvang, is hulle besig om die Roomse ketter, Johann Tetzel se leuen voort te sit. Hy het gesê:

As soon as the gold in the casket rings; the rescued soul to heaven springs [So wie die das Geld im Kasten klingt, die Seele aus dem Fegfeuer springt].

Hoeveel mense is daar nie wat na God TV kyk en die verkeerde indruk van die Evangelie van Jesus Christus kry? Patti Roberts, die eks-vrou van Richard Roberts, het baie ontnugterd geword het met haar skoonpa, Oral Roberts se “saad van geloof” evangelie. Sy het Al Bush, die President van die Oral Roberts Evangeliese Assosiasie gebel om haar diepe kommer daaroor uit te spreek. Die gesprek het so gelui:

Al, in die veertig optredes wat ons verlede jaar opgeneem het, hoeveel keer het ons vir mense die plan van verlossing gegee?

Die plan van verlossiing? Sjoe Patti, ek weet nie. Ek is seker ons moes dit ten minste een keer gegee het.

En hoeveel keer het ons die Saad-Geloof beginsel vir hulle gegee?

Hy het gelag. Patti, jy weet wat die antwoord daarop is. Ons gee die Saad-geloof beginsels by elke optrede. Waaroor gaan dit alles?

Al, in die briewe wat jy van kykers ontvang het, hoeveel van hulle het gedink dat miskien as hulle geld gee hulle ‘n plekkie in die Koninkryk gekoop het? Hoeveel van hulle het gedink dat dit God se mening oor hulle ewige bestemming verander het?

Hy het vir al lang ruk nie geantwoord nie. Toe hy uiteindelik antwoord, het hy sy stem laat sak en meer besadigd en huiwerig gesê: ‘n Hele klomp van hulle het, Patti.¹  (klem bygevoeg).

By die aanhoor weer en weer en weer van die leuen dat die offervaardige gee van jou geld of die oordadige saai van jou saad die deur na God se seëninge oopmaak, is baie van God TV se kykers reeds aan die neus gelei om te glo dat hulle finansiële gawes die deur na God se verlssoing en sy ewige heerlikheid oopmaak. Baie donateurs mag miskien alreeds hulle name op die fondasiesteen of ‘n Mezuzah in God TV se Uitsaaisentrum gegraveer hê, maar hoeveel van hulle se name is in die Boek van die Lewe opgeskrywe? Nietemin, ek was verbaas toe ek sien dat Jesus (‘n valse Jesus) sy dissipels uitgestuur het om die evangelie te verkondig dat hy presies dieselfde dinge gesê het wat mense op God TV hoor. Jesus het gesê:

Wanneer julle ‘n stad binnegaan, is die eerste ding wat julle moet doen om mense te oortuig dat hulle ‘n wonderbaarlike deurbraak in hulle lewens nodig het. Sommiges benodig ‘n deurbraak in hulle families; hulle het nodig dat hulle huwelike gered word en dat hulle eiesinnige en rebelse kinders wat van hulle huise af weggehardloop het na pa en ma toe terugkeer. Ander het ‘n deurbraak nodig in hulle kwynende besighede en finansies en om van die Satan terug te neem waarvan hy hulle beroof het. Nog andere het n desperate deurbraak nodig in hulle gesondheid. Moenie vergeet om die shofar soos Steve Munsey op God TV te blaas nie want ‘n shofar, soos julle weet, maak die hemelse vensters wyd oop wanneer dit deur ‘n ekspert geblaas word. Moenie sleg voel as julle nie ‘n ekspert is nie en nie weet hoe om die shofar te blaas nie. Hier’s vir julle ‘n opname van iemand wat ‘n professionele shofarblaser is. Al wat nodig is, is om die shofar teen julle lippe te druk en te maak of julle blaas terwyl julle die opname speel. Maar hier’s die punchline Sê vir hulle ek sal ALEENLIK, ek herhaal ALLEENLIK, ‘n deurbraak in die areas van hulle gesondheid, familielewe en besighede bewerk wanneer hulle enorme bedrae geld aan julle skenk sodat julle die evangelie kan verkondig. Maak dood seker om hulle te vertel dat elkeen wat nie offervaardiglik skenk nie salzilch, nada, geen deurbraak hoegenaamd van my ontvang nie. Sê ook vir hulle dat hulle name op ‘n fondasiesteen gegraveer sal word as hulle 30 000 denarii / shekels of meer skenk.

Ek kan nie presies onthou waar ek die bogenoemde gelees het nie maar wat ek wel weet is die volgende:

Hy sê toe vir hulle: Die oes is wel groot, maar die arbeiders min. Bid dan die Here van die oes dat Hy arbeiders in sy oes uitstuur. Gaan dan; kyk, Ek stuur julle soos lammers onder wolwe. Moenie ‘n beurs of ‘n reissak of skoene dra nie, en groet niemand op die pad nie. En in watter huis julle ook al mag ingaan, sê eers: Vrede vir hierdie huis! En as dáár ‘n man van vrede is, sal julle vrede op hom rus; anders sal dit tot julle terugkeer. Bly dan in daardie selfde huis en eet en drink wat hulle het, want die arbeider is sy loon werd. Moenie van huis tot huis gaan nie. En in watter stad julle ook al mag ingaan en hulle jul ontvang, eet wat aan julle voorgesit word. (Lukas 10:2-8).

En Hy sê vir hulle: Toe Ek julle uitgestuur het sonder beurs en reissak en skoene, het julle iets kortgekom? En hulle antwoord: Niks nie. (Lukas 22:35)

In die volgende vers het Jesus inderdaad vir hulle die opdrag gegee om ‘n beurs en ‘n swaard saam te neem sodat hulle hulself kon verdedig en selfversorgend kon wees op hulle lang evangeliese reise. Maar Hy het hulle nooit geleer om geld te vra in ruil vir hulle gebede of die blaas van die shofar nie sodat die donatuers ‘n sg. deurbraak in hulle lewens kon ontvang. Dink maar aan die weduwee wat twee geldstukkies in the tempel se skatkis gegooi het en vir wie Jesus as die grootste gewer vereer het.

En toe Hy opkyk, sien Hy die rykes wat hulle gawes in die skatkis gooi. En Hy het ook ‘n arm weduwee daar twee geldstukkies sien ingooi. En Hy sê: Waarlik, Ek sê vir julle dat hierdie arm weduwee meer as almal ingegooi het. Want hulle almal het uit hul oorvloed by die gawes van God ingegooi, maar sy het uit haar gebrek ingegooi alles wat sy gehad het om van te lewe. (Lukas 21:1-4)

Sou die groot eer haar te beurt val om haar naam gesrkyf te kry op ‘n Mezuzah of op ‘n fondasiesteen in een van die sewe ingange na Rory en Wendy Allen se GOD TV Uitsaaisentrum? Watwou, haar naam sou waarskynlik nie eens genoem word nie, wat nog van ‘n Mezuzah-verering. Sy het nie alles wat sy besit het in die skatkis gegooi om ‘n seëning of ‘n deurbraak in haar armoede te ontvang nie, of om ‘n tienvoudige of hondervoudige teruggawe of watter ander leuens die Word of Faith valse profete ookal mag opdis, te ontvang nie. Sy het God net eenvoudig gehoorsaam omdat sy Hom liefhet. Wat het geword van Jesus se ernstige waarskuwing in Mattheus 6:3-5?

Maar jy, as jy liefdadigheid bewys, laat jou linkerhand nie weet wat jou regterhand doen nie, sodat jou liefdadigheid in die verborgene kan wees; en jou Vader wat in die verborgene sien, Hy sal jou in die openbaar vergelde. En wanneer jy bid, moet jy nie wees soos die geveinsdes nie; want hulle hou daarvan om in die sinagoges en op die hoeke van die strate te staan en bid, om deur die mense gesien te word. Voorwaar Ek sê vir julle dat hulle hul loon weg het. (Mattheus 6:3-5)

Maar kom ons keer nou vireers weer terug na Angus Buchan wat dikwels op God TV verskyn en onomwonde verklaar dat ‘n magtige herlewing reeds in ons midde is. Natuurlik kan God ons land herstel tot ‘n geluksalige en vreedsame plek maar dan is dit nog lank nie ‘n motief vir ‘n herlewing nie. Die enigste motief vir ‘n herlewing is om versoen te word met ‘n eindlose heilige God wat nooit sy regverdige oordele oor diegene wat weier om hulle te bekeer en te glo soos die Skrifte sê, sal herroep nie. Soos Prof. Malan aangedui het, is Angus Buchan se evangeliese aanslag geheel en al gefokus op die bevordering van die koninkryksteologie wat die idee uitdra dat elke posisie van hoë aansien in die politiek, die ekonomie, gesondheid, onderwys, die media en kuns deur Christne beheers moet word alvorencs Christus kan terugkom. Dit is beslis nie wat Jesus geleer het nie. Jesus het alreeds sy hoop, vrede en blydskap aan sy volgelinge gegee maar dit is ‘n blydkskap wat die Heilige Gees in hulle diepste binneste ingeburger het en niks kan dit wegneem nie, nie eens die moeilikste omstandighede en vervolginge nie. Aan die anderkant is die vrede wat die wêreld gee, wat soos Jesus gesê het HY nie vir ons gee nie, afhanklik van vredesverdrae, koompromieë en niksbeduidende beloftes en ons weet baie goed hoedat hierdie sg. vredesverdrae gebreek word. Ja, dit is ook waar dat iets wat soos ‘n herleweing lyk mag plaasvind maar die vraag is: waarvandaan kom dit — van God of die verleier wat homself in ‘n engel van die lig kan verander (2 Korinthiërs 11:13 en 14). Die Here eer selgs ’n enkele motief wanneer gelowiges vir ‘n herlewing bid en dit is“om hulle oë te open, dat hulle hul van die duisternis tot die lig kan bekeer en van die mag van die Satan tot God, sodat hulle deur die geloof in My vergifnis van sondes en ‘n erfdeel onder die geheiligdes kan ontvang. (Handelinge 26:18). Die woord “herlewing” impliseer dat daar eens op ‘n tyd geestelike lewe, groei en dinamisme was maar dat dit weggekwyn het tot ‘n lewelose liggaam wat weer nodig het om opgewek te word tot ‘n dinamiese lewe in Christus.

En skryf aan die engel van die gemeente in Sardis: Dít sê Hy wat die sewe Geeste van God en die sewe sterre het: Ek ken jou werke, dat jy die naam het dat jy leef en jy is dood. (Openb. 3:1). (Klem bygevoeeg).

Prof. Malan vind Angus Buchan se positiewe kommentare oor valse profete soos Benny Hinn en Kathryn Kuhlman sorgwekkend en self sverwarrend. Ek dink weer dat die Word of Faith voorspoedkulte Angus Buchan soos ‘n handskoen pas. Hy mag miskien aangedui het dat hy geen aspirasies het om geld te maak nie, maar hy is bereid om met hoë agting te praat van Benny Hin en Rory en Wendy Alec wie se verlossingsleer geskoei is op die voorspoedkultus. Angus Buchan mag ook miskien ‘n verhouding met Jesus Christus as sy Verlosser hê en Hom as ‘n lewende werklikheid en mense vermaan om hulle te bekeer maar dan moet ons onthou dat Benny Hinn en Rory en Wendy Alec daarop aanspraak maak dat hulle dieselfde verhouding met Jesus Christus het en dat hulle ook biljoene mense met die Evangelie van Jesus Christus bereik. As Angus Buchan so begaan was oor verlore siiele sou hy ten minste ‘n poging aanwend om Benny Hinn oor sy valse leerstellings te waarsku en Rory en Wendy Alec oor die promovering van sy valse leerstellinge op hulle God TV aan te spreek. Angus Buchan sou ten minste diep bekommerd wees oor die biljoene kykers wat deur God TV mislei word. Kom ons kyk nou eers na sommige van die ketterse dinge wat Benny Hinn verkondig.

“Ek is ‘n klein Messias wat op die aarde wandel.”²

As Angus Buchan positiewe opmerkings oor Benny gemaak het, soos Prof. Malan sê, dan is hy besig om ‘n valse Messias te prys en te vereer. Na my mening behoort Angus Buchan sy positiewe getuienis oor Benny Hinn in die openbaar terug te trek want sy verfoelike aanspraak is nie net ‘n belediging van Jesus Christus nie maar hy (Buchan) is besig om baie mense te mislei deurdat hy hulle aanmoedig om ‘n valse Messias na te volg. Die Moreleta Park NGK volg dieselfde soort beleid om hulle Hinn-volgelinge te paai pleks daarvan om hulle ten hom te waarsku, en dit net omdat hulle nie die bootjie wil laat omtuimel nie. Die eer van mense is mos vir hulle veel belangriker as die eer van Jesus Cehristus. Hier’s nog ‘n paar van Benny Hin se“claim to fame” uitbarstings.

God het uit die hemel gekom, mens geword, die mense in klein gode verander, teruggekeer na die hemel as ‘n mens. Hy staan voor God as ‘n mens. Ek staan voor duiwels as die seun van God . . . Hou op met jou nonsens! Wat anders is jy? As jy sê “Ek” is” sê jy ek is deel van Hom, nie waar nie? Is Hy God? Is jy sy kind? Is julle sy kinders? Julle kan nie mense wees nie! julle kan nie! God het nie geboorte gegee aan vlees nie . . . Julle sê, “Wel, dit is kettery.” Nee, dis julle gekke breins wat so sê.³

Ek begin wonder wie nou eintlik die een is met die gekke brein. Drie raaiskote sal genoeg wees. Miskien sal Angus Buchan en Rory en Wendy Alec ons graag wil vertel of hulle met Benny Hinn saamstem (vir wie hulle tog so lief is) wanneer hy Jesus Christus op godslasterlike wyse demoveer tot ‘n sondaar (wat impliseer dat Hy soos enige ander sondaar verlore was en nodig gehad het om gered te word).

