(E)merging into a plural spirituality

Since it’s inception in 1893 the Parliament of the World’s Religions has been involved in creating a global dialogue between all faiths. Its overriding purpose is to quell every conceivable kind of fanaticism, bigotry, Sectarianism and fundamentalism in order to foster harmony, peace and compassion between all the religions of the world. Their point of departure in achieving their goal is their assumption that religion is generally considered to be the main culprit in starting wars, inculcating violence and causing the despair most individuals and even whole nations experience in their everyday lives. They truly believe that in their efforts to neutralize fundamentalist doctrines for the sake of better relationships and to subdue enmity between religious groups, they can bring peace on earth.

The first Parliament of the World’s Religions was held in Chicago in 1893. On that occasion it was not an isolated event but formed part of the World Columbian Exposition in Chicago. The world-wide interest in this event was so huge that the organisers decided to schedule smaller conferences, called Congresses and Parliaments. The Parliament of the World’s Religions which ran from September 11 to September 27 turned out to be the biggest success, not only in its attendance but because it hosted representatives from both the Western and Eastern spiritual traditions for the very first time. Rudyard Kipling’s well-known lament “Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.” would be cast to the wind for evermore. One of the speakers was Anagarika Dharmapala who represented Southern Buddhism, the term which was then applied to Theravada Buddhism. Please make a mental note of the word Theravada as it shows to what degree the Parliament of the World’s Religions has influenced many well-known ecclesiastical leaders’ thinking and re-thinking processes in our post-modern society.

While reading one my sisters in the Lord’s e-mails I became aware that Christians need to become more aware of the terms and vocabulary the leaders within the ranks of the Emergent Church use when they communicate with one another on their websites and blogs. You’d be surprised to find how many words they’ve borrowed from Eastern religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism and the New Age. The most astounding thing, however, is to see how skilfully they intertwine these terms with biblical words in an attempt to bridge the gap as it were between Christianity and various other religions, particularly Buddhism. On his website “Velocityculture Learnings” Ron Martoia seems to be doing just that.

To get a clear picture of the “engine,” if you will, that propels the Emergent Church’s ideals to foster love, compassion, selfless servitude, charity amongst the poor and the destitute and a tireless effort to usher in the “Kingdom of God” here and now, we first need to stimulate our awareness in regard to the meaning of “SELF,” a concept that pops up in all the religions, and especially the Christian faith and Buddhism. Incidentally, it is very interesting to note that the prayer of “Thanksgiving for the World’s Religions” [1] offers “Thanks and praise for our Buddhist sisters and brothers for their peace and relinquishing of self.” This alone emphatically underscores the reasons why many “Christians”  endeavour to find tangent points and “similarities” between the Christian faith and Buddhism. It is on record that Stephan Joubert, in good faith with Rob Bell, has publically declared in one of his sermons that the Christian faith does not have a monopoly on the truth but that other religions such as Buddhism also faithfully cradle the truth.

It is widely accepted that the teaching on the nature of ‘SELF” is central to the religion of Buddhism and although it is one of the most difficult to understand the doctrine of “fully perceiving the nature of the self” cannot be separated from the achievement of “enlightenment.” It is not my intention to wander off into an in depth dissertation or critique on the Buddha’ teachings with regard the Five Skandhas [2] and its bearing on his belief concerning “No-Self” or “Non-self.” A google search on the internet will guide you into the highly esoteric world of Buddhism. Suffice is to say that the Buddha taught that the “self” or in layman’s terms “the essence of you” are not an integral, autonomous entity. The individual “self,” commonly known as the “ego,” is more correctly thought of as a by-product of the skandhas. The doctrine of “No-Self” may be seen by some as a nihilistic teaching. However, the “No-Self” in Buddhism, amounts more to an overcoming of the delusion of the individual “self” so that we may experience that which is not subject to birth and death.

My main concern in this comment is with Theravada Buddhism, or Southern Buddhism as it is sometimes called, which seems to have inspired Ron Martoia to blend together“insight meditation” and Saint Paul’s teachings on the carnal nature (“ego”) of man. “Insight meditation” or Vispassana as it is known in Buddhism means to gain insight into the nature of reality. In the Theravada Buddhist tradition three dhamma seals are identiified: Annica or imparmanence which states that everything is in a constant state of flux and also that nothing that exists ever ceases to exist; Dukkha or “unsatifactoriness” (dis-ease) which means that nothing in the physical or psychological realm can give man satisfaction or peace; Anatta or “Non-Self” (“No-Self”) This, as I said said earlier, is one of the core teachings of Buddhism. In contrast to the biblical view that man is a living soul (each individual having his/her own unique ego, self-will or free-will, personality, emotions), Buddhism asserts that there is no “self” as something permanent in the individual. According to the Theravada what we term as the “self,” personality or “ego” is nothing but the illusionary or delusionary outcome or product of the five skandhas and the way to overcome this delusion of “self” which in reality is “non-self” or no-self is through “insight meditation” or Vispassana. The ultimate goal thereof is to attain Nirvana, which is often added as a fourth dhamma. It is believed that the three dammas, together with the fourth dhamma, can be brought to a moment-by-moment experience through concentrated awareness which in turn leads to the achievement of wisdom (Gnosticism) and ultimately enlightenment. In short, enlightenment is an escape from samsara into a state of unspeakable bliss. The Theravada tradition in Buddhism believes that every individual can reach Nirvana (enlightenment) and become an arhat (sometimes called an arahant), which means a worthy one, through his/her own efforts without the external help of a god or gods or any outside forces. The primary means to attain Nirvana or enlightenment (the escape from the cycle of birth and death, i.e. incarnation) is through Vispassana meditation or “insight meditation”’ which simply means to change your world-view.

I must once again emphasize that this is in direct opposition to the biblical view of the “self” that needs to be denied and crucified daily in order to enjoy the abundant life Jesus Christ promised every newly-born child of God. Those of you who have been confronted with New Age teachings in your church and especially in the Emergent Church will have realized by now that the new emerging spirituality must at all cost rethink, re-invent, revamp, and re-interpret the core doctrines of Christianity or at least bring them on par with other religions that supposedly also cradle the truth. With this in mind, I would now like to invite you to evaluate with me Ron Martoia’s so-called ATTENTION/AWARENESS, which is also called insight meditation or witness awareness as he terms is. He begins his comment “Insight Mediation….Witness Awareness” with the following remark.

One of the great tools in ATTENTION/AWARENESS development (and this is very vertical) is what is called insight meditation or witness awareness.  This is essentially being able to watch yourself and your thoughts arising with nonjudgmental viewing.  Non-judgmental because judgment causes us to push stuff we need to be aware of into our shadow egoic selves.  We hide this from our view because we don’t like what we see and when that happens our ability to attend to it ceases. We have not done much in the Christian world to address this issue of shadow. (Emphasis added)

Please pay close ATTENTION to his use of the term “shadow egoic selves” and his suggestion that Christians should be doing much more in the Christian world to address the issue of shadow. The “shadow egoic self” is just another way of describing the Buddhist concept of “No-self” or “Non-self,” the delusionary or illusionary product of the so-called five skandhas. The “shadow egoic self” says Martoia, is the spot where we put the stuff we don’t like, causing us to lose our ability to attend to those things. By pushing those things of which we are being judgmental into the shadow egoic self (No-self” or “Non-self) we are actually feeding and boosting the “ego” which is but a delusion in the Buddhist world. The ultimate goal or purpose is to achieve like-mindedness without the distractions of a judgmental mindset which in turn can only be achieved by means of the setting aside of sound doctrine. This is how Ron Martoia articulated Paul’s ruling on how to overcome the “ego” or the patterns of the flesh, as he refers to it:

To use more Pauline biblical language, we have to learn to observe the patterns of the flesh, to step outside of ourselves with enough consistency we can observe the ways we are responding to the world around us. Formation of this sort starts in our heads…to be transformed by our minds being renewed (Romans 12.1-2). This IS NOT an injunction by Paul to go read a bunch of bible verses contrary to how this is often preached. This could not be what Paul had in mind.

The individual believers in Rome didn’t have a pocket or nightstand copy of the bible for individual usage. He had to mean something more like becoming aware of what is going on inside your head space.

The Christians in Rome had no need of a pocket or nightstand copy of the Bible to understand Paul’s earnest plea to present their bodies as a living sacrifice to God. I would have thought that someone as intelligent as Ron Martoia would at least have known that Paul was referring to the Old Testament sacrifices with which, of course, they were well acquainted. However, in stead of a dead sacrifice, like those in the Old Testament that could only be offered once and no more, he urged them to present themselves as perpetual living sacrifices in the service of God; the kind  of sacrifice Paul beseeched them to offer was to devote their entire lives to God as if they no longer had any claim on themselves and to accept everything God may have appointed or allowed to happen in their lives — sufferings, hardships, tribulations — with fortitude. In order to do this their minds needed to be transformed, not necessarily through a pocket or nightstand copy of the Bible, but by a steadfast will so as not to become conformed to the world, i.e. by not acting, talking, waking and thinking as the unbelieving worldlings were doing. The biblical adage “As a man thinks, so is he” applies here and by having your mind changed by the inner work of the Holy Spirit you will be transformed more and more into the likeness of Christ. Paul is simply saying that they should not only present their bodies but also their intellect (sound and fully alert minds) to the service of God. This is a far cry from any form of meditation, including “insight meditation” that requires the mind to reach a “no-mind” or completely passive state so that you may attain a non-judgemental euphoria of like-mindedness with everyone you may want to enter into a conversation with — even those who adhere to other religions. This is exactly why someone like Stephan Joubert, who is an avid admirer of Ron Martoia, can say something so absolutely unbiblical as the following:

It [the Emergent Church] involves people who have a passion to say [that] the world and its culture in our generation need to be won back to Christ. And therefore I am not going to criticise their culture but I’m going to engage it. Therefore, I’m not going to take on their spirituality and postulate my truths. I’m going to listen to what they have to say because I can prove [to them] the truth ad infinitum as I did in the 1960’s, and I can debate with a Buddhist or a Hindu and sit there with them and say ‘here is my truth, here are my stuff.’ But now as an Emerging Church guy I will say [to them], let us listen . . . I’m not going to try and change you but you also have the right to hear how I feel and I’m not going to make any excuses for who I am. I’m not going to force my religion down your throat.

Stephan Joubert may just as well have said to Jesus Christ.

I refuse to obey your command to go into all the world and make disciples of all the nations and to teach them to observe everything you commanded me. Nevertheless, I will sit down with them in an interfaith environment and cheerfully listen to what their religions teach, not for the purpose of becoming one of them but to prove to them that I respect the truths their faiths uphold. I’m not going to force my truths down their throat.

I can agree that Stephan should not postulate or force his truths down other peoples’ throats but I sincerely disagree that he should withhold God’s truths from people of other faiths. God is going to say to him.

Ezekiel 3:18 When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. (Emphasis added)

Christians may probably think that the term “witness awareness” is something unique to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and that it encourages the disciples of Jesus to be continually aware of their divinely ordained duty to be effective witnesses for Him. Not so! . . . It pops up ever so frequently in New Age jargon as well. The following explanation of what meditation is, appears on Chris Sadhuta Liaguno’s website.