En laat my ook byvoeg: As die Heilige Gees nie met Jesus was nie, sou Hy gesondig het. Dis reg, die Heilige Gees was die krag wat Hom rein gehou het. Hy was nie net uit die hemel gestuur nie maar Hy was die Seun van die Mens genoem en as sodanig was Hy in staat om te sondig . . . Sonder die Heilige Gees, sou Jesus dit nooit kon maak nie . . .  Kan julle Christus op pad na die graf vir julleself voorstel, wetende dat Hy vir ewig daar sou wees, as die Heilige Gees sy siening oor sy opstanding uit die dood verander het?⁴

My, julle weet, whoosh! Die Heilige Gees het nou net vir my dinge gewys. Ek word duiselig! Ek vertel julle die waarheid — dit rus hierdie oomblik swaar op my  . . . Hy’s nou in die onderwêreld. God is nie daar nie, die Heilige Gees in nie daar nie, en die Bybel sê Hy was “begotten.” Weet julle wat die woord “begotten” beteken? Dit beteken wedergebore. Wil julle nog ‘n skok hê? Is jy wedergebore? So was HY. Moenie laat enigeen julle mislei nie. Jesus was wedergebore. Jy sê, “Waarvan praat jy?”  . . . Hy was wedergebore. Hy moes wedergebore word . . . As Hy nie wedergebore was nie, kon ek nie wedergebore wees nie. Jesus was wedergebore  . . . As Hy nie wedergebore was nie, sou ek nie wedergebore wees nie. Hoe kan ek Jesus in die gesig kyk en sê: “Jesus, U het alles derugemaak wat ek deurgemaak het, behalwe die wedergeboorte?”⁵ (Klem bygevoeg).

Jesus het geweet die enigste manier om Satan te stuit, was om een te word met hom in sy wese . . . Hy het een geword met die Satan in sy natuur sodat almal wat die natuur van Satan gehad het God se natuur deelagtig kon word.⁶

Is Benny Hin ‘n Vrymesselaar? Ek wonder maar net . . . omdat die Vrymesselaars dieselfde soort godslasterilike nonsens glo. Oom Angus, is jy bereid om hierdie soort godslasterlikhede in die openbaar te repudieer. As jy Jesus van Nasaret regtig liefhet soos jy by verskeie geelenthede in die verlede al gesê het, sal jy nie nog ‘n sekonde wag om ‘n man soos Benny Hinn in die openbaar te weerlê nie OF is sy godslasterlikhede maar net nog ‘n onbeduidende leerstelling wat jy bereid is om opsy te skuif ter wille van vrede en liefde en voorspoed? Sit vir jou ‘n nuwe hoed op en wys vir ons dat jy ‘n ware MIGHTY MAN is, een wat nie bang is om die ketters op GOD TV wat miljoene niksvermoedende mense mislei, aan te speek nie.

Vrymessalary verklaar:

Jesus van Nasaret het ‘n vlak van bewussyn bereik, van volmaaktheid, wat onder verskillende name bekend is: kosmiese bewussyn, siel-regenerasie [wedergeboorte], filsofiese inisiasie, geestelike verligting, Brahmaanse glansrykheid, Christus-bewussyn.⁷ (Klem bygevoeg).

Benny Hinn se “whoosh-shy” buite-aardse openbaringe is nie net blatante godslastering nie maar ‘n regstreekse verwerping van die hele Levitiese offferande sisteem in die Ou Testament wat onomwonde bewys dat in die sondoffer en in al die ander offers die diere vlekkeloos moes wees, wat aandui dat die EEN wie se “eens-vir-altyd-offer” uiteindelik aan die kruis bekragtig is, sondeloos moes wees en inderdaad sondeloos was.

as die gesalfde priester sondig, sodat die volk daardeur skuldig word, moet hy vir die sonde wat hy gedoen het, ‘n jong bul sonder gebrek aan die HERE as sondoffer bring; (Levitikus 4:3)

Want ons het nie ‘n hoëpriester wat nie met ons swakhede medelye kan hê nie, maar een wat in alle opsigte versoek is net soos ons, maar sonder sonde. (Hebreërs 4:15) (Klem bygevoeg).

As jy sondesloos is, beteken dit dat jy ook nie kan sondig nie.

As Jesus se reinheidd (sondeloosheid) toegeskryf was aan die Heilige Gees en nie sy eie rein en sondelose natuur nie, volg dit dat elke gelowige wat die inwonende Heilige Gees in sy/haar binneste het ook sondeloos is. (1 Johannes 1:8). Die titel Seun van die Mens beteken nie dat Jesus in staat was om te sondig nie. Was HY in die geringste in staat was om te sondig, sou Hy nooit die straf vir ons sondes op Hom kon neem nie. Die Seun van die Mens  beteken eenvoudig dat Hy hom tot die uiterste met die mens vereenselwig het, selfs tot die mate dat sy Vader “Hom wat geen sonde geken het nie, sonde vir ons gemaak [het], sodat ons kan word geregtigheid van God in Hom.” (2 Korinthiërs 5:21). Sommiges vertolk dit as dat Hy letterlik ‘n sondaar vir ons gemaak is, maar weer eens is dit nie die betekenis nie. Dit beteken gewoon dat God sy Seun ‘n sondoffer, waarin die Vader Hom soos ‘n sondaar behandel het, vir ons gemaak het.

Dis nie net mighty men soos Angus Buchan wat in ‘n noue verwantskap met Benny Hinn en sy godslasterike leerstellings is nie. Wat van Chuck Missler? Het ook ook die boot “ge-miss-ler?” Sy offersaad aan God TV was so belangrik dat Rory en Wendy Alec ‘n spesiale aankondiging gemaak het toe hulle sy offer vir die verspreiding van die Evengelie volgens Benny Hinn, Crefo Dollar, Kenneth en Gloria Copeland, Joyse Meyer, Billy Graham, Peter Wagner, John Hagee, Joel Osteen en ‘n menigte ander geestelike VIP’s ontvang het. (Oeps! wat het geword van Jesus se waarswkuwing in Mattheus 6:1-4). God TV se kykers is skynbaar so begogel deur die valse beloftes dat daar deurbrake sal kom op die terrein van hulle finansies, besighede en families wanneer hulle hul geld offervaardiglik gee, dat hulle nie ‘n snars omgee oor gesonde Bybelse leerstellings nie. Net solank hulle vleeslike behoeftes versadig word, is hulle hoogs tevrede.

In God TV se hoofkantoor in Jerusalem het Rory en Wendy Alec ‘n sg. bo-kamer en ‘n allerheiligste kamer met ‘n klipaltaar ingerig waarop hulle elke saadofffer wat hulle van hulle kykers ontvang in die vorm van ‘n rooierig gekleurde stuk papier plaas. Die “altaar” is die fokuspunt van hulle “gebede” wat dikwels in ‘n vreemde taal gebesig word. Niemand lê ooit hierdie sg. tale uit nie wat natuurlik net nog ‘n ander daad van ongehoorsaamheid aan die kant van God TV is. (1 Korinthiërs 14:27). Wat is die regte betekenis van die sg. “altaar” in God TV se hoofkantoor in Jerusalem? Dit kan onmoontlik nie ‘n replika wees van ‘n Ou Testamentiese altaar nie omdat God die Israelitete verbied het om ‘n altaar te maak waarvan die klippe uitgekap was.

Maar as jy vir My ‘n klipaltaar maak, mag jy dit nie bou van gekapte klip nie; want as jy jou ystergereedskap daaroor swaai, dan ontheilig jy dit. (Exodus 20:25)

Die sg. altaar in God TV se hoofkantoor is nie ‘n gebede-altaar nie maar ‘n okkultiese “kontakpunt.” Die “kontakpunt” se toebehoorsels (gebededoekies, sakdoeke, kiekies, gebede papier, some van klere, heilige olie, shofars) word aangewend om die krag wat rykdom en deurbrake bewerkstellig, vry te stel. Oral Roberts het daarop aanspraak gemaak dat die “kontakpunt” sy “grootste uitvindsel” was.⁸ Met die instuur van hulle gebede papiere (in hierdie geval n gedrukte rooierig gekleurde A4 vel papier), vestig die kykers ‘n kontakpunt wanneer elke vel papier op die “altaar” geplaas word en wanneer Rory en Wendy Alec en andere hulle hande op die hoop papiervelle lê om die krag van weelde vry te stel. Dave Hunt skryf:

Rituals are of no value. Rituals work in magic and magic [is] demonic; witch doctors have certain rituals they go through, sacramentalism is related to the rituals. The idea that a ritual has some spiritual value and power just is contrary both to common sense and to the Word of God.  For example, it’s closely related to scapulars and medals. I have a scapular that I keep in the Bible to show people, on one end of it, it says, whosoever dies wearing this scapular shall not suffer eternal fire.  Well, two problems, 1) if you believe Christ paid the penalty for your sins, you don’t need a scapular. What kind of a God delivers you from eternal fire because you wear a scapular.  It’s like the fetishes and so forth in the pagan world.  So, a ritual to exorcise demons is the same.  What is this, impress demons?  Are they impressed that you go through some ritual, or does God’s power depend upon you going through some ritual?  Where in the Bible does it say that God’s power can be released by some ritual?  Now you have the same idea with many of the so-called faith teachers, you know, touch my hand, this is a point of contact and even Oral Roberts had people light candles, you know, he lit the red candle while they lit the green candle, and this starts miracles flowing.  What kind of a God releases his power because you go through some ritual?  So we know, first of all, that the ritual isn’t right. (Emphasis added).

Miljoene mense word deur God TV mislei. Is jy een van die misleiddes?

Maar Petrus sê vir hom: Mag jou geld saam met jou vergaan, omdat jy gedink het om die gawe van God deur geld te verkry. (Handelinge 8:20)

---

¹Patti Roberts, Ashes to Gold (Word Books, 1985), p. 122

²Benny Hinn, “Praise-a-Thon” program on TBN, 6 November 1990.

³Benny Hinn, “Our Position in Christ # 2 — The Word Made Flesh (Orlando: Orlando Christian Center 1991) videotape # 2555, emphasis added. See also Hinn’s claim that believers are “little messiahs” or “little gods” on the “Praise-a-Thon” program on TBN (6 November 1990).

⁴Benny Hinn, Good Morning, Holy Spirit (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1990), 135-36, emphasis added. In the seventh printing, certain unannounced changes were made in the text in response to criticism from CRI so that the passage now reads (changes emphasized): “And let me add this: Had the Holy Spirit not been with Jesus, He may have likely sinned. That’s right. It was the Holy Spirit who was the power that kept Him pure. He was not only sent from heaven, but He was called the Son of Man—and as such He was capable of sinning. . . . Without the Holy Ghost, Jesus may have never made it.” The “Can you imagine.. .” sentence was deleted entirely. But even with the changes, Christ is still made out to depend on the Holy Spirit to keep Him from sinning, thus denying Christ the sinlessness that is an essential attribute of God.

⁵Benny Hinn, “Our Position ‘In Christ,’ Part 1” (Orlando, FL: Orlando Christian Center, 1991), videotape.

⁶Benny Hinn, TBN, 15th December 1990).

⁷Lynn F. Perkins, The Meaning of Masonry (CSA Press, 1971), p. 32

⁸Oral Roberts Best Sermons and Stories (Tulsa, OK: Oral Roberts, 1956), 46: 101

Angus Buchan, Benny Hinn and God TV

I recently read an article written by Prof. Johan Malan in which he expresses his concerns about Angus Buchan. He says, among other things:

Angus Buchan

“Spiritual Deception, Revival and Angus Buchan — Prof. Johan Malan, South Africa (May 2010)”

It is obvious that the South African revival preacher, Angus Buchan, does have a relationship with Jesus Christ as his Saviour and experiences Him as a living reality in his life. He also exhorts thousands of people to repent, and helps families to reconcile with each other, which is praiseworthy. On the other hand, worried voices are being heard that he reveals great ignorance on various aspects of biblical doctrines – to such an extent that he has embarked on the way of kingdom theology, the ecumenical movement, and even the promotion of dubious signs and wonders. On certain occasions he has made positive comments on false prophets such as Benny Hinn and Kathryn Kuhlman. His perceived ignorance on these matters is disturbing and even bewildering . . . . The other questions relate to the kingdom deception which Angus proclaims to the crowds. How can he, according to his own insight, promise people that South Africa and Zimbabwe will be completely restored? In this regard he acts contrary to Jesus Christ Himself, who said that in the end-time there will be great tribulation such as has never been on earth (Matt. 24:21). Someone who correctly understands the biblical message on the end-time would warn his followers against a time of great spiritual and moral falling away, while also mentioning the possibility of the persecution and rejection of evangelical Christians. These matters are not part of Angus’s message. Neither does he proclaim the blessed hope of the rapture to Christians to encourage them to remain steadfast until the Lord Jesus takes us away to our heavenly home (1 Thessalonians 4:16-18). The fact that so many people stream to the meetings of Angus is proof of the lack of leadership which the whites in South Africa experience in both the political and religious fields. They are looking for somebody to come and lead the Boers. Even some of the Israel groups (British Israelism, or White Theology supporters) allege that Prophet Van Rensburg has referred to a leader who would lead the Boers to a Boer state where they can be free from domination by the blacks. Could this perhaps be the reason for the popularity that Angus enjoys? . . . He cannot even remotely be mentioned in the same vein as a revival preacher such as Andrew Murray. It is in fact highly questionable whether the movement which he describes as a revival indeed qualifies to be defined as such.

If multitudes of men stream to the revival meetings of Angus Buchan because they hanker for a leader who can lead them to their “promised land” then I must add that their meetings, in the spiritual sense of the word, was a dismal failure from the very beginning, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of men have attended them in the past few years. Motive plays an extremely important role in God’s economy of revivals. A wrong motive will never move God’s hand to send a revival. I doubt very strongly whether He would send a revival when the motive is to find a leader who’s able to take the South African Boers to their “promised land” of hope and glory and peace and prosperity. In many cases in the past revivals blossomed when circumstances were very hazardous and life threatening. The motive of the Christians who prayed for these revivals was not for God to alleviate their suffering or even restore them to a place of safety. Their only motive was for God to convict men, women and children of their sins and their lost status, and to call them to a biblically grounded repentance and a firm faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ (Mark 1:15). But isn’t this Angus Buchan’s main objective, to call a spade a spade (name the sins of his Mighty Men and those of our fellow countrymen)? That may be true but what is his motive? To dangle a carrot of hope, love, joy, peace and a prosperous future (God’s Kingdom in this life here and now) in front of his Mighty Men’s noses and tell them that this is what God promises when you stop sleeping with your secretary, stop cheating the receiver of revenue, kneel before your wife to plead for her forgiveness, is not revival. Neither is it when he teaches them that they are the manifest sons (and daughters) of God in Romans 8:19. It is NOT the Gospel according to Jesus Christ. Repentance with the intent to improve your material and even physical welfare in this world tends to focus the eyes on self and its selfish needs.

Cindy Jacobs

Rory and Wendy Alec

Rory and Wendy Alec of God TV who have aired many of Angus Buchan’s Mighty Men Conferences are also constantly dangling a carrot of prosperity in front of their viewers’ noses. At the moment they are in alert mode and desperately in need of a “BREAKTHROUGH” in their finances to “break the chains” of their huge budget deficit and are pleading with their viewers to donate “sacrificially.” To get them to put their hands even deeper into their pockets they have been using world-renown preachers such as Benny Hinn, Steve Munsey and Cindy Jacobs to tell the viewers that their own breakthrough will only come when they give their money sacrificially. The same old message is on their lips every time you tune into God TV: “God will honour and prosper you ONLY when you sow a seed sacrificially.” Benny Hinn bravely asserted that God’s promises for you will only come to fruition when you sow your seed in faith. That’s an infamous lie from the pit of hell because God says: “For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.” (2 Corinthians 1:20 ). These promises do not pertain to temporary things such as health, wealth, prosperity and a country free from crime, corruption, and poverty.  The promises of God which are made through Christ, relate to thepardon of sin to the penitent; the sanctification of his people: support in temptation and trial; guidance in perplexity; peace in death, and eternal glory beyond the grave. All of these are made through a Redeemer, and none of these shall fail.

One of their major drawing cards to get you to donate £1,000 (±R10,000), €1,000 (±1 R11,000), or $1,500 (±R11,000) is to recognize your generosity by putting your name on a foundation stone in their broadcast center. When you donate £30,000 (±R330,000) €30,000 (±R280,000), $50,000 (±R380,000) or more they will place a  Mezuzah with your name on it in one of the seven doorways in their Broadcast Centre. Woe to you South Africans; your European, American and English God TV families have a much better chance than you to have their names placed on a Mezuzah in one of the seven doorways in God TV’s Broadcast Centre. Their currencies are much stronger than your rand. Rest assured, if your name is written in the Book of Life because you have sincerely and truly repented of your sins and believe in Jesus Christ and His Gospel (as the Scriptures say and not as God TV says) your eternal life is secure. You don’t need your name to be engraved on a plaque or foundation stone in Rory and Wendy Allen’s Broadcast Centre because you have given them R300,000 or more to allegedly help them spread the Gospel throughout the world. Moreover, you needn’t pay a single cent for your name to be written in the Book of Life because God’s salvation is free. It is a gift to those who receive it by faith through Jesus Christ who has paid the full price for all of your sins and transgressions on a cursed cross. If anyone teaches you otherwise and says that you must pay something in order to receive God’s blessings, they are perpetuating the abominable lie of the Roman Catholic heretic, Johann Tetzel, who said: 

As soon as the gold in the casket rings; the rescued soul to heaven springs [So wie das Geld im Kasten klingt; die Seele aus dem Fegfeuer springt]

How many people who watch God TV are getting the wrong impression about the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Patti Roberts, ex-wife of Richard Roberts, became very disillusioned with her father in law, Oral Roberts’ “seed of faith” gospel. She called Al Bush, the President of the Oral Roberts Evangelical Association to express her grave concern.

Al, in the forty shows that we taped last year, how many times did we give people the plan of salvation? The plan of salvation? Gosh Patti, I don’t know. Im, sure we must have given it to them at least once. And how many times did we give them the principles of Seed-Faith? He laughed. Patti, you know the answer to that. We give the principles of Seed-Faith on every show. What’s this all about? Al, in the letters that you received from viewers, how many of them thought that maybe if they gave money to Oral, they had bought a little place in the Kingdom? How many may have thought that swayed God’s opinion about their eternal destiny? He didn’t answer for a long time. When he finally replied he lowered his voice and said soberly and a bit hesitantly, A whole lot of them did Patti.¹  (Emphasis added)

Having heard again and again and again that the giving of money sacrificially or sowing a seed in abundance opens the door to God’s blessings, many of God TV’s viewers have already been led to believe that your giving opens the door to God’s salvation and his eternal heaven. Many donors may already have their names engraved on a foundation stone or a Mezuzah in God TV’s Broadcast Centre, but how many of them have their names written in the Book of Life? Nevertheless, I was surprised to see that when Jesus (a counterfeit Jesus) sent his disciples out to preach the Gospel He told them exactly the same things I heard on God TV. Jesus said:

When you enter a city the first thing you must do, is to tell people they need a miraculous breakthrough in their lives. Some need a breakthrough in their family lives; they need their marriages to be healed, their wayward and rebellious children who have run away from their homes to return to mom and dad. Others need breakthroughs in their dwindling businesses and finances and to take back from Satan what he had robbed them of. Still others need a desperate breakthrough in their health. Don’t forget to blow the shofar like Steve Munsey on God TV because the shofar, as you know, opens heavens windows wide open when it is blown. Don’t feel bad about not knowing how to blow the shofar. Here is a recording of someone who is a professional shofar blower. All you need to do is to put your lips to the shofar and do some clever mimicking while you play the recording. But here’s the punch line. Tell them I will ONLY, I repeat, ONLY grant them their breakthrough in the areas of their health, family lives and businesses when they donate huge amounts of money to you so that you may preach the Gospel. Make sure to tell them that everyone who does not donate sacrificially will receive zilch, nada, no breakthroughs form Me whatsoever. Also tell them that their names will be engraved on a foundation stone when they donate 30 000 denarii / shekels or more.

I cannot recall precisely where I read the above in the Bible but what I did find is the following:

He was telling them, “The harvest is vast, but the workers are few. So ask the Lord of the harvest to send workers out into his harvest. Get going! See, I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. Don’t carry a wallet, a traveling bag, or sandals, and don’t greet anyone on the way. “Whatever house you go into, first say, ‘May there be peace in this house.’ If a peaceful person lives there, your greeting of peace will remain with him. But if that’s not the case, your greeting will come back to you. Stay with the same family, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the worker deserves his pay. Don’t move from house to house. “Whenever you go into a town and the people welcome you, eat whatever they serve you, (Luke 10:2-8) Then he said to them, “When I sent you out without a wallet, traveling bag, or sandals, you didn’t lack anything, did you?” They replied, “Nothing at all.” (Luke 22:35)

In the very next verse Jesus actually commanded them to take a purse and a sword with them so that they may defend themselves on their long evangelical journeys and also fend for themselves when they needed to buy provisions. But He never taught them to ask for money in exchange for prayers or the blowing of the shofar so that the donor may receive a so-called breakthrough in their lives. Consider the widow who cast two mites into the temple treasury and whom Jesus honoured as the biggest giver.

Now Jesus looked up and saw rich people dropping their gifts into the offering box. Then he saw a destitute widow drop in two small copper coins. He said, “Truly I tell you, this destitute widow has dropped in more than all of them. For all the others contributed to the offering out of their surplus, but she, in her poverty, dropped in everything she had to live on.” (Luke 21:1-4)

She didn’t cast in all that she had into the treasury to receive a blessing, a breakthrough, a ten-fold or hundred-fold in return or whatever Word of Faith nonsense and lies. She simply obeyed God because she loved Him. What about Jesus’ warning in Matthew 6:3-5?

But when you give to the poor, don’t let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be done in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.” “And whenever you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to stand in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they will be seen by people. Truly I tell you, they have their full reward! (Matthew 6:3-5)

But let us now return to Angus Buchan, who frequently appears on God TV, and his revival messages. Of course God can restore our country to a blissfully peaceful land but then again this is not the motive for a revival. The only motive for a revival is to be reconciled to an infinitely holy God who will never retract or rescind his righteous judgments on those who refuse to repent and believe as the Scriptures say. As professor Malan indicated, Angus Buchan’s entire teaching is focused on the advancement of the Dominionist doctrine which promotes the idea that every single position of high ranking in politics, the economy, health, education, the media and art must be occupied by “Christians” before Jesus can return. This is definitely not what Jesus taught. Jesus has already given his hope, peace and joy to his followers but it is a joy and a peace that his Holy Spirit has entrenched in their innermost beings and nothing can take it away, not even the severest circumstances and persecution. On the other hand, the peace the world gives, of which Jesus said He does not give, is contingent upon peace treaties, compromises and flimsy promises and we know how easy these so-called peace treaties can be broken. Yes, it is also true that something that looks like a revival may occur but the question is: from whence does it come — from God or the deceiver who disguises him as an angel of light? God honours but a single motive when believers pray for a revival and that is “To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. (Acts 26:18). The word “revival” implies that there once was spiritual life, growth and dynamism but has waned or teetered to a lifeless corpse which needs to be resurrected unto a dynamic life in Jesus Christ.

To the messenger of the church in Sardis, write: The one who has the seven spirits of God and the seven stars says this:

“I know your works. You are known for being alive, but you are dead.” (Revelation 3:1)

Benny Hinn's Messiah look alike

Prof. Malan finds Angus Buchan’s positive comments on false prophets like Benny Hinn and Kathryn Kuhlman disturbing and even bewildering. Personally, I think that Angus Buchan fits the Word of Faith and prosperity cult like a glove. He may have indicated in the past that he has no aspirations to make money but is quite prepared to speak highly of Benny Hinn and Rory and Wendy Alec whose doctrine of salvation is steeped in the prosperity cult. Angus Buchan may have a relationship with Jesus Christ as his Saviour and experience Him as a living reality and exhort people to repent but then again Benny Hinn and Rory and Wendy Allen claim to have the same relationship with Jesus Christ and that they too are reaching billions with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If Angus Buchan was so concerned about lost souls, he would at least warn Benny Hinn of his false doctrines and Rory and Wendy Allen of promoting his false doctrines on their God TV. Angus Buchan would at least have been deeply concerned about the millions of viewers who are being misled by God TV. Let us now look at some of the heresies Benny Hinn has proclaimed in the passed.

“I am a ‘little messiah’ walking on earth,”²

If Angus Buchan has made positive comments on Benny Hinn, as Prof. Malan says, then he is praising and revering a false Messiah. In my opinion Angus Buchan should retract his positive testimonials of Benny Hinn in public because Hinn’s infamous claim is not only an affront to Jesus Christ but he (Buchan) is leading many people astray by encouraging them to follow a false Messiah. The Moreleta Park DRC favours the very same kind of policy which is to mollycoddle their Hinn-followers in stead of warning them against him so as not to rock the boat. Here are a few other Hinn-claims-to-fame.

God came from heaven, became a man, made man into little gods, went back to heaven as a man. He faces the Father as a man. I face devils as the son of God…. Quit your nonsense! What else are you? If you say,  I am, you’re saying I’m a part of Him, right? Is he God? Are you His offspring? Are you His children? You can’t be human! You can’t! You can’t!  God didn’t give birth to flesh…. You said, “Well, that’s heresy.” No, that’s your crazy brain saying that.³

Perhaps Angus Buchan and Rory and Wendy Alec would like to tell us whether they agree with Benny Hinn (whom they adore so much) when he blasphemously demoted Jesus Christ to a sinner (which implies that like any other sinner He was lost and needed to be born-again).

And let me add this: Had the Holy Spirit not been with Jesus,  He would have sinned. That’s right, it was the Holy Spirit that was the power that kept Him pure. He was not only sent from heaven, but He was called the Son of Man and as such He was capable of sinning…. Without the Holy Ghost, Jesus would have never have made it…. Can you imagine Christ headed for the grave, knowing He would remain there forever, if the Holy Ghost would change His mind about raising Him from the dead?⁴    My, you know, whoosh! The Holy Ghost is just showing me some stuff. I’m getting dizzy! I’m telling you the truth—it’s, it’s just heavy right now on me…. He’s [referring to Jesus] in the underworld now. God isn’t there, the Holy Ghost isn’t there, and the Bible says He was begotten. Do you know what the word begotten means? It means reborn. Do you want another shocker? Have you been begotten? So was He. Don’t let anyone deceive you. Jesus was reborn. You say, “What are you talking about?” . . . He was reborn. He had to be reborn…. If He was not reborn, I could not be reborn. Jesus was born again…. If He was not reborn, I would never be reborn. How can I face Jesus and say, “Jesus, you went through everything I’ve gone through, except the new birth?”⁵  (Emphasis added)

Masonry declares the same heresy

Jesus of Nazareth had attained a level of consciousness, of perfection, that has been called by various names: cosmic consciousness, soul regeneration, philosophic initiation, spiritual illumination, Brahmic splendor, Christ-consciousness.⁶ (Emphasis added). Benny Hinn’s “whooshy” extra terrestrial revelation is not only blatant blasphemy but an outright rejection of the entire Levitical  sacrificial system in the Old Testament which unequivocally proves that in the sin offering and all the other offerings the animals had to be without blemish, indicating that the One whose “once for all offering” was eventually ratified on the cross, had to be and actually was sinless.