Meditation is the art of being in the present moment, commonly related as a ‘no-mind’ state – where your thoughts and feelings cease to be the primary focus and your soul consciousness takes it’s righful place as the foremost awareness. This is also known by mystics as being the ‘witness’ of the world, or ‘being in the world and not of the world’, where curiosity and acceptance reign instead of judgement and interpretation.

In our ‘normal’ waking consciousness, typically our thoughts, feelings and body cravings take precedence over our soul’s awareness. There are specific techniques from various spiritual disciplines throughout the world which will enable the seeker to achieve a meditative state of awareness, however, when we take the time to allow ourselves to become fully engaged, fully present in any undertaking, the conscious, peaceful state associated with meditation becomes our every waking moment.

(The following excerpt is taken from “Your Book of Life: Accessing the Akashic Records” by Gary Bonnell, page 19. Full bibliography information is given in the Booklist/Resources section of this website.) The more an individual is capable of releasing his or her investment in the world of form, the more able they will be to enter the non-distracting state of Witness awareness. As Consciousness plays in the physical body it produces waves of rhythmic electrical impulses within the nerve centers of the brain and spinal cord. The frequency of these brain waves have been correlated with certain states of Consciousness. (Emphasis added)

“Witness awareness” may be summed up as a state of mind (the so-called “no-mind”) you attain through amongst others insight meditation (Buddhist Vispassana) in order to free your critical cognitive senses (which enables you to discern between right and wrong) from judgement and interpretation so that curiosity (the art of stimulating“conversational dialogue” and to listen to others without judging them) and acceptance may govern your “witness.”  Ron Martoia, as we’ve seen from the quote above, says that “This is essentially being able to watch yourself and your thoughts arising with non-judgemental viewing. This is in direct conflict with the teaching of the Bible:

1 Corinthians 2:15 But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him].

I have often wondered how some of our most revered South African clergy can speak so highly of Emergent Church leaders like Leonard Sweet, Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Ron Martoia  and many others who openly and unashamedly say things on public platforms and the internet that contradict the Word of God. I marvel even more when they defend their heresies by claiming that they are truly blood-washed followers of Jesus Christ. Serious condemnations such as the following in the Word of God don’t seem to bother them at all.

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

They all have apparently been so deeply enthralled by “witness awareness” meditation, contemplative and centering prayer as well as the so-called “silence” and other meditation techniques, (which allegedly endow them with a humble and non-judgmental “no-mind” attitude), that they have willingly abdicated any vestiges of discernment they may have had in the past in favour of a mindless and euphoric acceptance of everything that is anti-God, anti-Christ and anti-Bible. In fact, they seem to be happy people who love one another very dearly despite all the things they may say and think (re-think) about God and his Word. Whenever you confront them with God’s Word they do not see it as a necessary exhortation but as an outright judgment and retaliate by “non-judgmentally” accusing you of fundamentalism, condescendence, spiritual bigotry, sectarianism and exclusivism. Some of them even go so far by labeling you an agent of the devil (Now that’s what I call a “non-egoic-shadow-self-non-judgmental-attitude” because in stead of pushing the person whom he does not like into his egoic shadow self, he has dealt with him severely by calling him an agent of the devil). Indeed, they have developed and fine-tuned “non-judgmental judgment” into an art that transcends all other judgmental attitudes and wreaks of fundamentalism. In fact, they have merely replaced their judgemental fundamentalism with their own non-judgmental fundamentalism. Stephan Joubert’s comments on their e-church site is replete with non-judgemental remarks  about the institutionalized churches.

In taking a closer look at all the meditation techniques the Emergent leaders pursue and practice, it becomes evident that they have bought into nothing else but a cultic form of mind control. Any technique or method (including hypnotism, slain-in-the-spirit, and all forms of meditation) utilized to eliminate your god-given free-will that enables you to critically appraise things in order to either accept or reject them, amounts to mind control. I recently read a very  moving testimony of Jennifer Porter, an ex fashion model who joined the ICC (International Church of Christ) after she had had a genuine and biblically grounded born-again experience. She was a fashion-model in Europe when the Lord convinced her that she desperately needed Him to be her Saviour. Like so many young converts whose lack of discernment in their spiritual toddler years make them easy prey for cultic movements and churches, she got caught up in the ICC (International Church of God). Her parents became very concerned about her involvement with the church who abused their members psychologically, emotionally and spiritually. They thoroughly researched the ICC before they made any attempt to intervene and try to win back their daughter out of an environment that consumed her time and energy. During her vacation in January 1999 her parents invited a few ex members of the ICC and a minister to speak to her over a weekend. At first she was disappointed with her parents and very angry because they had invited them but consented to listen to hem. Gradually she realized that what they related to her proved beyond any doubt that the church was cultic in nature. She was above all unhappy with the way they mishandled the doctrine of salvation and she couldn’t get to grips with their belief that they were “the one true church” which incidentally is one of the main traits of a cult.  It was very painful for her when she decided to leave the church because she had made many good friends over the years. Nonetheless, she wanted to obey God regardless of the consequences. She eventually wrote a letter to her friends in the church.

Being the writer that I am, I spent late nights at Wellspring writing down everything I learned. I started writing a short letter to my friends in the ICC, with the intention of helping them see the Biblical issues that were being violated in the church. I learned so much and had such a fever to express it that the letter grew and grew.

I wanted to talk to the other women I had converted but they were staying at the leaders’ houses, and the leaders had told them that I was deceived, not a true disciple, and not to talk to me. I copied my letter and passed it out to the people I loved, delivering it to the leaders’ houses last. It felt like I was being chopped in two. I loved the people so dearly that it killed me to leave the church, but my hands were tied; the Word was being manipulated and I loved God and the integrity of His Word more than I loved them.

The reason why I included Jennifer Porter’s testimony in my comment is to show you how easy it is to be deceived. Had she not honoured God’s Word and his doctrines above her friends and fellow church members she would probably have fallen deeper into deception. We are living in exceedingly difficult times and in some cases choices have to be made which most Christians would probably prefer to ignore if it were possible. However, a Christian’s allegiance to Jesus Christ and his Word must inevitably lead to enmity in his or her own family circle and sometimes even their churches. Jesus said:

Matthew 10:34-39 Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. “For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. “And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.”He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it.

The Emergents hardly ever fight the good fight for the faith that was once delivered to us by the apostles. They seem to be more concerned about the status and integrity of their fellow-emergents than the Word of God, despite the many weird things they often say in public about Jesus Christ and his Gospel, redemption and the Kingdom of God. For them the integrity of the Gospel and the unadulterated preaching thereof is less important because the quoting thereof fosters a judgemental attitude.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

[1] From the book “All in Good Faith: A Resource Book for Multi-Faith prayer” by Jean Potter and Marcus Braybrooke, that was used during the 1999 “Parliament of the World’s Religions” in Cape Town.

[2] Skandha is the Sanskrit word for “heap” of “aggregate.” The Buddha taught that every individual is a combination of five aggregates, viz. form, sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness.

Who are the real "Christian" Cyber Bullies?

If Jesus’ disciples and Paul had all been alive today and living in South Africa our dear friend and enemy-lover, Guillaume Smit, would probably have branded them “Christian Cyber bullies” and “agents of the devil.” I say this on account of Guillaum’s reluctance to quote any of them on his blog for fear that his own agenda may be opened wide and revealed to the entire world for what it really is — an attack on the core doctrines of Jesus Christ. This is what he said amongst other things:

“The damage these Christian Cyber bullies inflict, is tremendous. As these things go, they attract a multitude of readers who only want to hear the bad news about people. Their frequent quoting of Scripture hides the fact that they are only busy with slander in the worst possible form – the incessant and unsolicited attack on God-loving Christians who try to reach this generation for Christ. The Christian Cyber bully accuses other Christians of departing from biblical principles, while they negate the second most important command given by God – loving another as you would love yourself. I can easily quote a few other texts from the New Testament that underscores the primacy of this principle, but I won’t.” (Emphasis added). Read the entire article here.

To what do we owe Guillaum’s most recent scathing and ill-worded attack on all those who in honour of God and his command are earnestly contending for the faith that was once delivered to the saints? (Jude 1:3). Hamlet’s famous quote from Shakespeare’s book could easily have been applied to his diatribe with only a slight alteration; in stead of saying “There is something rotten in the state of Denmark” we ought to contend that “There is something rotten in state of the Emergent Church.” Could it be that Guillaume hurriedly and irritatingly grabbed the first opportunity he could find to demonize the “Christian cyber bullies” and “agents of the devil” head-on after he had read my comment “Stel ‘n hemelse wag aan voor jou mond” . . . sodat derduisende mislei kan word?” (“Place a heavenly guard before your mouth . . . so that thousands may be misled?”)? Perhaps we should do Guillaume at least some honour and look at what he said with sincerity and circumspection. Would you join me while I scrutinize the things he said in the light of God’s word?

• “The damage these Christian Cyber bullies inflict, is tremendous.” I really couldn’t help smiling when I read this. Perhaps Guillaume should sit down sometime and quietly ponder the great possibility that it is he and his emerging friends who are inflicting tremendous damage to the church and the Christian faith. In one of my recent comments, which he seems to have found so profoundly aggravating, I merely quoted Brian McLaren who openly and brazenly heralded the groundbreaking news that he and other “deeply committed Christians” were going to join Muslims in their Ramadan festival this year. I have heard many strange and odd things in my life but Brian McLaren’s claim that he and his friends are “deeply committed Christians” is a real prize-winner. Do you know what a deeply committed Christians is, Guillaume? Please bear with me while I quote to you some groundbreaking truths from God’s Word. You have twice made it clear that you yourself are reluctant to quote relevant Bible verses, but please bear with me and read these verses with an open and receptive heart.

2 John 9 Anyone who runs on ahead [of God] and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ [who is not content with what He taught] does not have God; but he who continues to live in the doctrine (teaching) of Christ [does have God], he has both the Father and the Son.

John 8:31 So Jesus said to those Jews who had believed in Him, If you abide in My word [hold fast to My teachings and live in accordance with them], you are truly My disciples.

John 14:15 If you [really] love Me, you will keep (obey) My commands.

John 14:21 The person who has My commands and keeps them is the one who [really] loves Me; and whoever [really] loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I [too] will love him and will show (reveal, manifest) Myself to him. [I will let Myself be clearly seen by him and make Myself real to him.]

Brian McLaren and his “deeply committed Christian” friends have wilfully and disrespectfully disobeyed Jesus Christ who commanded us not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers, and most certainly not with their religious practices and festivals. And yet McLaren has the audacity like that of a well-perfumed skunk (1) to say “We, as Christians, humbly seek to join Muslims in this observance of Ramadan as a God-honoring expression of peace, fellowship, and neighborliness.” “As a God-honouring expression” while Muslims dishonour Him by refusing to admit that He has a Son who died for all (including the Muslims)? Do you as as a self-proclaimed God-loving Christian approve of Brian McLaren’s disobedience of God and Rob Bell’s brazen “unequal yoke” with the Dalai Lama (who is worshipped as a god) at his Seeds of Compassion Conference? You would do well to change your disposition from a “God-loving Christian” to a “God-fearing Christian” who honours, respects and obeys His commands, such as the one I have quoted above. Being boastful of one’s love for God while one disrespectfully dishonours and disobeys Him will most certainly be seen as a highly hypocritical misdemeanour by the Muslim world, for they know with precise and accurate knowledge what it means to obey Allah. In fact, only the so-called “God-loving” Christians do not know how to obey and honour the God of the Bible, especially when they are so fearful and reluctant to quote Him from His Word.

I have a slight suspicion that you would not repudiate Brian McLaren’s sharing in the Muslims’ celebration of Ramadan while claiming to be a deeply committed Christian. How do I know? Your approval of his book “The Secret Message of Jesus” which you advocate on your blog is ample proof thereof. Do you as a self-proclaimed God-loving Christian approve McLaren’s warped view of the Gospel when he says things like the following?

“I don’t think we’ve got the gospel right yet. What does it mean to be “saved?” (Read here)

“I must add, though, that I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts.”  (A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 260)

I cannot question your sincerity when you say that you are trying to reach this generation for Christ but I do put a big question mark behind your continued affirmation of Brian McLaren who does not even know what it means to be saved. I sincerely and prayerfully hope that you know what it means because you will never be able to reach this generation for Christ if you do not know what it means to be saved.

• As these things go, they attract a multitude of readers who only want to hear the bad news about people. The fact of the matter is that, by the grace of God, many Christians’ eyes have been opened to the infinitely dangerous teachings of the emerging church. The problem with you guys is that you truly believe that when fundamentalist Christians contend for the faith that they are targeting you personally. The sooner you realize that you are not that important the better for you. Do you really think that I am going to waste my time to target you personally when there is much more at stake in this warfare we are waging on a daily basis? This warfare is all about sounding the alarm and to pluck the precious souls of men and women out of the fire of the infamous labyrinth of lies the emerging church is proliferating throughout the entire world. How odd that you should suggest that my blog attracts a multitude of readers while some of you have already made fun of the insignificant amount of people my blog attracted in the past. Come on Guillaume, give credit where credit is due! I really don’t have many readers but I’m growing.

• Their frequent quoting of Scripture hides the fact that they are only busy with slander in the worst possible form. We are commanded (and that includes you) to test the spirits to discern whether they are from God (1 John 4:1). In order to do so we must at all cost know what God’s Word teaches and to refute any argument that exalts itself against the knowledge of God. I’m sure you will agree that it is the TRUTH that sets one free. How on earth would you ever be able to present the TRUTH to a generation you are trying to reach for Christ when you refuse to quote from God’s Word. If you are so certain that my arguments exalt itself against the knowledge of God then it is your God-loving duty to show me from Scripture that I am wrong and need to repent or at least make amends. Why do you need to do that? . . . Because it is the worst possible sin one can do and that is to lead people astray away from God, Jesus Cjhrist and his Word.

• The Christian Cyber bully accuses other Christians of departing from biblical principles, while they negate the second most important command given by God – loving another as you would love yourself. I can easily quote a few other texts from the New Testament that underscores the primacy of this principle, but I won’t.” I have reiterated again and again in the past that love without truth means nothing — zilch, nada, zero. You may recall that Jesus once said this superbly quotable TRUTH: “A time will come, however, indeed it is already here, when the true (genuine) worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father is seeking just such people as these as His worshipers” (John 4:23). You may have noticed that He did not say “in spirit and in love.” Is “love” of lesser importance or of no importance? No! certainly not! But the very fact that the genuine worshippers worship Him in TRUTH is the very proof that they love God and their neighbours because they know that the TRUTH sets people free and NOT a humanly generated love that tolerates lies, deceit and anti-biblical doctrines. The TRUTH of God alone sets people free from bondage to sin, Satan and the world because God’s TRUTH is the embodiment of His Love who is Christ, the only Truth, the only Way and the only Life. If you are really and truly a God-loving person then you should start telling the lost generation you are trying to reach for Christ the TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH. I can assure you that Brian McLaren’s assertion “I don’t think we’ve got the gospel right yet. What does it mean to be “saved?” is NOT the TRUTH and will never reach this generation for Christ. The TRUTH is in 1 John 5:13

I write this to you who believe in (adhere to, trust in, and rely on) the name of the Son of God [in the peculiar services and blessings conferred by Him on men], so that you may know [with settled and absolute knowledge] that you [already] have life, yes, eternal life.

Who’s the liar here — is it God or Brian McLaren? I don’t know about you but I prefer to believe God who is not capable of telling a lie. Please remember that the faith which John refers to was qualified by Jesus when He said: “He who believes in Me [who cleaves to and trusts in and relies on Me] as the Scripture has said, From his innermost being shall flow [continuously] springs and rivers of living water” (John 7:38). Have you noticed, Guillaume, how important Jesus regarded the Scripture as opposed to your own magna carte of “I can easily quote a few other texts from the New Testament that underscores the primacy of this principle, but I won’t.” Indeed, you won’t because you have a rather eschewed view of what genuine love is. Your love, like that of the emergent brotherhood, boils down to a tolerance of every conceivable religious persuasion, tolerance of everyone who has no qualms whatsoever to be yoked to the enemies of the cross of Jesus Christ, and an intolerance and animosity of everyone who dares to question the doctrines of the emergent church and its adherents. In your view the one’s who dare to contend for the faith that was once delivered to the saints are the enemies of the cross and not those who are blatantly disobedient to God and call themselves “deeply devoted Christians” and are brazenly fellowshipping with unbelievers in their religious festivals and practices.

I urge you to repent of your evil ways and to start learning what true love is in the light of God’s Word so that you may truly begin to reach this generation for Christ according to his will and not according to the doctrines of the abominable emergent church. Like them you are paving the way for Antichrist of whom God said:

Daniel 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace [tolerance, mutual love, prosperity] shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

(1) A “well-performed skunk” is the post-modern name for a fox. You may recall that Jesus once said: “tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected” when the Pharisees warned Him of Herod’s intentions to kill Him (Luke 13:32-33). No one, not even hell itself, is going to prevent Him from building his church, and least of all the Emerging Church that is venturing to transform the church (Matthew 16:18).

tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.

An Ecumenical Post Modern, Post Apartheid Missional Church

Since the Conference hosted by the Faculty of Theology at the University of Stellenbosch and Communitas from 18-20 May 2009 on the theme “What can we learn from the book of Acts about being a Missional Church?” the Book of Acts has suddenly become the new Magna Carta for the missional church in South Africa. Several questions ensue from the Dutch Reformed Church’s unexpected interest in Acts. If Acts is a trailblazer in regard to effective local and global missionary work, why has the church delayed its imperatives to study and implement what Jesus Christ’s apostles taught and practiced in Acts? What has motivated the DRC to embark at this late stage in the history of the church on a research programme that will work on seven themes in the Book of Acts over a period of three years? Are they aiming to reach the lost with the unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ so that as many lost sinners as possible may be saved? Or, is she working toward the inauguration of the Kingdom of God on earth in which every conceivable religious ragtag and bob-tail is welcome? Why is the DRC’s younger generation clergy obsessed with the ancient practices and experiential theology and disciplines of the so-called Desert Fathers, i.e. contemplative prayer, centering prayer, labyrinths, breath prayers, the silence, solitude etc., when these disciplines do not feature in the book of Acts? To find some answers to these questions it might be feasible to pay attention to the names of distinguished missiologists who keep on popping up in the ongoing discussions on the blogs of DRC pastors and students on the internet.

A name that seems to be on every “Acts-orientated” follower of Jesus’ lips is David Jacobus Bosch. He was a missiologist in South Africa who died in 1992 in a tragic car accident only a year after he published his monumental book, Transforming Mission. He formulated the concept of AC, the “Alternate Community” in South Africa which was born out of  his strong aversion to the Apartheid system. In his book “Mission and the Alternative Community,” pp. 8-9. Bosch wrote:

“The church has tremendous significance for society precisely because it [exists] as a uniquely separate community . . . . We have to work consistently for the renewal of the church—the alternative community—and precisely in that way at the renewal of society.” (Emphasis added)

Bosch’s definition of the church as a uniquely separate community seems to contradict his strong aversion to the Apartheid system. Wasn’t it the “doctrine of separateness” of the Apartheid system that led the politicians to believe that they could change and renew society? And yet, Bosch advocated an alternative community (the church) as precisely the entity to renew society. How can a uniquely separate community (embodied in the church) renew the society when today’s society advocates unity in diversity, centralization and globalization? Either the church needs to transform into a unified society or the society needs to be transformed into a uniquely separate church community. Having seen the direction the emergent church is going it is obvious that the missional church is opting for a unified and centralized community or society. As soon as the ecclesiae flirt with politicized methods (such as social action or activism) to transform, renew or refurbish society in order to stamp out social injustices, disparities between the rich and the poor and other communal discrepancies, they inevitably need to shift and even erase boundaries so as to engage different cultures and religions in an effort to find joint ways to reform society. In some instances it inadvertently and in others deliberately leads to a compromise of one’s beliefs and principles. To illustrate, I would like to quote to you what Lesslie Newbigin said in an interview in 1988. Newbigin hailed Bosch’s book Transforming Mission as “a kind of Summa Missiologica” that “will surely be the indispensable foundation for the teaching of missiology for many years to come.” (This endorsement is found on the back cover of the paperback version of Transforming Mission). Andrew Walker interviewed Bishop Lesslie Newbigin in 1988.

WALKER: How do you answer people when they say to you, ‘Why, Bishop Newbigin, do you believe in the incarnation and the resurrection of Christ?’ I mean, how would you suggest to a modern world that such a belief is credible?

NEWBIGIN: Well, ultimately, of course (and here we see my Reformed background), I come to the doctrine of election. I mean that by his mysterious grace God took hold of me, an unbelieving, pondering person, and put me in a position where the reality of Jesus Christ, crucified and risen, became for me the one clue that I could follow in making sense of a very perplexing world.

The test, of course, can only come at the end. I would want to claim that that clue ultimately gives one a kind of rationality that is more inclusive of the whole of human experience than the real, though limited, rationality of the reductionist and rationalist scientific point of view. But at the end of the day, we have to wait for the day of judgment. There is an element of risk, there is an element of commitment involved, where you don’t pretend to have something – that is, if there were some way by which I could prove the authority of Jesus Christ from outside, then that would be my authority and not Jesus Christ. I can only point to him.

WALKER: Given that you can point to him, do you think it reasonable or unreasonable to suggest that to be a Christian does involve some minimal amount of beliefs?

NEWBIGIN: Oh yes, surely it does.

WALKER: I mean, if somebody was to come here, put you into a corner and say, ‘Now look here Bishop, what have you got to believe to be a believing Christian?’, what would you say were the basics?