If the priest that is anointed do sin according to the sin of the people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering. (Leviticus 4:3)

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. (Hebrews 4:15)

If Jesus’ purity (sinlessness) was attributable to the Holy Spirit and not his own pure and sinless nature, it follows that every believer who has the Spirit of God indwelling his/her innermost being is also sinless. (2 Corinthians 5:21). Some interpret this as Him being made a sinner for us in the real sense of the word, but again this is not what is meant here. It simply means that God made his Son to be a sin-offering for us in which His Father treated Him like a sinner. Not only mighty men like Angus Buchan are in close cahoots with Benny Hinn and his blasphemous doctrines. What about Chuck Missler? Has he “miss-ler-ed” the boat as well? His “seed of faith” was so important that Rory and Wendy Alec made a special announcement when they received his sacrificial offering toward the “spreading of the Gospel according to Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Joyce Meyer, Billy Graham, Peter Wagner, John Hagee, Joel Osteen and a host of other spiritual “VIP’s”.” GOD TV’s viewers seem to be so hooked on the lie that their own “breakthrough” in the area of their finances, businesses and families will come when they give sacrificially that they don’t care a hoot about sound biblical doctrines.(1 John 1:8). The title Son of Man does not mean that Jesus was capable of sinning. Had He in the very slightest been capable of sinning He would never have been able to pay the penalty for our sins. The Son of Man simply means that He identified Himself with man to the very uttermost, even to the extent that His Father “made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Some interpret this as Him being made a sinner for us in the real sense of the word, but again this is not what is meant here. It simply means that God made his Son to be a sin-offering for us in which His Father treated Him like a sinner. Not only mighty men like Angus Buchan are in close cahoots with Benny Hinn and his blasphemous doctrines. What about Chuck Missler? Has he “miss-ler-ed” the boat as well? His “seed of faith” was so important that Rory and Wendy Alec made a special announcement when they received his sacrificial offering toward the “spreading of the Gospel according to Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Joyce Meyer, Billy Graham, Peter Wagner, John Hagee, Joel Osteen and a host of other spiritual “VIP’s”.” GOD TV’s viewers seem to be so hooked on the lie that their own “breakthrough” in the area of their finances, businesses and families will come when they give sacrificially that they don’t care a hoot about sound biblical doctrines.

In God TV’s headquarters in Jerusalem Rory and Wendy Alec have set up a so-called uppermost room and a holy of holies chamber with a stone altar on which they place every “seed offering” they receive from their viewers in the form of a reddish colored sheet of paper. The “altar” is also the focal point of their “prayers” which are frequently uttered in another tongue. No one ever interprets these so-called tongues which is yet another act of disobedience on the part of God TV. (1 Corinthians 14:27). What is the real purpose of the so-called “altar” in God TV’s headquarters in Jerusalem? It cannot possibly be a replica of an Old Testament altar because God forbad the Israelites to build and altar from hewn stone.

And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it. (Exodus 20:25) The so-called altar in GOD TV’s headquarters is not a prayer altar but an occult “point of contact.” The “point of contact” paraphernalia (prayer cloths, handkerchiefs, photographs, prayer sheets, hems from garments, holy oil, shofars) are used to release the power to create wealth and to receive your breakthrough. Oral Roberts claimed that the “point of contact” was the “greatest discovery”⁷ he had ever made.” By sending in their prayer sheets (in this case printed reddish colored A4 sheets) the viewers establish a point of contact when each sheet is placed on the “altar”  and when Rory and Wendy Alec and others lay their hands on the heap of paper sheets to release the power of affluence. Dave Hunt wrote:

Rituals are of no value. Rituals work in magic and magic [is] demonic; witch doctors have certain rituals they go through, sacramentalism is related to the rituals.  The idea that a ritual has some spiritual value and power just is contrary both to common sense and to the Word of God.  For example, it’s closely related to scapulars and medals. I have a scapular that I keep in the Bible to show people, on one end of it, it says, whosoever dies wearing this scapular shall not suffer eternal fire.  Well, two problems, 1) if you believe Christ paid the penalty for your sins, you don’t need a scapular. What kind of a God delivers you from eternal fire because you wear a scapular.  It’s like the fetishes and so forth in the pagan world.  So, a ritual to exorcise demons is the same.  What is this, impress demons?  Are they impressed that you go through some ritual, or does God’s power depend upon you going through some ritual?  Where in the Bible does it say that God’s power can be released by some ritual?  Now you have the same idea with many of the so-called faith teachers, you know, touch my hand, this is a point of contact and even Oral Roberts had people light candles, you know, he lit the red candle while they lit the green candle, and this starts miracles flowing.  What kind of a God releases his power because you go through some ritual?  So we know, first of all, that the ritual isn’t right. (Emphasis added)

Millions of people are being misled and deceived by God TV. Are you one of the deceived?

Acts 8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

 ———————————————————————

¹ Patti Roberts, Ashes to Gold (Word Books, 1985), p. 122

² Benny Hinn, “Praise-a-Thon” program on TBN, 6 November 1990.

³ Benny Hinn, “Our Position in Christ # 2 — The Word Made Flesh (Orlando: Orlando Christian Center 1991) videotape # 2555, emphasis added. See also Hinn’s claim that believers are “little messiahs” or “little gods” on the “Praise-a-Thon” program on TBN (6 November 1990).

⁴ Benny Hinn, Good Morning, Holy Spirit (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1990), 135-36, emphasis added. In the seventh printing, certain unannounced changes were made in the text in response to criticism from CRI so that the passage now reads (changes emphasized): “And let me add this: Had the Holy Spirit not been with Jesus, He may have likely sinned. That’s right. It was the Holy Spirit who was the power that kept Him pure. He was not only sent from heaven, but He was called the Son of Man—and as such He was capable of sinning. . . . Without the Holy Ghost, Jesus may have never made it.” The “Can you imagine.. .” sentence was deleted entirely. But even with the changes, Christ is still made out to depend on the Holy Spirit to keep Him from sinning, thus denying Christ the sinlessness that is an essential attribute of God.

⁵ Benny Hinn, “Our Position ‘In Christ,’ Part 1″ (Orlando, FL: Orlando Christian Center, 1991), videotape.

⁶ Lynn F. Perkins, The Meaning of Masonry (CSA Press, 1971), p. 32

⁷ Oral Roberts Best Sermons and Stories (Tulsa, OK: Oral Roberts, 1956), 46: 101

To grow or not to grow, that is the question

The names of persons in the following illustration are fictitious and do not in any way refer to living individuals.

Peter and Margaret were over the moon when their first-born, John, was born. He was the most beautiful baby in the whole world, perfectly made in everyway. As with all mothers the first thing Margaret did was to see if he had all his little toes and fingers and whether there were any physical dificiencies on his little body. He was just perfect and so adorable. When the time came for them to go home daddy arranged a wonderful welcoming party for mother and son. Both John’s grandparents on Peter’s and Margarte’s side were there as well as most of the family and lots and lots of friends. it was a real feast.

Mom was able to breast feed John regularly everyday and later when he was able to be fed more solid baby foods, she gave him only the best. And John was a really good eater. Margaret had no problems having to feed him. There was only one problem and it was a really big problem. John remained a little baby. After six to eight months he hadn’t grown a single inch and remained cloistered in his little cot.

What would you do if you had a son or a daughter who didn’t grow normally and remained confined to their cots? Of course you would be greatly disturbed. Could we for a moment shift this most tragic and disconcerting scenario to the spiritual realm? Are we as equally concerned about our own spiritual growth and that of others as we are about babies whose physical growth are stifled? The Bible very empathically warns against spiritual stagnation and the necessity for spiritual growth. In fact Paul says in Hebrews 5 from verse 7 through to chapter 6 and verse 3:

In the days of his flesh, he offered up prayers and appeals with loud cries and tears to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his devotion to God. Son though he was, he learned obedience through his sufferings and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, having been designated by God to be a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek. We have much to say about this, but it is difficult to explain because you have become too lazy to understand. In fact, though by now you should be teachers, you still need someone to teach you the basic truths of God’s word. You have become people who need milk instead of solid food. For everyone who lives on milk is still a baby and is inexperienced in the message of righteousness. But solid food is for mature people, whose minds are trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.

Therefore, leaving behind the elementary teachings about Christ, let us continue to be carried along to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, faith toward God, instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this we will do, if God permits. (Emphasis added).

If it was necessary for Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God, to grow in wisdom and maturity (Luke 2:52) how much more shouldn’t his followers strive to grow in wisdom and maturity in order to become like Him more and more? Here now follows some verses from Scripture that admonish us to grow in our spiritual lives and not to remain stymied.

For this reason, since the day we heard about this, we have not stopped praying for you and asking that you may be filled with the full knowledge of God’s will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that you might live in a manner worthy of the Lord and be fully pleasing to him as you bear fruit in every good work and grow in the full knowledge of God. (Col 1:9-10)

And it is he who gifted some to be apostles, others to be prophets, others to be evangelists, and still others to be pastors and teachers, to perfect the saints, to do the work of ministry, and to build up the body of Christ until all of us are united in the faith and in the full knowledge of God’s Son, and until we attain mature adulthood and the full standard of development in Christ. Then we will no longer be little children, tossed like waves and blown about by every wind of doctrine, by people’s trickery, or by clever strategies that would lead us astray. Instead, by speaking the truth in love, we will grow up completely into the one who is the head, that is, into Christ, in whom the whole body is united and held together by every ligament with which it is supplied. As each individual part does its job, the body’s growth is promoted so that it builds itself up in love. (Eph 4:11-16)

A stifled spiritual growth is a veritable sowing land for false doctrines and inevitably leads one into labyrinths of serious deception. Isn’t this the very reason why men like Stephan Joubert and a multitude of other pastors and preachers in our country have fallen prey to deception and erroneous doctrines? Stephan Joubert, for instance, contrary to the teachings of Jesus and Paul and all the other apostles, believes that Ultimatetly, spiritual growth is not what its all about. Like so many of his former thought provoking discoveries (or is it brain provoking discoveries), he has now discovered that there is something that is even more important than spiritual growth. Ironically he places the reasons for a lesser important spiritual growth squarely in the court of institutionalized church programs, but conveniently praises the church programs of a couple of Emergent Churches who have made an impact in their immediate vicinities and helped to make the world a better place. In Die Burger of 18 March 2009 he said that the Kingdom of God is a sowing land and not a business enterprise. I can agree with that, but the question is: What do you sow?

To defend his apathy towards business and program driven churches, STEPHAN JOUBERT referred to a church in Roodepoort whose pastor is Pieter-Nel Klopper. One Sunday he decided to launch a fundraising program for the needy (Stephan is not apathetic about these kinds of church programs) and asked the members of his church to place their donations in two containers in front of the church. Enough money was collected to help someone who had been robbed of R800 and to pay for another person’s debt of R2000. In addition two cars were given to two members who had been having problems with transport. Now, this is wonderful; Christians should help one another. The only problem is that it was splashed on the pages of some newspapers and also on the infamous “Kletsklerk” (an Afrikaans chat forum where mostly atheists and haters of God mock the evangelical Christian faith) while Jesus explicitly commanded his followers not to splash their giving of alms in public.

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. (Mat 6:1-4).

Is this Joubert’s discovery of something that is even more important than spiritual growth – a reward winning patent of how to skillfully circumvent Jesus Christ’s commandments? They have already received their reward which is the accolades an praises of men. Stephan calls this hypocritical act of giving your alms in the public eye IMPACT. He says

It is time for a new term, one that moves the focus away from myself. I am talking about the word IMPACT! . . .

Impact happens when my life is poured out like water in service of Christ and other people.

Impact causes me to no longer care whether I am growing spiritually or not. Like Paul in 1 Corinthians 4, I no longer have time or energy for monitoring my own growth. That I leave to God! Impact causes me to prayerfully fetch my life coordinates obediently from the Lord every day and to report for duty in his kingdom. All that matters now is that the Lord is glorified.

Stephan is full of surprises, especially when he refers to (please note: NOT quotes) Scripture in order to substantiate his IMPACT agenda. He wrongfully impacts an eisegesis (reads his own interpretation into) 1 Corinthians 4 that is nowhere near the meaning of which Paul wanted to convey. Paul does not speak about spiritual growth in chapter 4; this he had already done in chapters 2 and 3. His entire rhetoric revolves around the mysteries of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (the things that relate to the Cross which only the Holy Spirit can reveal) which we are commanded to proclaim with fortitude and loyalty. Paul’s main concern in chapter 4 was that he and ministers like him proclaim the Truth of the Cross faithfully in the interest of their Master. If Paul hadn’t been concerned about his own spiritual growth and that of others, as Stephan Joubert asserts, he would never have had reprimanded the Corinthian church for her infantile spirituality in chapter 3 verses 1 and 2. Indeed, he seems to be so upset with them that he compares their childish behavior to a spiritually mature man who judges (evaluates, discerns, examines, investigates, inquires into) all things (1 Corinthians 2:15). To be able to do this you must know the Truth and how to rightly divide the Truth. Not so, says Stephan Joubert:  We no longer need to stand up for the truth and there is something that is more important than spiritual growth — IMPACT.