NEWBIGIN: I would simply say, ‘Jesus Christ, the final and determinative centre around which everything else is understood.’ If that is there, I am not enthusiastic about drawing exact boundaries. I think you can define an entity by its boundaries or by its centre. I think that Christianity is an entity defined by its centre. So provided a person is, as it were, ‘looking to Jesus’, and seeing him as the central, decisive, determinative reality in relation to which all else is to be understood, then even if his ideas are weird or off-beat, I would regard him as a brother in Christ. (Emphasis added)

According to Lesslie Newbigin and his rendering of the doctrine of election,  Jesus Christ is apparently merely the one clue which all men can follow to make sense of a very perplexing world. His statement fits in perfectly well with the emergent perspective of being a follower of Christ. Jesus Christ is no longer the unique Way, Truth and Life because such an exclusive assertion stifles a working relationship between the church and the non-Christian religions who find it very offensive. Christ is seen merely as the epitome of sacrificial living which He demonstrated in His sacrificial death on the cross, motivating his followers to follow his example, to topple the walls of social injustices and make sense of a very perplexing world. The  problem is that this is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Nowhere between the two covers of the entire Bible are Christians given a mandate to renew or change society. Their mandate is to go into all the world, make disciples of individuals within every society (nation) and to teach them to observe everything He commanded them to do.

To see Jesus Christ as the epicentre of one’s existence is a very noble and honourable thing to do, but what significance does the epicentre have, if any, when it is stripped of exact boundaries? (i.e. exact doctrines such as “I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through Me.”) Surely, the entrenchment of Jesus Christ as the epicentre of your life involves obedient submission to His doctrines and His calling to herald the unadulterated doctrines of His grace (2 John verse 9). Before I continue, it is of the utmost importance to articulate very carefully what is meant by the drawing or setting up of doctrinal boundaries. First of all, it does not entail a separation or exclusion of people from the mercies of God (Titus 2:11). God extends His grace to all people, no matter what their present position with regard to their creed, race, and ethnicity may be. Consequently, these exact doctrinal boundaries are not drawn to exclude people who are presently confined within the boundaries of other faiths but to break through those boundaries, and to translate the confined within those boundaries out of their present position in the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of His dear Son (Colossians 1:13). The translation is thus a transference from without the confines of one set of kingdom boundaries into the confines of another set of Kingdom boundaries where bound sinners are set free in Jesus Christ. In essence it an individualistic salvivic experience through faith in Jesus Christ and obedience to the demands of His Gospel, by which each and every individual repentant sinner is placed on the Rock within the boundaries of the Kingdom of God, the boundaries being the sovereign will of God as expressed in His eternal doctrines. The post modern missionary model has shifted from an individualistic salvivic experience to a communal, transformational and reconciliatory missional paradigm which finds its niche in the emergent church’s view of the Kingdom of God — an all inclusive universalistic  Kingdom which is perhaps defined best by Rob Bell’s statement “a giant resurrection rescue” in one of his Nooma videos. Both the Reformed en Emergent fraternities have a keen interest in the establishment and progression of God’s Kingdom on earth, Lesslie Newbigin states:

The church is the bearer to all the nations of a gospel that announces the kingdom, the reign, and the sovereignty of God. It calls men and women to repent of their false loyalty to other powers, to become believers in the one true sovereignty, and so to become corporately a sign, instrument, and foretaste of that sovereignty of the one true and living God over all nature, all nations, and all human lives. It is not meant to call men and women out of the world into a safe religious enclave but to call them out in order to send them back as agents of God’s kingship. – Lesslie Newbigin, Foolishness to the Greeks

Newbigin’s call to repentance is not based on the individual’s need to confess his own personal sins to a holy and righteous God who extends His arm of unlimited grace through the finished work of His Son on the cross to every single human being, but on the need for a corporate change of loyalties, i.e. a corporate and  societal transformation. David Bosch had a similar view of the Kingdom.

As we call people (back) to faith in God through Jesus Christ, we must help them to articulate an answer to the question ‘What do we have to become Christians for?’ At least part of the answer to this question will have to be: ‘In order to be enlisted into God’s ministry of reconciliation, peace, and justice on earth.’ It should be natural for Christians to be committed to these values. In a sense . . . there is already very much believing in Western society. What we do not need, then, is to introduce more religion. The issue is not to talk more about God in a culture that has become irreligious, but how to express, ethically, the coming of God’s reign, how to help people respond to the real questions of their context, how to break with the paradigm according to which religion has to do only with the private sphere.” — David J. Bosch, Believing in the Future (Emphasis added)

Here again the communal transformational and reconciliatory missional model as opposed to the individualistic salvivic model comes to the fore. In his book “Transforming Mission” Bosch wrote:

Even so, personal conversion is not a goal in itself. To interpret the work of the church as the ‘winning of souls’ is to make conversion into a final product, which flatly contradicts Luke’s understanding of the purpose of mission. Conversion does not pertain merely to an individual’s act of conviction and commitment; it moves the individual believer into the community of believers and involves a real — even a radical — change in the life of the believer, which carries with it moral responsibilities that distinguish Christians from ‘outsiders’ while at the same time stressing their obligation to those ‘outsiders’. (David Bosch: Transforming Mission, pg. 117)

Jesus’ mission was first and foremost to the individual sinner. He came to seek and to save the lost sinner (Luke 19:10). This is borne out by his salvivic encounters with individuals like Nicodemus, Zacchaeus,, the Samaritan Woman, Mary (Lazarus’ sister) who washed his feet with her tears and dried them with her hair, the blind man on whose eyes the Lord put clay to heal him, Peter, Paul and many others. Hadn’t personal conversion been uppermost in Jesus’ mind, He wouldn’t have given so much of his time to talk to and present His Gospel to individual persons. Missiology would indeed have been a non sequitur if it was not focused on the salvation of the lost individual which, to reiterate, was the main purpose for Jesus’ incarnation and not the transformation or renewal of whole societies. In fact, Jesus Himself said that very few people are being saved because the majority do not find the strait gate and the narrow way (Matthew 7:13 & 14). One of the reasons why so many are not finding the strait gate and narrow way is because it is so fundamentally and inexorably narrow-minded. It is too exclusive and condescending according to the emergent adherents. By the by, in another virulent attack on fundamentalists, Cobus van Wyngaard said the following on his blog recently:

In his [Scot McKnight’s] book Finding Faith Loosing Faith he talks about a number of crisis that leads to deconversion. I’ll order the book sometime, and will mention them more when I get the book, but form [sic] today’s talk Scot confirmed one thing: Fundamentalism creates extremely good soil for atheism to flourish in. I’ve been saying this for a long time now. The crisis that fundamentalism creates is that an expectation on infallability [sic] of the Bible is created that cannot be met, and the text never intended to meet, when that realisation dawn on someone, it has the potential of leading to atheism.

It appears that rev. Cobus van Wyngaard welcomes Scot McKnight’s attack on fundamentalism as an ex cathedra announcement of pure infallibility. Today’s emergent de-converted “saints” are strangely prone to an infallible choice of making fallible men the epicentre of their lives while claiming to be followers of Jesus Christ who once uttered the most fundamental truth in the history of mankind — “no one comes to the Father but through me.” The apostle Luke penned down an equally fundamental truth in the book of Acts that echoes Jesus’ words in John 14:6: “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Is Luke’s missionary dictum in Acts 4:12 fallible? If Cobus is correct in saying that God’s Word is fallible and that any claim to infallibility breeds atheists, why do the DRC clergy want to learn from Acts about how to be a missional church? It is preposterous to think that you will be able to proclaim Luke’s missionary dictum while you have doubts about the infallibility of God’s Word, unless of course you want to convert fundamentalist bred atheists to your own status of so-called de-converted Jesus-followers.

To reiterate: Jesus Christ is no longer the Way, the Truth and the Life because the non-Christian religions with whom the post modern missional church aims to work together to bring about an ethical transformation in society, find that doctrine highly offensive. Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross is merely an example of sacrificial living in behalf of the poor and the destitute and the means to take on social injustices, poverty, crime and violence. There are several examples of this of which the most recent is Rick Warren’s PEACE PLAN. To accomplish a global transformational paradigm shift He suggests that we need to have a critical mass and in order for that to happen there must be a crossing of all barriers – unity is a must! “Critical mass” is a scientific term which, used in a societal frame, refers to “an explosion in global consciousness capable of ‘touching’ or transforming all of humankind.” The idea is that when a certain critical number of people all share the same awareness, then change can come to all people’s thinking because of the critical mass.”

From Rick Warren’s website (pastors.com) “This is a time, which calls for a critical mass of transformational leaders who will commit to creating a synergy of energy within their circle of influence so new level of social, economic, organizational and spiritual success can be reached. We have not, however, developed the leaders we need for this noble task. To reach such heights, we will need to un-tap the leadership potential of skillful leaders who are successfully directing various organizations and systems. Some of these men and women, knowledgeable and committed, to there profession, will be the transformational leaders we need to create the needed synergy of energy.” (Emphasiss added)

Are the DRC leaders’ efforts to birth a new missional strategy in South Africa focused on achieving this critical mass? The DRC clergy are already talking about “Mission as reconciliation” (Klippies Kritzinger) and “Acts being a book about crossing boundaries.” (Cobus van Wyngaard, My Contemplations). Here’s what Cobus and so many other DRC reverends believe:

Our group worked on Acts 15-20. Between 11:00 and 12:00 today, we identified the following as the most important theological thread for South Africa today:

Looking at our text, but also at the whole of Acts, we notice that Acts tell the story of boundries that was crossed. Of course, we didn’t notice this first, the scholars that introduced he discussion also pointed us to this. However, what we believe is important is that the boundry crossing always caused the Jerusalem church to change their theology. When Peter visit Cornelius, the theology change. At the meeting in Jerusalem, the fact that boundries have been crossed changes the theology.

That we need to cross boundries is commonly accepted in South Africa today. But crossing boundries need to change the theology of those on the inside. (Emphasis in the original text).

It is rather sad to hear learned men of the cloth say that the church at Jerusalem in the book of Acts always changed it’s theology and that when Peter visited Cornelius the theology also changed. The fact of the matter is that their theology never changed. If Peter’s, all the other apostles’ and the Jerusalem church’s theology needed change every time they crossed boundaries it would mean that their original theology was erroneous and that their conversion experience was false. What was their theology? The apostle Peter received their theology from the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost when he encapsulated it as follows:

1) Jesus Christ was crucified and slain. (. . . this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death (Acts 2:23).

2) Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. (But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power (Acts 2:24)

3) His resurrection was prophesized in advance according to the Scriptures. (And so, because he [David] was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants on his throne, he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that He was neither abandoned to Hades, nor did His flesh suffer decay (Acts 2: 30, 31).

4) His sacrificial death and resurrection demands a response through faith unto the remission of sins. Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2: 38)

Paul proclaimed the very same message much later in his first letter to the Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 15:1-5 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

It was not the early church’s theology that changed or needed to change but some of the Jewish Christians’ perceptions in regard to God’s dealings with the gentiles. Peter’s vision of a great sheet being let down from heaven, containing clean and unclean animals, was not to teach him that he needed to alter his theology but to discard his Hebraic version of “Apartheid” which led him to believe that he would become unclean if he supped and dined with gentiles. He was rather slack in his understanding of Jesus’ words “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.” ”Any man” to him seemed to have referred to the Jews only, in much the same way the Calvinists regard “any man” or “the world” as a reference to the predestined elect only. Peter’s mind and attitude, not his theology, was changed when he came to the following conclusion :

Acts 15:9-11 “He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” (Emphasis added)

Have you noticed the profundity of Peter’s statement?  Peter said in effect: “We, the Jews, are saved in the very same way they, the gentiles are saved — by faith and faith alone in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross” He did not say that they, the Gentiles, are saved the same way as we, the Jews are. Peter’s statement of faith reached back into history 430 years before the Law was given and when Abraham, then still a Gentile, was made righteous through his faith in Jesus Christ (Galatians 3;17, 18). Gone was Peter’s exclusive brand of Hebraic Apartheid between Jewish and Gentile Christians who believed the same way. Does that imply that Christians have the right to change their theology or to compromise their faith when cultural boundaries are crossed? By no means, for if they do they cannot claim to believe the same way as Peter or the Gentile Christians in Acts to whom he referred.

Now, let us return to Newbigin’s doctrine of election. The question is, how do you reconcile two apparently irreconcilable opposites — the one, a system which draws exact boundaries between the elect and the non-elect (reprobate) and contained one of the building bricks in the wall of Apartheid, and the other, a system which promotes and works toward an all inclusive universalistic spirituality? How can someone like Lesslie Newbigin hold to the doctrine of election and simultaneously regard someone with weird and off-beat ideas as a brother in Christ? Hadn’t Newbigin categorically stated that he believes in the doctrine of election, his testimonial that “even if his ideas are weird or off-beat, I would regard him a a brother in Christ,” could have been contributed to Brian McLaren who made the following weird and off-beat statement:

“I must add, though, that I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts.” (A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 260) (Emphasis added).

Lighthouse Trails had this to say about McLaren’s weird and off-beat antics.

Is Brian McLaren becoming an enemy of the Cross of Jesus Christ? While his signature and endorsement on the back of such books as Tony Campolo’s “Speaking My Mind” and Dave Fleming’s “The Seeker’s Way,” was horrible enough, that was mild compared to what he has now done.

In the midst of the Purpose Driven craze and an apparently sleeping church, Brian McLaren has endorsed a book that calls the doctrine of the Cross a vile doctrine. (p. 168, Reimagining Christianity – Alan Jones) (Emphasis added).

You may want to take me to task for making a connection between Lesslie Newbigin and Brian McLaren but before you do that I would like to draw your attention to an even more shocking notion that is making headway in the ranks of our new generation of South African pastors, one that needs to be taken very seriously, and that is the view that David Bosch is having a major influence on the emergent church in South Africa. The following very telling statement appears on Cobus van Wyngaard’s blog My Contemplations

For I believe a growing group of us, the work of David Bosch is becoming key to the emerging conversation in South Africa. He’s had an important influence on thinkers such as Alan Hirsch and Brian McLaren, he is South African, he wrote brilliantly, and on the questions that we are currently asking. So in attempting to answer the question I’ll refer to my own and other’s interpretation of Bosch, and show where I believe Bosch is guiding us at the moment. (Emphasis added)

If David Bosch is one of Brian McLaren’s major influences, he was indeed far ahead of his time but that certainly does not mean it is something to be admired. In fact, the church as a whole should be very concerned about the DRC’s apparent interest in the book of Acts while they are actually promoting the contemplative spiritualities of the Desert Fathers and their disciples. Of even greater concern is the fact that David Bosch adopted Hans Kung’s “Paradigm Theory” in his book “Transforming Mission” in an attempt “to demonstrate the extent to which the understanding and practice of mission have changed during almost twenty centuries of Christian missionary history.” (For a critique of Bosch’s use of paradigm theory, see Gerald Pillay, “Text, Paradigms, and Context: An Examination of David Bosch’s Use of Paradigms in the Reading of Christian History,” in Mission in Creative Tension, ed. J. N. J. Kritzinger and W. A. Saayman (Pretoria: Southern African Missiological Society, 1990), pp. 109-23.). To get a better insight into Hans Kung’s missiological paradigms I suggest you read here. it gives you an idea of the direction the missional or “sent churches” in South Africa are taking and it does not look good —  not good at all.

Deut 13: 1-3 If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, Let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the Lord your God is testing you to find out if you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. (Emphasis added)

The Dutch Reformed Church’s [Accelerated] Downward Spiral into Apostasy

Someone recently asked me “How is it possible that anyone who once proclaimed a steadfast faith in Jesus Christ can apostatize from the truth and begin to follow another Jesus, and yet still believe that they are following the real Jesus?” In hindsight I knew my answer was rather flimsy at the time and I felt like kicking my own rear-end for not having provided a better reason for our postmodern malady of chronic apostasy. I must admit I felt much better when I realized that when Paul grappled with the phenomenon of apostasy he could only express his astonishment at the serious and very dangerous defection from sound biblical doctrine in the church at Galatia without giving any sound reasons. The most amazing thing about their apostasy was that it happened so quickly. It accelerated at an alarming rate since Paul’s last missionary journey to Galatia and very soon after the false teachers began to infiltrate the church with their menacing heresies. It indicates that when doctrinal error is allowed to continue unabated and is not immediately nipped in the bud it will quickly spread like a cancerous tumour, spreading rapidly from body cell to body cell until the entire body is infected and eventually killed (2 Timothy 2:13-19). Incidentally, rev. Attie Nel of the DR Church Bergsig delivered a sermon on this passage but instead of warning his congregants against the manifold false teachers of our time, he singled out the “whistle-blowers” as the whipping-boys and cancer carriers and advised his congregants to rather surf the site http://bible.org if they needed solid biblical mentors or teachers to guide them on their spiritual journey. He said:

“Today there are three persons who’ve had a very significant influence on my life: N.T. Wright, SCOT McKNIGHT and Eugene Peterson. In South Africa: Stephan Joubert and Jan van der Watt, and even Adrio König. Everyone of us should have a teacher or two in our lives, preferably more than one [and] say: ‘I am eager to learn from you.’ However, people learn in different ways. Some learn through reading; others though listening; yet others learn though talking, discussion. I do not like to talk because I am a slow thinker, but I’m an avid reader and listener. Now, I’m going to give you a website’s name where all three of these things occur. There’s a lot of reading-matter, very good reading-matter and conservative theologians; they publish daily on that site and there is also sermons you may listen to, and there’s a place where you can chat with others. The address is very simple, www.bible.org. Pop in there; you can also make those persons your teachers.”

Toward the end of his sermon rev. Nel says:

“Make God the first love, the only love in your life. Having said that, one wonders, ‘but how do I live it?’ And one of the persons I heard speaking about this, this week, he said ‘Just love Jesus.’ That’s all. Only love the Lord. If you love the Lord and if you love Him more than anything else everything falls into place. Its so easy. Its so easy. Its not an emotion. I do not choose to feel something. I choose to be something. How does it feel to love your wife? I don’t know . . . All I know is that I would do nothing to hurt her. How does it feel to love your wife? I don’t know . . . I do not know what it feels like. All I know is that when I keep my children in safety, that is what my wife wants of me . . . ‘Just love Jesus’”

These are indeed precious words but unfortunately precious words do not always paint the full picture. Jesus Christ also wants rev. Attie Nel and all the other pastors in the Dutch Reformed Church family to keep God’s children safely, just as his wife wants him to keep their kids in safety. Didn’t Jesus say that our love for Him will be mirrored in the way we feed and keep his sheep and lambs? (John 21: 15-17). To love Jesus is therefore much more than a mere pious wish to “just love Jesus.” In fact, Scripture never says that we should “just love Jesus.” Love for God finds its highest expression in the way you handle and practice His Word (doctrines) (John 14:21; 2 John 9) and also in the way you feed and keep his children. In the first place, to keep God’s children safely means to preserve and feed them within the constraints and parameters of His Word so that they may grow spiritually and to protect them against the unscrupulous attacks of false teachers. Are our pastors doing that? No, say I, because they are delivering up the sheep and the lambs to teachers who are saying and doing things contrary to our Great Teacher, Jesus Christ. They are leading the sheep and especially the lambs along ways that seem right but the ends thereof are the ways of death (Proverbs 14:12).

N.T. Wright, one of rev. Attie Nel’s influential teachers, is a bishop in The Church of England who are confusing God’s children with his book “What Saint Paul Really Said.” He is also one of the co-writers of a book that is causing an uproar in the church, called “Stricken By God, Nonviolent Identification & the Victory of Christ edited by Brad Jersak en Michael Hardin. Several distinguished leaders in the Emergent Church, amongst them Brian McLaren, have endorsed it with gusto. Bishop Wright is an highly esteemed person in the Emergent Church. On page 119 of his book “What Saint Paul Really Said” he wrote the following on the doctrine of justification.

“‘Justification’ in the first century was not about how someone might establish a relationship with God.  It was about God’s eschatological definition, both future and present, of who was, in fact, a member of his people.”

With this concoction readers are expected to rethink the concept of justification. According to Wright “justification” cannot be interpreted in terms of God’s imputed righteousness of His Son to save sinners, but merely as an expression or locution (metaphor) of God’s covenant faithfulness in vindicating Israel in the face of the nations. No wonder Paul lamented:

Galatians 1:6-7 I am surprised and astonished that you are so quickly turning renegade and deserting Him Who invited and called you by the grace (unmerited favor) of Christ (the Messiah) [and that you are transferring your allegiance] to a different [even an opposition] gospel. Not that there is [or could be] any other [genuine Gospel], but there are [obviously] some who are troubling and disturbing and bewildering you with a different kind of teaching which they offer as a gospel] and want to pervert and distort the Gospel of Christ (the Messiah) [into something which it absolutely is not].

The apostle John was equally astonished when he was shown the apocalyptic MYSTERY BABYLON, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH and the woman who was drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus (Revelation 17:6). In fact, the very same word “thaumazo { thou-mad’-zo}” is used in both these passages. Unfortunately astonishment (amazement, bewilderment and shock) have been replaced by admiration and appreciation, even to the extent that the once disallowed and disavowed doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church are being assimilated in Protestant circles with accelerated zeal and wonderment. Those who fail to notice the globally orchestrated and unrelenting efforts of some of the most revered spiritual leaders in both the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches to reverse the Reformation need to surf the internet for only a few hours to see how far they have progressed to eradicate the divide between the two. During my research on the internet I happened to stumble on a site entitled PBS that seems to be on the forefront of providing international news and views via their television stations and internet content. They claim to reach more than 65 million people every week and invite their viewers and listeners to experience the worlds of science, history, nature and public affairs; hear diverse viewpoints; and take front row seats to world-class drama and performances. I was particularly interested in their page called RELIGION AND ETHICS and its cover story “Protestant Mary” which appeared on December 17, 2004. Kim Lawton, Managing Editor/Correspondent and award winning reporter, producer, writer and editor who has worked in broadcast media and print for nearly 20 years covering religion, ethics, and culture, interviewed several well-known clergy and academics. She introduced Prof. Timothy George, Southern Baptist and dean of the evangelical Beeson Divinity School in Birmingham, Alabama, as one of a growing number of theologians and writers urging evangelicals and other Protestants to stop ignoring Mary. She also interviewed Professor BEVERLY ROBERTS GAVENTA (Princeton Theological Seminary) who is calling for a new Protestant examination of Mary.