The impression one gets is that the Emergent Church fraternity do not want their church members to grow in the Lord, in his grace and in his Truth. They seem to deliberately keep them in their little toddler shoes so that they can manipulate them at will.

Destined humility

In a post written on 20 November 2010 on his blog VELOCITY CULTURE Ron Martoia made the following staggering statement.

An ancient way of viewing spiritual progress and movement that has really come back into vogue is that of a journey sometimes however the ancient literature will use this interchangeably with pilgrimage.

In this metaphor God is horizon. He is being moved toward but has not yet been apprehended. This is the very idea we hear in the cliche’ “it is not the destination but the journey that matters.” I think one of the reasons this has seen a renaissance of usage in recent years is the postmodern condition that wants to highlight that certainty and “arrival” are not all they are cracked up to be and that the idea of movement toward something seems far more humble. (Emphasis added).

Was that the reason why the Israelites wandered in the wilderness for 40 years and most of them never reached their destination because they believed the cliché “It is not the destination but the journey that matters?” I can only imagine what it must have been like when they danced around Moses in a ring-a ring-o-roses kind of way and chanting: Don’t worry Moses, be happy! It is not the destination but the journey that matters.” You may recall that Moses never reached his destination in the Promised Land as well. Perhaps Ron Martoia would like to tell us whether these words were eventually incorporated in the Song of Moses? Or maybe he should don his composer’s hat and write an new song for us.

This is just another one of the Emergent Church’s enigmatic and strange transformational gizmos that leads to nowhere fast. But what lies at the root of their humble but terrible movement toward a destination they never seem to reach? Ah! but of course, their turning back to – no, not God – Roman Catholicism. Not even the late Pope John Paul II knew what his destination was. Dave Hunt wrote in an article “Death of a Pope” (The Berean Call):

John Cardinal O’Connor declared: “Church teaching is that I don’t know…what my eternal future will be. I can hope, pray, do my very best—but I still don’t know. Pope John Paul II doesn’t know absolutely that he will go to heaven, nor does Mother Teresa of Calcutta….” Cardinal John Krol, as spiritual leader of Philadelphia’s more than one million Catholics, admitted that his personal major worry was about “getting to heaven.” Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), who headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, watchdog of Catholic orthodoxy (Holy Office of the Inquisition), and successor to John Paul II, expresses the same uncertainty of salvation—as he must. . . .

In a book highly rated by 250 evangelical leaders, the Pope wrote, “Baptism and the Eucharist…create in man the seed of eternal life.” Rejecting the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice and His triumphant cry, “It is finished!” (Jn 19:30), the documents of Vatican II begin thus: “It is the liturgy through which, especially in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, ‘the work of our redemption is [still being] accomplished.’” Rome anathematizes anyone who dares to confess the very assurance of a finished salvation that the Bible repeatedly promises (1 Jn 5:13).

Stephan Joubert summed it up well when he quoted the well-known Song “The Unreachable Star” from the Spanish author, Miguel de Cervantes’ novel, “The Ingenious Hidalgo Don Quixote of La Mancha”

No matter how hopeless, no matter how far . . . To fight for the right, without question or pause . . . To be willing to march into Hell, for a Heavenly cause . . . And I know if I’ll only be true, to this glorious quest, That my heart will lie peaceful and calm, when I’m laid to my rest . . . And the world will be better for this:

That one man, scorned and covered with scars, Still strove, with his last ounce of courage, To reach . . . the unreachable star . . .

They all claim to follow Jesus Christ but can this be the Christ of the Bible – a Christ who takes them on a humble journey or pilgrimage with no destination in sight, or at least a destination that is in sight like the metaphorical elusive horizon or the unreachable star that always remains unattainable? If that were true I would rather be an atheist.

John 3:16 according to Stephan Joubert

Please allow me to ask you a question. If Jesus Christ IS the TRUTH as much as He IS the WAY and the LIFE would you say that anyone who blurts out something so incongruous, inappropriate and tactless as the following loves the Lord Jesus Christ with all his heart, mind and strength, and is one of his loyal followers?

Do I need to stand up for the truth? Or is there a better way?

“We need to stand up for the truth.” People like saying that. However, “standing up” is equal to religious protest for some. It is to unmercifully (and tactlessly) tackle sin and injustice. Does that help? No! I would be able to quote a couple of studies that show how those “standing up for the truth” efforts of religious people have no real healing effect on society. It only serves to highlight the boundaries between “us” and “them.” It makes religious folks come across more judgmental than ever. But it does not embody Jesus’ words that we need to let our light shine before people in order for them to see our GOOD WORKS and glorify our heavenly Father (Matthew 5:16). (Emphasis added)

Guess who said these prophetically fulfilling words? If you said Stephan Joubert you are spot on. (Read here). Why are they prophetically fulfilling words? Well, for the simple reason that Stephan Joubert, together with his emergent buddies, are fulfilling Bible prophecy to the letter. Consider the following

Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy4:2-4).

Has Stephan Joubert turned his back on the God’s Truth as we find it embodied in Jesus Christ? Nah! He is merely advising South Africa and the rest of the world not to stand up for the Truth. The dictionary defines “to stand up for” as follows.

- to remain firm or steadfast, as in a cause.

- to uphold; support.

- to adhere to.

- to stand firm; to be resolute.

Countless Christians have lost their lives and many are presently facing death because they firmly and resolutely stood up for and are still standing up for the Truth. They did not lose and still do not lose their lives because they selfishly serve others; they lost their lives because they refused to turn their backs on the eternal Truth that Jesus Christ is the ONLY WAY, the ONLY TRUTH and the ONLY LIFE and that NO ONE comes to the Father but through HIM. (John 14:6). Stephan Joubert has said some very shocking things in the past and resolutely refuses to recant and repent. One of his most recent posts on their e-church website confirms this. Let us now evaluate some of the shocking things he has said in the light of God’s Word.

[The] “standing up for the truth” efforts of religious people have no real healing effect on society. It only serves to highlight the boundaries between “us” and “them.” It makes religious folks come across more judgmental than ever. But it does not embody Jesus’ words that we need to let our light shine before people in order for them to see our GOOD WORKS and glorify our heavenly Father (Matthew 5:16).

The purpose of Jesus’ salvivic mission to the earth was not to heal societies. He never promised to heal whole societies. He came to seek and to save lost individuals (Luke 19:10; Luke 15:4). In fact, there is but a small remnant amongst the Jews and the Gentiles who will be saved in the long run. Jesus Himself once said that the gate and the way that leads to eternal life is strait and narrow and that there are but few that find it (Matthew 7:14). They do not find it because they have rejected the Truth who is Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God. The truth is supposed to highlight the boundaries between “us” (the believers) and “them” (the unbelievers). Has Stephan Joubert forgotten what the Jesus, whom He claims to follow, once said:

Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword! For I came to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A person’s enemies will be members of his own family. The one who loves his father or mother more than me isn’t worthy of me, and the one who loves a son or daughter more than me isn’t worthy of me. (Matthew 10:34-37).

According to Joubert anyone who stands up for the Truth is more judgmental than ever. What does he mean? Is he saying that you are being judgmental when you claim Jesus Christ is the only Way to God the Father and eternal life? The emergent fraternity has found a new way to bring lost sinners to God. You only need to do GOOD WORKS and God will do the rest. Not even Jesus who was sinless and who performed the most wonderful works was able to save lost sinners through his good works. He once said: “You are already clean because of the word [the Truth] that I have spoken to you. (John15:3). He also said that his followers are sanctified through, not good works, but his Truth (his Word) (John 17:17). Paul exemplified Jesus’ words when he said: “But not everyone has obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah asks, “Lord, who has believed our message?” Consequently, faith comes from listening, and listening comes through the word of Christ. (Romans10:16-17)

Stephan Joubert should rather diligently study God’s Word (2 Timothy 2:15) which is His TRUTH (John 17:17) in stead of quoting a couple of studies that show how those “standing up for the truth” have no real healing effect on society. Paul encouraged Timothy as well as Jesus’ followers throughout the ages to diligently study the Word of God [and not the couple of studies by Ron Martoia or anyone else] so that we may rightly divide the truth. The Amplified Bible says it thus:

Study and be eager and do your utmost to present yourself to God approved (tested by trial), a workman who has no cause to be ashamed, correctly analyzing and accurately dividing [rightly handling and skillfully teaching] the Word of Truth. (2 Timothy 2:15).

In effect Paul was telling Timothy to study the Word of God so that he may stand up for the truth according to God’s will. The reason for standing up for the truth, is because it (the Truth) sets people free (John 8:32). Jesus said the truth will set people free. Stephan Joubert says it has no healing effect. Guess who’s the liar?

But let us continue. Stephan says:

Of course we don’t have to apologize for having Jesus as Lord. Still, that does not give us a license to act thoughtlessly or bullishly in the presence people living different lifestyles. Our calling is to live out the love of Christ that’s within us. . . . In any case, if we really believe that God loves the whole world according to John 3:16, then we can socialize with anyone – from the biggest sinner to the most dedicated child of God. We just need to ensure that Jesus is the Guest of honor during every encounter and then leave the rest up to Him.

Let’s briefly look again at John 3:16 and quote it “word for word” from “Scripture” [“the undiluted Truth”]. It says:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, so that we may socialize freely with anyone living with different lifestyles and to follow the most important route of building good relationships with them so that they may not perish but have everlasting life (John 3:16).

Stephan Joubert abhors Christians who stand up for God’s Truth but just adores everyone who stands up for his “truth” which  supposedly is a better way. This is the kind of outrageous arrogance and religious conceitedness you find amongst the Emergent fraternity: They have no fear of God when they shun his Truth and replace it with their own “truth” which  allegedly is a better way. I’m sorry Stephan, but your way is not a better way. It is a way that seems right but the end thereof leads to death (Proverbs 14:12 (and let me remind you that this comes from the lips of the Wisdom Teacher, your Sage and your Sophia). In the very same chapter the Wisdom Teacher says: “A true witness [to the Truth] delivereth souls: but a deceitful witness speaketh lies. (verse 25).

Of course the building of relationships is of the utmost importance but we should never allow it to hamper the Truth. Jesus Christ, Stephan Joubert’s Sage and Sophia, once said:

The one who loves his father or mother more than me isn’t worthy of me, and the one who loves a son or daughter more than me isn’t worthy of me. (Matthew 10:37).

He is not saying that we shouldn’t love our fathers, mothers, sons or daughters; He is saying that if we compromise the Truth or remain silent about the Truth (or do not stand up for the Truth) for the sake of a better relationship with them or others, we cannot be his disciples. Then we are not worthy of Him. In fact, He is saying that we are none of his, that we do not belong to Him and that we are not saved when we do not stand up for his Truth for the sake of better relationships. In his prize-winning book Jesus, a radical leap Joubert articulates the importance of relationships over the Truth as follows:

The right relationships with Christ, one another and others is a purpose in itself for the millennium-three churches; it is not merely yet another way of getting more people on church premises. For them it is about an active being there in the Name of the Lord for each other and others. However, they do not want to be known as mere “friendly churches.” That’s why they feel at ease with diversity and differentiation because they believe in the words: “Belong before believe.”

One cannot deny that the Emergent fraternity has a benevolent aptitude to believe but it’s a pity that they believe in all the wrong things. “”Belong before believe” is a lie from the pit of hell. Yes! you may belong to an institutionalized church without having to believe in Jesus Christ but you will never belong to Him without having to believe in Him and his Gospel Truth (Romans 8:9b). Indeed, in Acts we learn that God Himself added to the church those who were being saved and that the “others” or “them” (as Stephan Joubert likes to call unbelievers) were too afraid to join a church where a husband and wife were slain by God because they did not stand up for the truth and lied to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:1-10). Today’s churches, especially the Emergent Church, invite every Tom, Dick and Harry to join their churches and in no time a once living church becomes as dead as all the unbelievers (Luke 9:60) whom it accommodates for the sake of better relationships.

Isn’t it just kosher for Stephan Joubert to admonish others not to stand up for the truth because there is supposed to be a better way when he himself constantly claims to stand up for the truth as he sees it. He is not abiding by his own rules and regulations. In fact, he can’t seem to stay away from the truth in the Bible and often refers to whole chapters in Scripture but, like a snake, very cunningly steers away from the context and meaning of the text. In order to under gird his interpretation of Matthew 10 he gives a whole new meaning to Jesus’ words “be as cunning as serpents and as innocent as doves.” He writes:

He tells us to be as cunning as snakes, and as inoffensive as doves. In other words, we need to be able to read situations and people well. We need to think carefully about what we do before we bring Jesus’ name into disrepute through our “standing up” actions.