So even in order to understand fully what those Gospels are about, which is so much what Protestants prize, we have to pay more attention to her. We can’t just bring her out for Christmas Eve and put her back away on the 26th.

Why do we need to pay more attention to Mary when she hardly or ever contributed to the advancement or illumination of the Gospel? That task was given to the twelve apostles of whom Jesus once said: “Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.” We dare not show any partiality when Christ himself singled out every person who does the will of His Father in heaven to be his brother and sister and mother. Mary who presented herself to God so that He may accomplish His will in regard to the incarnation of God the Son, was indeed blessed but so are the poor in spirit, they that mourn over their sins, the meek, the hungry who thirst after the righteousness of God, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers and those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake. No one can deny that Mary was a blessed chosen vessel of God, for had He not done so our blessed Lord and Saviour could never have partaken of flesh and blood so that our sins and transgressions could be judged in His torn and bloodied body on the cross. The virgin vessel was blessed but no more than every man, woman and child who do the will of His Father in heaven. As soon as we place Mary on a pedestal to single her out for special attention above all the others whom Jesus Christ referred to as his brothers and sisters and mothers, we are dangerously close to the Mariology of Roman Catholicism. Mariology in the Roman Catholic tradition is not just about bringing Mary out of Christmas Eve and examining her position for a better and fuller understanding of the Gospels. The ultimate goal of Mariology is to proclaim Mary Co-redemptrix with Jesus Christ. The following definition of the word “Co-redemptrix” appears on Wikipedia.

Co-Redemptrix in Roman Catholic Mariology refers to the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the redemption process. It is a separate concept from Mediatrix. The concept of Co-redemptrix refers to an indirect or unequal but important participation by the Blessed Virgin Mary in redemption. She gave free consent to give life to the redeemer, to share his life, to suffer with him under the cross and to sacrifice him for the sake of the redemption of humankind. Co-Redemptrix has not been formally defined as a dogma, although petitions for declaring it (along with Mediatrix) a dogma have been submitted to the pope by various Cardinals and bishops. It would become a fifth Marian dogma if approved by the Holy See.

Millions of Roman Catholics have signed and submitted a petition to the Pope, pleading with him to declare Mary Co-redemptrix, Mediatix and Advocate for all Christians. On April 9, 1997 the late Pope John Paul II referred to the role of Mary in the crucifixion during an audience as follows:

Mary … co-operated during the event itself and in the role of mother; thus her co-operation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and in submission to him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity…In God’s plan, Mary is the ‘woman’ (cf. John 2:4; John 19:26), the New Eve, united to the New Adam in restoring humanity to its original dignity. Her cooperation with her Son continues for all time in the universal motherhood which she enjoys in the order of grace. Trusting in this maternal cooperation, let us turn to Mary, imploring her help in all our needs. (Emphasis added)

The ominous reality about the growing world-wide appeal to proclaim Mary the Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate for all Christians is that it has taken on an increasingly supernatural dimension with the many Marian apparitions throughout the world. In many of these Marian apparitions she claims to be the Mediatrix, Advocate, Saviour (Ark of peace) and ever-present, titles which belong to Christ alone. Her most alarming claim is that she is the Co-Redemptrix or Co-redeemer of the world. The following quotes are directly from the lips of the “Mary” many people have seen in her apparitions throughout the world.

I stand here as the Co-redemptix and Advocate. Everything should be concentrated on that. Repeat after me: The new dogma will be the dogma of the Co-Redemptrix. Until I’m acknowledged, there with the most holy Trinity, has willed me to be, I will not be able to exercise my power fully in the eternal work of co-redemption and in the universal mediation of graces.”

She claims to have suffered with Christ for the sins of the world.

I love you even if you are far away from me and my son. I ask you not to allow my heart to shed tears of blood because of the souls who are being lost through sin.

For a long time I have suffered for you. If I don’t want my son to abandon you, I am forced to pray to him myself without ceasing. You pay no heed. However much you would do, you can never recompense the pain I have taken for you.

I boldly assert that his suffering became my suffering because his heart was mine. And just as Adam and Eve sold the world for an apple, so in a certain sense my son and I redeemed the world with one heart.

I am she who is related to the divine Trinity. I am the virgin of Revelation.

My children, I am the Door of heaven and a help on earth.

She encourages her children to venerate her statues.

As mother I want to tell you that I am here with you represented by the statues you have here. Each of my statues is a sign of a presence of mine and reminds you of your heavenly mother. Therefore, it must be honored and put in places of greater veneration. You should look with love at every image of your heavenly mother.

She also encourages her followers to build shrines and temples to her honour

I ardently desire a temple built for me here where I can show and offer all my love, compassion, help and protection, for I am your merciful mother.

In 1999 in Amsterdam she was not only hailed as the Co-Redemptrix but also for the first time as The Lady of all Nations. In one of her apparitions she said the following-

When the dogma, the last dogma in Mary’s history has been proclaimed, the Lady of Nations will give peace, true peace to the world. The nations, however, must say my prayer in union with the church. They must know that the Lady of all nations has come as Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.

The Marian apparition now claims that she is not only Mary the mother of God but also Lady of all the Nations and as soon as the Pope declares her to be the Co-Redeemer with Christ she will usher in a new era of peace.

Speak about the mother of the Eucharist because the mother of the Eucharist closes history. All the messages come from God and everywhere that I am appearing I am speaking about the same things. Because of the triumph of the Eucharist, the mother wants all the churches to be reunited so that there will be only one church for all the people (Emphasis added).

You may have begun to wonder why I am telling you these things and how they tie in with the Dutch Reformed Church’s downward spiral into apostasy. Not only has the emerging mystical spirituality (contemplative prayer, centering prayer, lectio divina, lectio continua, enneagrams, labyrinths, solitude, the silence, meditation, breath prayers, the Jesus prayer, contemplative retreats, twelve cross stations, Jesus candles, icons, Ignatian contemplation, the Desert fathers etc.) taken the church by storm, it is beginning to show its true colours and purpose which is to bring Protestants back into the Roman Catholic fold.

The Faculty of Theology at the University of Stellenbosch and Communitas will be hosting a three-day conference on the theme “What can we learn from the book of Acts about being a Missional Church?” from 18-20 May 2009. The conference will launch research groups that will work on seven themes in the Book of Acts over a period of three years. The project aims at bringing together two major discussions within the context of theology and church practice. Proff. BEVERLY GAVENTA (Princeton Theological Seminary) who I have already briefly introduced to you as a promulgator for a new Protestant examination of Mary and SCOT McKNIGHT (North Park University, Chicago) will be the main speakers at the conference. Like Prof. Gaventa, McKnight urges Protestant churches to honour Mary. The following excerpt appeared in one of the site Lighthouse Trials Research’s newsletters:

In emerging church leader, Scot McKnight’s book, The Real Mary: Why Evangelical Christians Can Embrace the Mother of Jesus, McKnight says that Protestant Christians are the only Christians who do not honor Mary. He recommends that Protestant churches all practice an “Honor Mary Day” (p. 144), saying she “leads us to a Jesus who brings redemption … To listen to Mary is to hear the message of Jesus’ death and resurrection as a mega-event whereby God established a new kind of power, a new kind of family, and a new kind of kingdom” (p. 145). McKnight describes this great event as a time when the world will come together and worship Mary (Emphasis added).

McKnight who is already having a great impact on the emerging church is also passionately promoting the Eucharistic Jesus in Protestant circles. He says that “the Eucharist profoundly enables the grace of God to be received with all its glories and blessings.”(Scot McKnight, Turning to Jesus, (Louisville, KY: Westminister John Knox Press, 2002 edition, p. 7).

It is evident that the Dutch Reformed Church’s three-day conference on the theme “What can we learn from the Book of Acts about being a Missional Church” is nothing but a well-disguised effort to promote the Roman Catholic Church’s New Evangelization programme. Many young Dutch Reformed Church clergy are progressively opting for a missionary strategy to establish the Kingdom of God on earth and are urging people to become followers of Jesus. The Jesus they are following is slowly but surely morphing into the Eucharist Jesus who is repeatedly sacrificed on the altars of Roman Catholic cathedrals throughout the world. For more information on this subject read here.

Jeremiah 44:15-25 Then all the men who knew that their wives were burning incense to other gods, and all the women who stood by – a great assembly – even all the people who dwelt in Pathros in the land of Egypt, answered Jeremiah: As for the word that you have spoken to us in the name of the Lord, we will not listen to or obey you. But we will certainly perform every word of the vows we have made: to burn incense to the queen of heaven and to pour out drink offerings to her as we have done – we and our fathers, our kings and our princes – in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem; for then we had plenty of food and were well off and prosperous and saw no evil. But since we stopped burning incense to the queen of heaven and pouring out drink offerings to her, we have lacked everything and have been consumed by the sword and by famine. [And the wives said] When we burned incense to the queen of heaven and poured out drink offerings to her, did we make cakes [in the shape of a star] to represent and honor her and pour out drink offerings to her without [the knowledge and approval of] our husbands? Then Jeremiah said to all the people – to the men and to the women and to all the people who had given him that answer – The incense that you burned in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem – you and your fathers, your kings and your princes, and the people of the land – did not the Lord [earnestly] remember [your idolatrous wickedness] and did it not come into His mind? The Lord could no longer endure the evil of your doings and the abominations which you have committed; because of them therefore has your land become a desolation and an [astonishing] waste and a curse, without inhabitants, as it is this day. Because you have burned incense [to idols] and because you have sinned against the Lord and have not obeyed the voice of the Lord or walked in His law and in His statutes and in His testimonies, therefore this evil has fallen upon you, as it is this day. Moreover, Jeremiah said to all the people, including all the women, Hear the word of the Lord, all you of Judah who are in the land of Egypt, Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: You and your wives have both declared with your mouths and fulfilled it with your hands, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed to burn incense to the queen of heaven and to pour out drink offerings to her. [Surely] then confirm your vows and [surely] perform your vows! [If you will defy all My warnings to you, then, by all means, go ahead!] (Emphasis added).

When a church, their leaders, their countrymen and their country refuse to listen to and heed God’s warnings in His Word, He leaves them to their own devices and allows them to fall even deeper into their self-inflicted, apostatized and idolatrous lifestyles. Like Israel of old they too have their pious reasons for their disobedience. Our country has been in the grip of crime and violence for a very long time and despite the many warnings from various corners throughout the country, church leaders, and especially our younger generation church clergy, have unremittingly and obstinately followed their own “new-hearty” and “labyrinthy” ways to bring peace to our land. They too say “we and our fathers, our kings and our princes – in all the cities of South Africa – will bring peace, prosperity and happiness through our own efforts and methods. We have tried the old ways but it didn’t work. Let us therefore rethink the Gospel; let us listen to the followers of other religious persuasions and work in union and in harmony with them to save our beloved country.” God  says to them “[Surely] then confirm your vows and [surely] perform your wishes to usher in peace on earth by supposedly bringing My Kingdom on earth with your abominable ways; honour the queen of heaven as my people have done in olden times. If you will defy all My warnings to you, then, by all means, go ahead! But!  remember what I have said through my apostle Paul:”

1 Corinthians 10:9-12 We should not tempt the Lord [try His patience, become a trial to Him, critically appraise Him, and exploit His goodness] as some of them did – and were killed by poisonous serpents; Nor discontentedly complain as some of them did – and were put out of the way entirely by the destroyer (death). Now these things befell them by way of a figure [as an example and warning to us]; they were written to admonish and fit us for right action by good instruction, we in whose days the ages have reached their climax (their consummation and concluding period).

The Enigmatic Ping-Pong Love of the Emergent Fraternity

King Solomon’s wise remark in Ecclesiastes 1:9 “The thing that has been, it is what will be; and that which has been done is that which will be done: and there is no new thing under the sun” is relevant and true to this very day. It is particularly true of most people’s reactions, and especially high profile persons such as professors, doctors, and pastors (“dominees)” in the post modern emergent camp, when they are confronted with the unalterable, infallible and eternal truth of God. Allow me to explain this in terms of an incident in the Bible when Paul and Silas were severely beaten in prison subsequent to their witnessing to the truth. Paul and Silas, as with all the other disciples, witnessed to the truth; they heralded it and never sought to engage in a conversation with the idolaters of their time. They never said: “Ok you guys, let us congenially gather around the coffee table where you may teach us the beatitudes in your religion and we will teach you ours. We’re not interested in converting you to our religion; we’re merely trying to find common ground so that we may learn from one another.”

Acts 16:25-37

But about midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns of praise to God, and the prisoners were listening to them; and suddenly there came a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison house were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were unfastened. When the jailer awoke and saw the prison doors opened, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here!”And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They said, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household. Now when day came, the chief magistrates sent their policemen, saying, “Release those men.” And the jailer reported these words to Paul, saying, “The chief magistrates have sent to release you. Therefore come out now and go in peace.” But Paul said to them, “They have beaten us in public without trial, men who are Romans, and have thrown us into prison; and now are they sending us away secretly? No indeed! But let them come themselves and bring us out.” (Emphasis added)

That’s what I love about Paul. Contrary to today’s emergent leaders such as Stephan Joubert who make such a big fuss of the integrity of Rob Bell, his own name and even those of his fellowmen were of little concern to him (Galatians 2:6) when matters pertaining to God’s truth and the doctrine of salvation needed to be defended in the face of Christ’s enemies. Nevertheless, when simple justice called for it, he stood his ground like a man and confronted his persecutors head-on: “Hey, you guys cannot just cast us out like common dirt when you violated your own country’s laws. They have beaten us mercilessly and now your highly respected magistrates whose integrity you hold in high esteem want to thrust us out shamelessly and secretly? Tell your highly esteemed magistrates to come here and accompany us out with due respect and honour.”

Before I continue, I would like to emphasize that I have no concern for my own name when it is maligned in behalf of Christ and His Gospel. In fact, the “black-and-white” defined truth is that all Christians should leap with joy when they are maligned, ridiculed and persecuted for the Name of Jesus Christ and His Gospel (Matthew 5: 11; Acts 5:41). However, I fail to understand how someone who calls himself a Christian can publicly associate my name with the devil, who is the father of all lies and a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44), and subsequently make an about turn to send me a private e-mail, assuring me that he is praying for me and my family. A serious dilemma arises: should he pray to God for Tom Lessing and his family or should he pray for “an agent of the devil (the father of all lies and a murderer from the beginning) and his family? He reminds me of Dr. Johan van den Heever of the Eldoraigne Dutch Reformed Emergent Church who recently also very piously called me his brother. It is this kind of ping-pong love no one dares to trust, because you never know what they are going to call you next. A fountain cannot bring forth bitter and sweet water (James 3:11).

Although Rev. Guillaume Smit did not give me permission to post on my blog an e-mail he recently sent me, he has no authority to prevent me from disclosing the general content of his mail. I never gave him permission to label me an agent of the devil and yet he wilfully and maliciously called me the agent of the father of all lies who is a murderer from the beginning on the internet for the entire world to see. Now he clandestinely wants me to continue our discussion in private. He wants to gently and secretly get rid of me like those magistrates in Paul’s day. Nonetheless, I have decided to disclose, on the internet as he had done in calling me an agent of the devil, that he has now piously decided to pray for me and my family. He is determined to pray that God would overcome me with His love; that He would open my spiritual eyes so that I may know the truth, and yet when I presented him with the truth from Scripture he accused me of legalism and pharaseeism; and that my “black-and-white” theology is an outright fallacy. His ad hominem accusations are not even original. He parrot-talks after other emergent gurus who call themselves Christians. In one of his reviews of Ron Martoia’s book, “Static,” he wrote here:

“I also re-read Ron Martoia’s book, Static, in this time. Martoia challenges his readers to rethink salvation and sin in light of a biblical understanding of Scripture rather than a theological understanding (my words). I agree with him on the issue: We are way too obsessed with black-white legalistic issues when it comes to Christian life and ethics. It results in the Christian church becoming more and more like a Pharisaical religion in stead of being an authentic Jesus movement” (Emphasis added).

The overriding meaning of the above quoted section is evident: If you believe the Bible is the inerrant, infallible, unalterable and eternal Word of God, you are a “black-and-white-legalistic-Pharisee” as opposed to the “authentic Jesus movement” that promotes yoga and other disciplines in Hinduism, Buddhism and New Age philosophies. Many emergent preachers claim that all religions have wonderful and beautiful truths that may be incorporated freely into Christianity in order to enhance the “authentic Jesus movement’s” evangelical outreach throughout the world.

The questions we should ask is why we need to have second thoughts about biblical salvation and what the purpose is behind the emergent fraternities “rethinking” process. Biblical salvation is an individual-istic redemption. The Holy Spirit deals with every individual in a personal way convicting him/her of their own particular sins with the purpose of bringing them to a position where they contritely acknowledge (confess) their sins and eternal lostness to Jesus Christ in order for them to be saved from the righteous wrath and indignation of an infinitely holy God. Not so with the emergent church. This kind of salvation is too narrow-minded, too harsh and judgmental, too simplistic and out of touch with postmodern man’s immediate needs. They can no longer wait for Jesus Christ to usher in His Kingdom of peace, wholeness, and wellness. They want it here and now, the result being that they have derailed biblical salvation and shunted it to a parallel sounding rail of a global resurrection or salvation, which is nothing more than a social gospel. Rev. Jannie Pelser’s transformational theology to inculcate healthy and sound norms and values in our society falls squarely in this category.

In Flip Loots’ programme “Oop Gesprek” (Sunday, 12 April 2009) his two guests, Jannie Pelser and Graham Power (who was one of the sponsors of of the “Parliament of the World’s Religions” in Cape Town in December 1999), once again advertised their missional programme to inculcate sound and healthy norms and values in our society. How do they aim to forge healthy and civilized norms and values in our society when they unashamedly tolerate the corruption and highly unethical transformation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in their churches and seminaries, and unashamedly and publicly spread the lie that we may learn from other religions and even the New Age because they too have certain beneficial truths inherent in their beliefs? (read here). Strengthened by their maxim “unashamedly ethical” they aim to eradicate corruption, crime and unethical practices from the top to the bottom. How dare they appoint themselves to the lofty position of guardians of social ethics (norms and values) when they unashamedly cuddle up to men who unashamedly corrupt the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Jannie Pelser admitted that we are living in the last of the last days which, according to Scripture, will be unashamedly characterized by a falling away from the faith. And yet, Jannie and Graham Power are confident and very excited that their missional thrust to transform South Africa and the whole of Africa with their norms-and-values-heart-transplant will be a resounding success. Who should we believe —  God or Jannie Pelser and Graham Power? I have written extensively on the fallacies of their unbiblical transformational “gospel” here and here.

I have already posted one of Rob Bell’s Nooma videos in one of my previous comments but would like to do so here again to prove to you what I mean.

The Gospel is NOT just about God not having given up on the world; that a giant resurrection rescue is on its way and that He wants to put it all back together, you, me and the whole world, again. The Gospel is the Good News of God’s unending longsuffering toward mankind as a whole, not willing that any should perish but that the entire world should come to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. The sad news, however, is that the majority shun God’s divinely ordained way of saving lost sinners. They have rejected the cross of His Son because to them it is sheer foolishness  (1 Corinthians 1:18). They want Him to resurrect them into a new and wonderful life of well-being, wholeness and peace without the blood of His cross. The Gospel is the Good News only to those who in faith and repentance have responded to God’s divinely ordained way of salvation. To those who reject His free gift of salvation, there is no peace (Isaiah 42:22).

The late Alice Bailey, a Theosophist during her life, who was used as a channel by die spirit guide, Djwal Kuhl, said something very similar about a universal resurrection in her book The Externalization of the Hierarchy – Section III – Forces behind the Evolutionary Process

An Easter Message

Easter Day 1945

On this day, we recall to our minds the fact of Resurrection – a universal and eternally recurring resurrection. I would like to talk with you anent the Christ, about His work as head of the Hierarchy, and about the rebuilding which humanity must undertake and which the Hierarchy is seeking to impulse at this time. A great period of reconstruction is planned. Here are the two words around which I wish to create my theme: Resurrection and Reconstruction. It will be a reconstruction implemented by Those Who know the meaning of resurrection, and it will involve a resurrection of humanity through the medium of its intelligentsia and men and women of goodwill. These two groups (the Hierarchy and Humanity) will need to be brought into a closer rapport, and this is entirely possible if the followers of the Christ realize their opportunity and shoulder their responsibilities. I would point out that when I use the phrase “followers of the Christ” I refer to all those who love their fellowmen, irrespective of creed or religion. Only upon this basic premise can a hopeful future be founded.

I do not care whether or not those who read my words accept the occult teaching of a spiritual and planetary Hierarchy over which the Christ presides, or whether they think in terms of Christ and His disciples. The essential recognition for which I plead is that this great group of spiritual Individuals, Who receive so general a recognition throughout the world and in all the great religions, should be [469] regarded as active. The Christian view of the Christ is built upon that which He enacted for us two thousand years ago and through which He symbolically indicated to us the way which all aspirants must go. It portrays a picture of a waiting, quiescent Christ, living in some vague and far away heaven, “resting on His laurels” and practically doing nothing very much until such time as the sons of men of every race and creed acclaim Him as Savior; this they must do both as individuals and as representing the organized Christian Church. It is a picture of a listening, observing Christ, animated by pity and compassion, but Who has done all He could and now waits for us to do our part; it is also a picture of One Who waits to see what humanity, as a whole, will accept theologically. In the mind of the narrow, fundamentalist theologian, Christ is seen as presiding over a peaceful place called Heaven, into which the elect are welcomed; He is also seen as consigning all who remain aware of their own spiritual integrity and responsibility, who refuse to be gathered into organized churches or who go idly or wickedly through life, to some vague place of eternal punishment. To this vast multitude (probably the majority) His love and compassion apparently do not reach, and His heart remains untouched. It appears that He cares not whether they suffer eternally or attain complete annihilation.