The irony is, in contrast to Joubert’s call not to stand up for the truth, that Jesus emphatically taught his disciples to stand up for the truth and not to shy away from the bold declaration thereof. This is evident from his command that they should proclaim his word (the truth). He told them that when they entered a town or a village they should find out who was worthy and to stay with them until their departure to a next town or village. “Worthy” here refers to those who were benignly disposed to the truth and who treated them kindly. Those who listened and responded to God’s truth were blessed with God’s shalom but those who refused to listen to God’s truth and were hostile to the disciples did not receive God’s shalom (verses 10-14). The dust off the disciples’ feet was shed in disgust on their towns and villages because it would be more tolerable for the extremely sinful Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for them. Did you hear that Stephan? The sodomites, gays, lesbians and those who live alternate lifestyles will encounter more tolerance in the day of judgment than those who reject the truth and are reluctant to stand up for the truth. Jesus’ command to be as cunning as snakes and as innocent as doves relates to the dangerous attitude of the people who refused to listen to their words (the truth). Jesus called them ravenous wolves who were apt to turn on the disciples and harm or even kill them. Serpents are known for their wisdom and cunning (Genesis 3:1) and especially for their adroitness to avoid danger and harm. No other animal has the keen adeptness to avoid danger so quickly than a serpent. Therefore, Jesus actually warned them: “You need caution and wisdom in the midst of a world that will seek your lives.” He directs them, also, to be harmless, not to provoke danger, not to do injury, and thus make their fellow-men justly enraged against them. Does it mean that we should not stand up for the truth in order not to provoke danger and to avoid confrontation with the enraged masses who stop their ears to the truth? Stephen was stoned because he stood up for the truth and so was Paul. The Jewish rabble wanted to stone Jesus because He stood up for the truth. When we take these latter incidents into account it is abundantly clear that Jesus did not have the proclamation of his truth in mind when He told his disciples to be as cunning a snakes and as innocent as doves. He did not advise them NOT to stand up for the truth for the sake of a better relationship with those who rejected his truth. He commanded his disciples to avoid the rebellious with wisdom and cunning and to shake the dust off their feet in stead of wanting to engage them in a relationship. God’s truth is a sword that needs to be wielded with wisdom, cunning and innocence (Hebrews 4:12).

What about Romans 12? Should we accept Stephan Joubert’s interpretation of Romans 12? He wrote:

Paul’s starting point in Romans 12 is that we always do good things to those across the faith-border. Instead of correcting them, we should give them cups of cold water. In this way we make them red of shame through love, and not red of anger through judgmental behavior.

Paul is definitely not saying that we should give our enemies cups of cold water in stead of standing up for the truth and correcting them. Had this been  the meaning of Romans 12:20 he would never have written down 2 Timothy 3:16 and 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.” Stephan Joubert just loves to talk about GOOD WORKS while he downgrades the necessity for correction. Paul very distinctly and clearly says that you cannot do any GOOD WORKS when you shun correction and instruction. Only the man who listens and obeys correction and instruction is capable of doing good works to the honour and glory of God. Good works go hand in hand with a teachable spirit. The bottom-line is: No teachable spirit amounts to no good works.

The last paragraph in Stephan Joubert’s illustrious post is the proverbial cherry on the cake. He wrote:

Jesus never threatened sinners with hell. Please read the gospels – all his statements about punishment deal with “religious” people. It’s sad how some don’t twist his words around today! Some church attendees only send forth judgments against those who think differently – that while Jesus placed words of life and healing on our tongues. Judgment is truly God’s very last resort. Jesus is the heavenly Fireman. He came to put out the fire, not to add coals to it. Please learn from Him how to live among his favorite people.

Jesus NEVER threatened sinners with hell? Really? No! He never threatened; He merely put the facts on the table and warned everyone who refused to repent of their final destination in hell. Consider the following.

There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (Luke 13:1-5) (Emphasis added)

The word used here for “perish” (“apollumi”) is the same word that is used in John 3:16 and does not mean to merely die; it means to perish in hell. There are many more examples where Jesus warned about an impending punishment in hell for those who reject his truth and refuse to repent. I am not going to elaborate on those examples. But, have you noticed . . . .? Stephan Joubert believes that only the religious people are going to be punished in hell. In his opinion anyone who believes that people other than the religious are going to hell is twisting his words around. I wouldn’t talk about “twisting his words around” if I were Stephan Joubert, considering the way he has twisted around his words in Matthew 10 and Romans 12.

Have you noticed how Stephan Joubert is indicting himself of being judgmental while he accuses “some church attendees” of “send[ing] forth judgment against those who think differently?” He unceremoniously judges some religious church attendees and sends them to hell while he exonerates those who think differently. He is of course referring to people of other faiths. Allow me to elaborate on Joubert’s enigmatic wisdom. The religious are those who stand up for the truth (i.e. the fundamentalists); they are obviously the ones who are going to hell. Who are Jesus’ favorite people? Not the religious, because they are going to hell. So it must be those who think differently. Well, if they are Jesus’ favorite people then it is completely unnecessary to stand up for the truth in their midst. His favorites do not need the truth that sets one free.

“Jesus came to put out the fire of hell” Really? I really don’t think so. In fact He created it. Listen carefully, Stephan. Listen to the truth and you may learn how to stand up for the truth.

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: (Matthew 25:41)

The eternal lake of fire was not made for man but for the devil and his angels. However, those who prefer to follow the devil and his lies instead of Jesus Christ and His Truth must of necessity follow Satan into hell.

I have already given you Stephan Joubert’s interpretation of John 3:16. Shall we now look at his rendition of what happened on the Day of Pentecost? Here goes:

But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them. You men of Judea and all of you who live in Jerusalem, hear this. We have not come here to unmercifully (and tactlessly) tackle sin and injustice and therefore burden you with the facts. We honor and respect your protests against anyone who stands up for the truth and we acknowledge with humility all the great scholarly studies men have done to prove that standing up for the truth has no real effect on society. On behalf of myself and my eleven brothers who have stood up with me now, I want to assure you that we want to foster an intimate relationship with you. NO! please do not feel threatened; we are not going to command you to repent of your sins and receive Jesus Christ as your Saviour. That, my dear friends, is akin to “standing up for the truth” and we really don’t want to do that, do we? You see, we want you to feel at home, safe and sound in your own chosen lifestyles and religious affiliations. Please believe me when I say this: We honestly and truly don’t want to highlight the boundaries between us and you. As a matter of fact I would rather want to highlight the lies Jesus of Nazareth spread when He said that He did not come to bring peace on earth but a sword of division. What a lot of baloney! How for the love of Mike can someone who wants us to form a close relationship with those who have different lifestyles and religions say something so cruel as the following nonsense?: I came into this world for judgment [as a Separator, in order that there may be separation between those who believe on Me and those who reject [Me]. (John 9:39). I want you to ignore Him. On second thoughts, I now remember to whom He said these words. Those of you who are religious, please put up your hands. I see a hand there, thank you. There’s another hand, and another and another, thank you. John, would you be so kind and count the hands while I continue. Well guys I’ve got some really bad news for you. Jesus spoke these words to you religious fanatics or as you are called “fundamentalists” who are always just standing on the truth. You pitiful guys are going to bear the full brunt of his judgment in hell and not his favorites. What’s that you said, sir? Who are his favorites? His favorites are the outcasts, the poor, the destitute, the downtrodden, no matter what kind of lifestyles they follow. They may be poor because of alcohol abuse but that does not matter; they are still his favorites. No! we are not going to warn his favorites to repent; we don’t want to be judgmental. OK! I’ve said enough. We don’t want you guys to think that we want to win you for Christ through much speaking. Rather look at the light that emanates from us and look at our good works. “Of course we don’t have to apologize for having Jesus as Lord. Still, that does not give us a license to act thoughtlessly or bullishly in the presence people living different lifestyles. Our calling is to live out the love of Christ that’s within us. . . . In any case, if we really believe that God loves the whole world according to John 3:16, then we can socialize with anyone – from the biggest sinner to the most dedicated child of God. We just need to ensure that Jesus is the Guest of honor during every encounter and then leave the rest up to Him.” But whatever you do, don’t stand up for the truth because it has no healing effect on societies. 

Hallelujah, 3000 souls were saved that day when Peter delivered his sermon according to Stephan Joubert. 

The Kingdom of God, here and now: Part 2

A Theocratic Kingdom where God reigns supreme and his subjects obey his every command in love and in voluntary subjection to his authority has been His goal since the beginning of time. The holy angels who refused to follow Satan in his villainous journey of rebellion, have always obeyed God since their creation and will continue to do so for the eternities to come. Someone once said that Satan’s and the fallen angels’ rebellion and their subsequent banishment from heaven left a huge void in heaven and that God decided to make man and woman in their own image so that they and their descendants may fill that void. How true this is, is debatable. Nonetheless, the fact is that God in his infinite wisdom decided to make man and woman in their own image and to appoint them as co-workers and co-rulers over his creation and to place them in a resplendent garden of much beauty and abundance, not only to indulge in and enjoy God’s love, goodness, mercy and loving-kindness but also to be tested.

Because reciprocate love is the very bedrock of a relationship, God first had to exact a time of probation for Adam and Eve so that he could see whether they would love Him as much as He loved them. Forced love is not love; it not only stifles the image of God in man but kills the most basic element of that image which is free-will. Forced love is coercion at its worst. The  only way to see whether they loved Him was to give them a very simple command – “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” The bottom-line is: Obey and live in the awesome holy presence of God for all eternity OR disobey and be separated from the awesome holy God for all eternity in the lake of fire. You will recall that Jesus once said that the keeping of His commandments is the litmus test for true love. “If ye love Me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). This is precisely why it is so difficult to believe that the Emergent Church fraternity can say they love Jesus with all their heart, mind and strength and that they are his followers when they have cast just about every doctrine (commandment) He has given to the wind.

Unbelievers and in particular the atheists are easily aggravated by the idea that a single act of disobedience affords God the right to judge dissidents and cast them in hell. How can a single act of disobedience possibly warrant such a horrible punishment? There are two main reasons: the awesome, incomparable and incomprehensible holiness of God and the overwhelming, incomparable and incomprehensible wickedness of Satan. These are the only two opposing entities in the entire cosmos who have been at war since Satan’s fall into sin, disobedience and unrighteousness. All sin, all disobedience and all unrighteousness can be traced back to Satan (1 John 3:8).

Consequently our first parents’ act of disobedience was a giant step into the dominion or kingdom of Satan. When Adam and Eve took this step they dragged the entire human race with them. It is imperative to understand that God did not prepare the Lake of Fire for men and women who were made in his image; He prepared it for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41). Accordingly whoever prefers to remain in Satan’s kingdom of darkness and refuses to be translated from his kingdom to the Kingdom of His beloved Son (Colossians 1:13) will inevitably bear the consequences of God’s righteous wrath in the Lake of Fire, simply because they are of their own accord subjects in Satan’s kingdom. It is not his will that they perish but their own will and choice to remain in Satan’s kingdom of darkness seals their fate. If God were to overlook a single act of disobedience and allow it to go unpunished He could never have been the awesome, incomparable and incomprehensible holy God that He is. In fact, a single unpunished act of disobedience would have compromised not only his own holiness but the holiness of his Kingdom as well. It is for this very reason that no unclean person will ever be permitted to enter the Kingdom of God and his Christ (Ephesians 5:5).

Thanks be to God, his initial purpose to populate his Kingdom with creatures made in his own image was not foiled by Satan or the Fall. In fact, He had already set his plan of redemption in motion even before the foundation of the earth (Acts 2:23; Revelation 13:8). He sent his Son whose single most important mission it was to do the will of his Father.

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:7-10) (Emphasis added).

Jesus could never have been our final, complete and perfect sacrifice for sin on the cross if He had not fulfilled every single iota and title of his Father’s Law (Matthew 5:17) and if He, although He is the Son of God, had not learnt obedience through the things He suffered (Hebrews 5:8). His substitutionary sacrifice was not only to pay the debt in full for our sins but also to fulfill the Law in behalf of everyone who believes in Him and who by faith are baptized into his death (Romans 6:3). They are the ones who are given access to the Kingdom of God.

The God of the Bible is the God of new beginnings. However, his new beginnings are not haphazardly implemented; his new beginnings are always inaugurated by the shedding of an innocent victim’s blood in behalf of the guilty. Throughout the Old Testament the refrain “built there an altar unto the Lord” introduces a new beginning (Genesis 13:18; 35:7; Exodus 17:16; Joshua 22:10, 11; Judges 6:24; 1 Samuel 7:17; 2 Samuel 24:25; 1 Kings 18:32; 1 Chronicles 21:26). Subsequent to Adam and Eve’s fall God took the initiative and slew an animal to make coats of skin for them to wear and to replace their own hopelessly insufficient aprons of fig leaves they made for themselves (their own goody-goody deeds and efforts to cover their sin) (Genesis 3:7 and 20). This singularly beautiful deed of unfathomable mercy and loving-kindness was God’s magna carte of salvation and the foundational sign that the remission of sin and a new beginning shall be granted by the shedding of blood only. (Hebrews 9:22; 2 Corinthians 5:17). God’s triumphal song of new beginnings “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel (Genesis 3:15) would ring true again and again on each and every occasion when a burnt offering was brought to the Lord. Noah offered burnt offerings to the Lord as soon as he and his family set foot on dry ground after the Great Flood, indicating that God had once again offered them a new beginning. Sadly, the men of renown in Genesis became dissatisfied with God’s new beginning founded on blood; They were the most ancient of the emergent clan or tribe who wanted a new spirituality for millennium one and decided to opt for a religion based on mysticism. Their leader was Nimrod whose wife, Semiramis, was a woman of ill-repute. Alexander Hislop has this to say about her in his book The Two Babylons:

The Chaldean Mysteries can be traced up to the days of Semiramis, who lived only a few centuries after the flood, and who is known to have impressed upon them the image of her own depraved and polluted mind.

AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS compared with JUSTINUS, Historia and EUSEBIUS’ Chronicle. Eusebius says that Ninus and Semiramis reigned in the time of Abraham.

That beautiful but abandoned [uninhibited] queen of Babylon was not only herself a paragon of unbridled lust and licentiousness, but in the Mysteries which she had a chief hand in forming, she was worshipped as Rhea, the great “MOTHER” of the gods, with such atrocious rites as identified her with Venus, the MOTHER of all impurity, and raised the very city where she had reigned to a bad eminence among the nations, as the grand seat at once of idolatry and consecrated prostitution.¹

The mysticism or mysteries enshrouded in the Roman Catholic Church and particularly in the teachings of the Desert Fathers and now finally in the Emergent Church had their origin in the Chaldean mysteries of the Babylonian whore, Semiramis. Satan used a woman to introduce his chaos into God’s perfectly created world but thanks be to God He used a woman to bear his only begotten Son into our world who  ultimately will disperse of Satan’s chaos when He destroys his kingdom. Sadly Satan also used a woman to introduce to mankind a false religion based on a false trinity — Ninus or Nimrod (the father), Semiramis (the Mother and Babylonian holy spirit) and Tammuz (the Seed or the Son). Satan, having been the great deceiver and imposter from the very beginning, concocted his own version of Genesis 3:15. It is well-documented in Alexander Hislop’s book The Two Babylons that all the nations of antiquity were familiar with the promise in Genesis 3:15 and that they incorporated it in their own respective mythologies. The Babylonian rendition of it is the oldest which spread rapidly to all the surrounding countries.

When her husband Nimrod died a violent death, presumably at the hand of the God-fearing Seth (the third son born to Adam and Eve after Cain murdered his brother, Abel), she spread the lie that her illegitimate son, Tammuz who was born after the death of her husband Nimrod, was none other than Ninus (Nimrod) who had been raised from the dead. Hence the mother and child worship that is being perpetuated in the Roman Catholic Church to this day. To counteract the narrative that Seth and seventy-two judges found Nimrod guilty of apostasy and sentenced him to death by having his body cut in pieces,² she claimed that he prayed to the supreme God of heaven to take his life. Hislop writes:

. . . his prayer was heard, and . . . he expired, assuring his followers that, if they cherished due regard for his memory, the empire would never depart from the Babylonians. What Berosus, the Babylonian historian, says of the cutting off of the head of the great god Belus, is plainly to the same effect. Belus, says Berosus, commanded one of the gods to cut off his head, that from the blood thus shed by his own command and with his own consent, when mingled with the earth, new creatures might be formed, the first creation being represented as a sort of a failure. Thus the death of Belus, who was Nimrod, like that attributed to Zoroaster, was represented as entirely voluntary, and as submitted to for the benefit of the world. . . .

But yet, as we shall afterwards see, among the civilised nations of antiquity, Nimrod almost everywhere fell into disrepute, and was deposed from his original pre-eminence, expressly “ob deformitatem,” “on account of his ugliness.” Even in Babylon itself, the posthumous child, as identified with his father, and inheriting all his father’s glory, yet possessing more of his mother’s complexion, came to be the favourite type of the Madonna’s divine son.

This son, thus worshipped in his mother’s arms, was looked upon as invested with all the attributes, and called by almost all the names of the promised Messiah. As Christ, in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, was called Adonai, The Lord, so Tammuz was called Adon or Adonis. Under the name of Mithras, he was worshipped as the “Mediator.” As Mediator and head of the covenant of grace, he was styled Baal-berith, Lord of the Covenant (Judges 8:33). In this character he is represented in Persian monuments as seated on the rainbow, the well known symbol of the covenant. In India, under the name of Vishnu, the Preserver or Saviour of men, though a god, he was worshipped as the great “Victim-Man,” who before the worlds were, because there was nothing else to offer, offered himself as a sacrifice.³

You may recall that God’s wrath was kindled when the Israelites mourned and wept over the death of Tammuz (Ezekiel 8:14).⁴ Ninus (Nimrod), the father, who fell into disrepute after his death, was worshipped in silence. Hislop writes:

. . . the first person in the Godhead was practically overlooked. As the Great Invisible, taking no immediate concern in human affairs, he was “to be worshipped through silence alone,”⁵

John of the Cross, one of the contemplatives’ idols, taught that silence is the first language of God which, of course, is but an extension of the Babylonian heresy. Could it be anything else, bearing in mind that Roman Catholicism is but an extension of Babylon? For more information on the Emergent Church’s fallacies on the silence of God, read here. Having lost his eminence to the extent that Nimrod was worshipped in silence only, one would have thought that his splendor, honor and glory would have come upon the child (Tammuz). No so! It was the whore, Semiramis, who usurped his attributes. Hislop writes:

Now while the mother derived her glory in the first instance from the divine character attributed to the child in her arms, the mother in the long-run practically eclipsed the son. At first, in all likelihood, there would be no thought whatever of ascribing divinity to the mother. There was an express promise that necessarily led mankind to expect that, at some time or other, the Son of God, in amazing condescension, should appear in this world as the Son of man. But there was no promise whatever, or the least shadow of a promise, to lead any one to anticipate that a woman should ever be invested with attributes that should raise her to a level with Divinity. It is in the last degree improbable, therefore, that when the mother was first exhibited with the child in her arms, it should be intended to give divine honours to her. She was doubtless used chiefly as a pedestal for the upholding of the divine Son, and holding him forth to the adoration of mankind; and glory enough it would be counted for her, alone of all the daughters of Eve, to have given birth to the promised seed, the world’s only hope. But while this, no doubt, was the design, it is a plain principle in all idolatries that that which most appeals to the senses must make the most powerful impression. Now the Son, even in his new incarnation, when Nimrod was believed to have reappeared in a fairer form, was exhibited merely as a child, without any very particular attraction; while the mother in whose arms he was, was set off with all the art of painting and sculpture, as invested with much of that extraordinary beauty which in reality belonged to her. The beauty of Semiramis is said on one occasion to have quelled a rising rebellion among her subjects on her sudden appearance among them; and it is recorded that the memory of the admiration excited in their minds by her appearance on that occasion was perpetuated by a statue erected in Babylon, representing her in the guise in which she had fascinated them so much. . . .

This Babylonian queen was not merely in character coincident with the Aphrodite of Greece and the Venus of Rome, but was, in point of fact, the historical original of that goddess that by the ancient world was regarded as the very embodiment of everything attractive in female form, and the perfection of female beauty⁶

What evidence do we have that the Emergent Church and her adherents have inherited the legacy of the Babylonian religion of goddess worship? Most of you may be familiar with the etching of the Tower of Babel pictured on the left. When looked upon from above the architectural structure is in the form of a labyrinth, of which the very top and center was the headquarters, if you will, of Babylon’s occult religion, namely astrology. (See the picture of the Tower of Babel on a coin and its flipside showing the tower from above on the right). The queen of heaven, Semiramis (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-19, 25), and not her husband, Nimrod , or her son, Tammuz, (whom she claimed had a virgin birth and supposedly was the resurrection of her deceased husband) was the main cog in the  clockwork of the Babylonian idolatrous system. She ran the entire business. Genesis 11:4, in speaking of “a tower and his top reaching the heavens,” is not a reference to the height of the tower, but instead to the inscriptions of the Zodiac on the walls of the inner sanctuary. When Israel fell deeply into the idolatrous system of astrology she was seriously reprimanded by the prophet Isaiah:

Stand now with thine enchantments, and with the multitude of thy sorceries, wherein thou hast laboured from thy youth; if so be thou shalt be able to profit, if so be thou mayest prevail. Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee. Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it. (Isaiah 47:12-14).

Taurus the bull is the second sign in the array of the zodiac figures. In antiquity a bull’s horns denoted power, might, strength and sovereignty (1 Kings 22:11). One of the symbols that was used for Nimrod, the mighty hunter before the Lord, was the divided man-bull symbol, representing him as “The prince” who was cut asunder (cut in pieces at the height of his might and power). This half man and half bull symbol found its way into many countries and their respective religions of which that in Crete, Greece, is perhaps best known. According to Grecian mythology King Minos struggled for supremacy against his brothers and prayed to Poseidon to send him a white bull as a sign of his approval. Contrary to Poseidon’s command to sacrifice the bull in his honor, King Minos decided to keep it because of its beauty. As punishment the goddess Aphrodite (another name for Semiramis) made Minos’ wife, Pasiphaë, fall in love with the bull. She ordered Daedalus, the archetypal craftsman, to make for her a wooden cow and climbed into it so that she could copulate with the bull. Their offspring was the monstrous Minotaur. In disgust Minos commanded Daedalus to build a maze called a LABYRINTH where they were confined to live and never escape. The half brother of the Minotaur ordered that seven maidens of Athens be led into the labyrinth every ninth year to feed the Minotaur. The traits of a labyrinth can be summed up as follows:

1. The Minotaur’s labyrinth was used for human sacrifice.
2. The Chartres labyrinth in France is in a cathedral corrupted with pagan symbols and paraphernalia.
3. Labyrinths are used in witchcraft.
4. Labyrinths are used for magic.
5. Labyrinths are used by Druids.
6. Labyrinths are based on coiled serpents.
7. Labyrinths are temples and places of worship.
8. Labyrinths are associated with the underworld.
9. Labyrinths are associated with the god of the dead (Satan).
10. Labyrinths are not associated with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (He is the God the living, not of the dead – Mark 12:27).
11. Labyrinths are associated with sun worship.
12. Labyrinths are idols.
13. Labyrinths are associated with the Tower of Babel.
14. Labyrinths originated with other religions and cults and not the Christian faith.
15. Labyrinths are not straight paths but are crooked.
16. Labyrinths are not biblical at all but come directly from Satan and his demons. It is demonic through and through.

Christians who walk the labyrinth are not getting in touch with the God of the Bible but Satan himself and they are not promoting the Kingdom of God but the kingdom of darkness.

But what about the feminine aspect of the labyrinth? We’ve already seen that Semiramis, the licentious wife of Nimrod, played the biggest part in the development of the mysteries of Babylon. In fact, throughout the centuries she together with her son, Tammuz, and not Nimrod who was to be worshipped in silence, remained the major object of peoples’ worship (in the Roman Catholic Church as Mother Mary and the infant, Jesus). If we take into account that it was she who seduced King Minos’ wife, Pasiphaë, to fall in love with Poseidon’s white bull we may also assume that she was indirectly involved in the making of the labyrinth, although it was Minos who ordered Daedalus to build it for the MInotaur and Minos’ unfaithful wife.

Goddess worship is an integral part of Wiccan spirituality (white magic or so-called benevolent witchcraft). The various names applied to Sermiramis in Greece (Aphrodite, Artemis, Athena, Demeter, Gaea, Hera, Hestia, Rhea) and Rome (Venus, Diana, Minerva, Ceres, Terra, Juno, Vesta, Ops), Egypt (Isis), and later in Germany (Hertha), Scandinavia (Disa), India (Isi or Devaki), Asia (Cybele) and China (Shing-Moo) are commonplace in pagan goddess spiritualties and in Wicca. Of the various symbols Wicca has attributed to the Great Goddess (as they call her) the labyrinth seems to be one of the more important ones. I found the following definition of the labyrinth on a Wiccan website:

The Labyrinth is a symbol of death and rebirth.

Walking the Labyrinth is a mystical journey into the other realms, and back to Earth. It is a symbolic pilgrimage out of the small self, or busy mind, back Home to the Divine.

Unlike mazes, which were modeled on Labyrinths, you can’t get lost in a Labyrinth. Despite the twists and turns, there is one path in, which is also the path out. Just like life.

The evidence seems to indicate that the Labyrinth was presided over by the Great Goddess. In Crete, the Labyrinth was dedicated to the Goddess Ariadne, and was created as a dancing ground in Her honour. (Karl Kereny, Dionysos: Archetypal Image of Indestructible Life.) (Emphasis added).

By the by, the term Labyrinth comes from the word “labrys,” a double-ax that was used by priestesses during the Minoan civilization for sacrificial purposes. A woman who carried a double-ax was believed to have supernatural powers because she was connected to the Great Goddess. The double axe (labrys) is used in witchcraft to consecrate women to goddess worship. Read here. Christians who dabble in the labyrinth and its attended  practice of contemplative prayer is not worshipping the God of the Bible but are actually dabbling in witchcraft.

Mosaïek pastors VIEW SLIDE SHOW DOWNLOAD ALL

Christians who acknowledge that rebirth (regeneration) is secured through faith alone in the blood-sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God, will never venture to walk in the crooked paths of the satanic labyrinth that comes from the lowest parts of the abyss. Those who do are not only denying that there is but a single way to be reborn, they are blatantly treading a path that leads to hell. Guess what? The Mosaïek Church in Fairlands, Johannesburg, where Johan Geyser, Trevor Hudson, Gys du Plessis, Stephan Joubert, Ron Martoia and other well-known emergent pastors preach regularly has its own labyrinth where many have already, perhaps unknowingly, tread the path of Semiramis (the Great Goddess) right into Satan’s lair. My most sincere and honest plea is that they repent of their evil ways, stop treading in the path of the labyrinth and demand of their pastors that the labyrinth on their premises be destroyed. Should they succeed in doing that they may well be associated with the repentant sinners in Ephesus who brought their curious arts and books and burnt them in public to prove that their repentance and regeneration was not just a sham but a genuine act of obedience from the heart (Acts 19:19). On the other hand, they may be excommunicated and asked to leave the church but then at least they would prove that they truly love the Lord Jesus Christ with all their heart, mind and strength and that they are his true followers (1 Corinthians 11:19).

“Everything is Holy”⁷ a saying that has become an Emergent Church maxim is rooted in Goddess worship. We’ve seen earlier that one of Semiramis’ names was Gaea (in ancient Greece) and Terra (in ancient Rome) which in modern-day terms is Gaia. Sue Monk Kidd’s journey into Roman Catholic mysticism began when she started reading Thomas Merton’s books. She wrote:

We also need Goddess consciousness to reveal earth’s [Gaia’s, Terra’s] holiness . . . Matter becomes inspirited; it breathes divinity. Earth becomes alive and sacred . . .. Goddess offers us the holiness of everything. (Emphasis and parenthesis added).⁸

In Ray Yungen’s book A Time of Departing, posted at Lighthouse Trails Research, the author says “Monk Kidd had made the full transition to a spiritual view more in tune with Wicca than with Christianity. Now she worships the Goddess Sophia rather than Jesus Christ.” (Emphasis added) During my visits to the Mosaïek church in Fairlands, Johannesburg at several of their conferences I couldn’t help noticing the large array of portraits of women on the wall. The fact that it is very artistically painted is not the issue; the question we need to ask is: why do they place so much emphasis on women? They may argue that it is the artist’s style and forte to paint portraits of women instead of landscapes or anything else. Nonetheless, when their excessive emphasis on women adjoined to their unbiblical interpretation of Jesus as God’s Sophia (the feminine Greek word for wisdom) are taken into account, it becomes evident that it is their goal to accentuate the supposedly feminine side of God.

In September 2009, at a congress held at the Mosaïek Church Stephan Joubert spent an entire session to explain away Jesus Christ’s association with the purity story (Leviticus) in favor of the wisdom story (Proverbs). He made a big issue of Jesus being the Sage and Sophia from heaven. Indeed Jesus is the Wisdom of God but his is primarily a wisdom steeped in the foolishness of the preaching of his Word with a design to destroy the wisdom of the world.

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (1Co 1:19-25) (Emphasis assed).

Please note the wise interplay between the Sophia of God and the Sophia of the Greeks He intends to destroy. Contrary to the post modern belief that all wisdom comes from God (read here), the Lord of hosts cannot tolerate the wisdom of unbelievers or the wisdom that allegedly is entrenched in other religions. Although the emergent fraternity claim allegiance to the Sophia of God (ensconced in the foolishness of the preaching of his Word and his Cross) they are, as we’ve seen earlier, actually following the Sophia of the Greeks (Goddess worship) that is meant for destruction. Lillian Calles Barger, an ardent admirer of Sue Monk Kidd, says in her book Chasing Sophia, reclaiming the lost wisdom of Jesus,

This is why sophia—the feminine Greek word for wisdom—is a fitting motif for this hook. For those seeking to find their female voice, sophia has not remained merely a Greek word for wisdom. Borrowing from ancient images of wisdom as a woman, sophia becomes Sophia—a feminine, divine being. I discovered that the early Christian understanding of Jesus, as the Sophia of God, needs to be dusted off from centuries of neglect and reclaimed and re-imagined as an emotionally and spiritually powerful image. As a wisdom seeker and a lifelong follower of Jesus, I also recognized the need to untangle the meaning of Sophia. . .

. . . women felt betrayed by the institutional church and saw the very nature and basis of the Christian faith as a hindrance to their liberation. In workshop after workshop, we were challenged to do theology for ourselves and to “tell the truth” by being more honest about our lives. We were encouraged co “trouble the waters” of a patriarchal system and to reimagine the faith. The theology presented included substituting, if not completely replacing, Jesus with Sophia—the feminine personification of the Greek word for wisdom. This was a seemingly more appropriate image of the Divine for women to embrace. Sophia was blessed and worshiped in emotionally laden prayer and song. This was the first time I had heard of wisdom being used in this way.

Stephan Joubert said something similar at the Mosaïek Church’s congress that took place in September 2009 when he presented his paper called “Being a Radical Pilgrim and Prophet.”

Jesus is not a reformer. He is not a reformer trying to reform some of the stories. Jesus does not link onto, particularly, the purity story, never at all. Jesus, if I might, may put it like this, Jesus links onto the, to wisdom. And if you understand this, it will change the entire understanding of Jesus. Jesus takes the fourth story of Israel, the story that did not win, the story that belonged to the upper classes: the story of wisdom. (Emphasis added).

In Matthew Fox’s book called “A New Reformation!” he writes that we are in fact confronted with two churches: one expressed by the image of the Punitive Father, personified by a rigidly hierarchical church structure, repression of the feminine, . . . and the other expressed by the feminine figure of Wisdom, personified by a Mother/Father God of justice and compassion. It is time for Christians to choose whom it will follow: an angry exclusionary god or the loving open path of wisdom (Emphasis added).

In Roman Catholicism the Virgin Mary is venerated as the seat of wisdom which immediately suggests that Jesus, who is portrayed as the perpetual child in his mother’s arms, receives his wisdom from her. It started in Babylon with Semiramis, the archetypal Queen of Heaven, when she and her husband, Nimrod, built a tower that reached unto heaven instead of an altar unto the Lord. They established a religion that was built on Genesis 3:15 but with a satanic slant to it. Semiramis gave birth to Tammuz from an illegitimate relationship and spread the lie that he had an immaculate virgin birth. But it was not Tammuz that would bruise the serpent’s head; Semiramis herself would do it. It is a lie that is maintained to this day in the Roman Catholic Bible, the Douay-Rheims Bible.

I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. (Genesis 3:15) (Emphasis added).

Ancient Babylon built a Tower that reached unto heaven. A new Babylon is in the making and it is called the Emergent Church. Like ancient Babylon they too are building a “tower.” It is called a labyrinth which is embedded in the mysteries of the RCC’s contemplative spiritualties that supposedly brings you into the presence of God.

Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, “Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. Pay her back as she herself has paid back others, and repay her double for her deeds; mix a double portion for her in the cup she mixed. As she glorified herself and lived in luxury, so give her a like measure of torment and mourning, since in her heart she says, ‘I sit as a queen, I am no widow, and mourning I shall never see.’ For this reason her plagues will come in a single day, death and mourning and famine, and she will be burned up with fire; for mighty is the Lord God who has judged her.” And the kings of the earth, who committed sexual immorality and lived in luxury with her, will weep and wail over her when they see the smoke of her burning. They will stand far off, in fear of her torment, and say, “Alas! Alas! You great city, you mighty city, Babylon! For in a single hour your judgment has come.” And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their cargo anymore, cargo of gold, silver, jewels, pearls, fine linen, purple cloth, silk, scarlet cloth, all kinds of scented wood, all kinds of articles of ivory, all kinds of articles of costly wood, bronze, iron and marble, cinnamon, spice, incense, myrrh, frankincense, wine, oil, fine flour, wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and slaves, that is, human souls. “The fruit for which your soul longed has gone from you, and all your delicacies and your splendors are lost to you, never to be found again!” The merchants of these wares, who gained wealth from her, will stand far off, in fear of her torment, weeping and mourning aloud, “Alas, alas, for the great city that was clothed in fine linen, in purple and scarlet, adorned with gold, with jewels, and with pearls! For in a single hour all this wealth has been laid waste.” And all shipmasters and seafaring men, sailors and all whose trade is on the sea, stood far off and cried out as they saw the smoke of her burning, “What city was like the great city?” And they threw dust on their heads as they wept and mourned, crying out, “Alas, alas, for the great city where all who had ships at sea grew rich by her wealth! For in a single hour she has been laid waste. Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you saints and apostles and prophets, for God has given judgment for you against her!” Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, “So will Babylon the great city be thrown down with violence, and will be found no more; and the sound of harpists and musicians, of flute players and trumpeters, will be heard in you no more, and a craftsman of any craft will be found in you no more, and the sound of the mill will be heard in you no more, and the light of a lamp will shine in you no more, and the voice of bridegroom and bride will be heard in you no more, for your merchants were the great ones of the earth, and all nations were deceived by your sorcery. And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all who have been slain on earth.” (Revelation 18:4-24).

---

¹ Alexander Hislop: The Two Babylons Chapter I Distinctive Character of the Two Systems

² It was customary in the Old Testament to cut men or women or oxen in pieces and send their body parts throughout the nation to instill fear (Judges 19:29; 1 Samuel 11:7).

³ Alexander Hislop: The Two Babylons Chapter II Section II Sub-Section IV The Death of the Child

⁴ The name of a Phoenician deity, the Adonis of the Greeks. He was originally a Sumerian or Babylonian sun-god, called Dumuzu, the husband of Ishtar, who corresponds to Aphrodite of the Greeks. The worship of these deities was introduced into Syria in very early times under the designation of Tammuz and Astarte, and appears among the Greeks in the myth of Adonis and Aphrodite, who are identified with Osiris and Isis of the Egyptian pantheon, showing how widespread the cult became. The Babylonian myth represents Dumuzu, or Tammuz, as a beautiful shepherd slain by a wild boar, the symbol of winter. Ishtar long mourned for him and descended into the underworld to deliver him from the embrace of death (Frazer, Adonis, Attis and Osiris). This mourning for Tammuz was celebrated in Babylonia by women on the 2nd day of the 4th month, which thus acquired the name of Tammuz (see CALENDAR). This custom of weeping for Tammuz is referred to in the Bible in the only passage where the name occurs (Ezek 8:14). The chief seat of the cult in Syria was Gebal (modern Gebail, Greek Bublos) in Phoenicia, to the South of which the river Adonis (Nahr Ibrahim) has its mouth, and its source is the magnificent fountain of Apheca (modern `Afqa), where was the celebrated temple of Venus or Aphrodite, the ruins of which still exist. The women of Gebal used to repair to this temple in midsummer to celebrate the death of Adonis or Tammuz, and there arose in connection with this celebration those licentious rites which rendered the cult so infamous that it was suppressed by Constantine the Great.

⁵ The name Adonis, by which this deity was known to the Greeks, is none other than the Phoenician ‘Adhon, which is the same in Hebrew. His death is supposed to typify the long, dry summer of Syria and Palestine, when vegetation perishes, and his return to life the rainy season when the parched earth is revivified and is covered with luxuriant vegetation, or his death symbolizes the cold, rough winter, the boar of the myth, and his return the verdant spring.

Considering the disgraceful and licentious rites with which the cult was celebrated, it is no wonder that Ezekiel should have taken the vision of the women weeping for Tammuz in the temple as one of the greatest abominations that could defile the Holy House.

⁶ Alexander Hislop: The Two Babylons. Chapter II Section III, The Mother of the Child.

⁷ Rob Bell Velvet Elvis – Rethinking the Christian Faith, (Zondervan: Grand Rapids, 2005) 77.

⁸ Sue Monk Kidd: The Dance of the Dissident Daughter (San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins), pp. 162-163. Published: 1996.

A Prayer of Contrition

A Prayer to Ponder on

When Pastor Joe Wright was asked to open the new session of the Kansas Senate, everyone was expecting the usual politically correct generalities.  But, what they heard instead was a stirring prayer, passionately calling our country to repentance and righteousness.  The response was immediate and a number of legislators walked out during the prayer.

In six short weeks, the Central Christian Church (Wichita, Kansas) had logged more than 5 000 phone calls, with only 47 of those calls responding negatively.  Commentator Paul Harvey aired the prayer on the radio and received a larger response to this program that any other program he has ever aired.

The Central Christian Church is now receiving international requests for copies of this prayer from India, Africa, and Korea.  Pastor Joe’s prayer is reprinted here as an encouragement and challenge for each of us to stand for the truth of the Gospel whenever the Lord gives us the opportunity:

“Heavenly father, we come before You today to ask Your forgiveness and seek Your direction and guidance.  We know Your Word says, ‘Woe on those who call evil good,’ but that’s exactly what we have done.  We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values.  We confess that:

¨       We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word and called it pluralism,

¨       We have worshipped other gods and called it multiculturalism,

¨       We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle,

¨       We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery,

¨       We have neglected the needy and called it self-preservation,

¨       We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare,

¨       We have killed our unborn and called it choice,

¨       We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable,

¨       We have neglected discipline of our children and called it building self-esteem,

¨       We have abused power and called it political savvy,

¨       We have coveted our neighbour’s possessions and called it ambition,

¨       We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression,

¨       We have ridiculed the time-honoured values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.

Search us O God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and set us free.  Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent here by the people of Kansas, and who have been ordained by You to govern this great state.  Grant them the wisdom to rule, and may their decisions direct us to the center of Your will.  I ask it in the name of Your son, the Living Saviour, Jesus Christ, Amen.”

Sound familiar? We can add ” . . . in South Africa” after all the above except perhaps the eighth one although more blood has flown in our country than in Iraq and Iran combined.

A Paradox of our Time

A Paradox of our Time

This is as insightful as it is scary. A Columbine student

who experienced one of the many High School Massacres wrote:

 

“The paradox of our time in history is that

we have taller buildings, but shorter tempers;

wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints;

we spend more, but have less;

we buy more, but enjoy it less

We have bigger houses and smaller families;

more conveniences, but less time;

we have more degrees, but less sense;

more knowledge but less judgment;

more experts, but more problems;

more medicine, but less wellness.

We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values.

We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.

We’ve learned how to make a living, but not a life;

we’ve added years to life, not life to years.

We’ve been all the way to the moon and back, but,

have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbor.

We’ve conquered outer space, but not inner space;

we’ve cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul;

we’ve split the atom, but not our prejudice.

We have higher incomes, but lower morals;

we’ve become long on quantity, but short on quality.

 

These are the times of tall men, and short character; steep profits, and

shallow relationships.

These are the times of world peace, but domestic warfare;

more leisure, but less fun; more kinds of food, but less nutrition.

These are days of two incomes, but more divorce; of fancier houses, but broken homes.

It is a time when there is much in the show window and nothing in the stockroom;

a time when technology can bring this letter to you,

and a time when you can choose either to make a difference…or….

just hit delete.”