This surely cannot be so. None of these pictures is accurate or adequate; they are not true in any sense of the word. . . Resurrection is the clue to the world of meaning, and is the fundamental [470] theme of all the world religions – past, present and the future. Resurrection of the spirit in man, in all forms in all kingdoms, is the objective of the entire evolutionary process and this involves liberation from materialism and selfishness. In that resurrection, evolution and death are only preparatory and familiar stages. The note and message sounded by the Christ when last on Earth was resurrection, but so morbid has been mankind and so enveloped in glamor and illusion, that His death has been permitted to sidestep understanding; consequently, for centuries, the emphasis has been laid upon death, and only on Easter Day or in the cemeteries is the resurrection acclaimed. This must change. It is not helpful to a progressive understanding of the eternal verities to have this condition perpetuated. The Hierarchy is today dedicated to bringing about this change and thus altering the approach of mankind to the world of the unseen and to the spiritual realities. (Emphasis added).

“Liberation from materialism and selfishness” is a recurring theme in many religions and philosophies. On Saturday, 24 April 1982 the following advertisement appeared in the Rand Daily Mail under the title “THE CHRIST IS NOW HERE.”

WHO IS THE CHRIST?

Throughout history, humanity’s evolution has been guided by a group of enlightened men, the Masters of Wisdom. They have remained largely in the remote desert and mountain places of earth, working mainly through their disciples who live openly in the world. This message if the Christ’s reappearance has been given primarily by such a disciple trained for his task for over 20 years.

At the centre of this Spiritual Hierarchy stands the World Teacher, Lord Maitreya, known by Christians as the Christ. And as Christians await the Second Coming, so the Jews await the Messiah, the Buddhists the fifth Buddha, the Muslims’ the Imam Mahdi, and the Hindus await Krishna. These are all names for one individual.

His presence in the world guarantees there will be no Third World War.

WHAT IS HE SAYING?

My task will be to show you how to live together peacefully as brothers. This is simpler than you imagine, My friends, for it requires only the acceptance of sharing.

How can you be content with the modes within which you now live: when millions starve and die in squalor; when the rich parade their wealth before the poor; when each man is his neighbour’s enemy; when no man trusts his brother?

Allow me to show you the way forward into a simpler life where no man lacks; where no two are alike; where the Joy of Brotherhood manifests through all men.

Take your brother’s needs as the measure of your action and solve the problems of the world.

It is very interesting that yoga and transcendental meditation are presented on the internet as metaphysical ways to alleviate the suffering in the world:

Transcendental Meditation can improve your grades, make you a better citizen, assure you of a higher salary, alleviate world suffering, and increase the productivity of the national economy, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi promised an overflow crowd of about 200 in Leverett House Junior Common Room last night.(Read here).

It is evident that this resurrection of humanity will take take place by means of a massive paradigm shift, corporately induced primarily through meditation, and contemplative spirituality (centering prayer) which, in turn, is solidly embedded in Eastern religious practices such as yoga and other New Age philosophies. The Bible warns against passivity or inactivity of the mind because the mind, according to Scripture, is the avenue by which change and transformation is brought about in a person’s life. Paul warns us not to be conformed to this world system and its philosophies but to be transformed by the renewal of our mind so that we may prove what is that good, acceptable and perfect will of God (Romans 12:2). In Ephesians 4:23 he says that we should be renewed by the spirit of our mind and Peter in his first Epistle (1:13) warns that we should gird up the loins of our mind. Our minds should continually be taken captive in obedience to the will of Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 10: 5). Indeed, the mind is the battleground for the souls of men and Satan will  do everything in his power to neutralize the mind so that he may invade and take captive the thoughts of men in obedience to his will. In fact, the Bible states very clearly that it is he, the god of this world, who blinds the minds of unbelievers so as to keep the Gospel veiled in them that perish (2 Corinthians 4:3). Contemplative spirituality with its emphasis on stillness and passivity of the mind (altered states) is unmistakably the primary vehicle Satan utilizes to captivate the hearts of men and to bring about change in the world; a change that allegedly brings on global peace, tranquillity, wholeness, wellness and euphoric love and compassion. This kind of peace, love, wholeness and wellness cannot and will not last because its orchestrator is bent on the destruction of mankind. No wonder the Bible says that when they say peace and safety a sudden inescapable destruction will come upon them (1 Thessalonians 5:3).

Ron Martoia who pleads that we should rethink salvation and sin in the light of a biblical understanding of Scripture and whose ideas Rev. Guillaume Smit endorses wholeheartedly, has some very unbiblical ideas about salvation and sin. In his opinion Jesus rarely said anything about getting to heaven. Tony Cartledge of the ABP Associated Baptist Press released a report on 8 February 2007 of a conversation Ron Martoia had with several religious leaders on January 29. 2007. He wrote:

CONOVER, N.C. (ABP) — Despite decades of tweaking evangelistic methods, there is little evidence that many Christians are experiencing true life change, Ron Martoia told church leaders Jan. 29. (Read he entire article here.)

Perhaps, the church consultant said, that failure is because Christians in the Western world have been prone to think of salvation as a “point-of-sale” transaction that focuses on getting to heaven instead of appreciating that Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament promise of shalom, a concept that suggests wholeness, wellness, and peace.

Based on surveys he has done, Martoia said nine out of 10 pastors define the gospel as the good news that Jesus died for people’s sins so they can go to heaven. But Jesus rarely said anything about getting to heaven. He focused mainly on present human needs. Jesus’ self-stated mission, as found in Luke 4:16-19, is derived from Isaiah 61:1-2 and incorporated the Old Testament sense of bringing deliverance, healing and wholeness.

Preaching about forgiveness from sin becomes increasingly ineffective in a postmodern world where a sense of guilt and obligation is less often operative, Martoia said. In contemporary American culture, one can no longer assume that people identify themselves as sinners in need of grace.

“People may not think of themselves as sinners going to hell, but they seek wholeness and recognize they’re not there,” he said.

Thus, Martoia suggested that the Genesis 1 creation of humankind in God’s image (imago Dei) is a better starting point for evangelism than beginning with the “fall” story of Genesis 3: “What would it be like for us to begin the conversation with people as if we’re trying to live out the image of God in us and want them to live out the image of God in them?”

The inner imago Dei creates the yearning to believe that there is purpose to life, that life can be better, and that belonging is possible, Martoia said. It’s a trio of longings that correspond to faith, hope and love, he said.

Helping others identify and get in touch with the image of God in them is more of a process than a one-time transaction. And seeing the gospel through imago Dei calls for an apologetic that begins relationally, not just rationally, Martoia said. (Emphasis added)

You need not look far to realize what Ron Martoia, also known as a transformational architect, means when he says “get in touch with the image of God in them is more than a one-time transaction” (i.e. being born from above). It provides ample proof why he is into Eastern mysticism and why his ideas on salvation (i.e. wholeness wellness and peace) are based on his keen interest in yoga and the integral theory. The “Excellerators” website describes Ron Martoia as a transformational architect who is addicted to golf and is also a yoga instructor. A short description of his book here reads as follows:

Dr. Ron Martoia proposes using modern interpretations of basic Christian terms sometimes employed in evangelistic attempts. So many witness encounters are compromised by, among other things, the unwillingness to rephrase biblical language into something more understandable to the listener. Maybe the words we sometimes use confuse more than inform. Is the Christian message hopelessly out of date? Dr. Martoia would say no, it just needs to be rephrased. Addressing secondary elements of the witness encounter (the basics of conscience-level communication and subsequent conviction are not addressed), Martoia tells the story of his interaction with two young adults and their attempt to fully present the Gospel to their friend. While advocating positive positions on some issues that many feel are at odds with Christianity, including yoga and feminism, Martoia does address the need for a change from how evangelism has been attempted in recent years. (Emphasis added).

If Jesus rarely spoke of heaven and focused mainly on human needs, his crucifixion, burial, resurrection and ascension would have been a nonsequitur. The biblical facts, as He Himself stipulated prior to His ascension, are that He was going to prepare a place in heaven for all His true followers (John 14:1, 2). In addition, He also promised them that they would encounter hatred, persecution, affliction and tribulation in this world but that they should remain vigilant and loyal to Him, even unto death, because He would never forsake or leave them. Biblical salvation is not a transaction; it is a command. When the biblical Jesus began his public ministry His very first words were “Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.” Repentance is not an option, it is an absolute necessity and anyone who disobeys His command will forfeit eternal life in heaven (John 23:36). Brother Paul said, in stark contrast to Ron Martoia’s rethinking philosophies, the following:

1 Cor 15:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: (Emphasis added)

I have not only recently been accused of being an agent of the devil but also of unethical practices such as “stealing.” What can be more unethical than stealing away the truth out of the hearts of men, women and children who could have been saved if they had heard the true Gospel instead of the mishmash “gospel” of the emergent church? What is more unethical than the infringement of God’s sole rights on His Gospel by rethinking, changing and revamping it to make it more palatable for the postmodern creature? It is not only unethical and not only amounts to spiritual theft but is also downright dangerous. Read here.

When Mr. Sarel van der Merwe (in Jannie Pelser’s programme “Brandpunt” – 03/04/2009) pointed out that Rob Bell promotes Yoga in his Mars Hill sermons they thought he was off his rocker. Subsequent to the programme, Rev. Guillaume Smit wrote a comment on his blog under the title “Does Rob Bell teach Yoga?” After a quick survey on the internet he found a sermon Rob preached on May 29, 2005 called “breath.” Instead of doing an in depth survey on the dangers of yoga, he came to the conclusion that Rob only used Yoga as an illustration and ended his comment in sympathetic praise for yoga. Read his comment here.

But as I’m not a member of his community I’m not privy to the subcultures prevalent in Mars Hill. Maybe yoga is practiced by a lot of his church members as part of their daily exercise routine. After all, yoga, as with karate and judo and other martial arts sports, can be practiced without getting involved in eastern religions or eastern philosophy. (Emphasis added)

The issue is not whether Rob Bell’s congregants practice yoga but that he promotes and teaches yoga during some of his sermons.

The Hindu masters or yogis themselves maintain that Yoga cannot be divorced from its inherent spiritual purpose which is to be yoked to the impersonal Hindu God Brahman. Yogi Baba Prem, Vedavisharada, CYI, C.ay, C.va wrote:

It was quite astonishing to see on the flyer “Christian Yoga! This Thursday night….” I could feel the wheels spinning in my brain. “Christian Yoga”, I thought. Now while Christians can practice yoga, I am not aware of any Christian teachings about yoga. Yoga is not a Judeo/Christian word! It is not a part of the Roman Catholic teachings and certainly not a part of protestant teachings. It is not found within the King James Version of the bible. It is a Hindu word, or more correctly a Sanskrit word from the Vedic civilization. So how did we get “Christian Yoga”? From this I could conclude that “Christian Yoga” could only indicate one of two possibilities:

1) Christianity is threatened by yoga and is attempting to take over this system that “invaded their turf” pertaining to spiritual teachings and techniques.

2) Christianity is subconsciously attempting to return to the spiritual roots of civilization—the Vedic civilization.

I thought to myself, “why would they want to take over yoga?” Could it be due to the decline of members within the Christian church within the last 60 years? Is this an extensive marketing plan cooked up in some New York marketing guru’s head? Is it an attempt to water down the teachings of yoga and import their own teachings into the system? Or is it that they cannot stand not to own everything spiritual? I think the best reason might be that yoga, and eastern spirituality, offered answers to the spiritual questions that the spiritually hungry masses had. It offered a practical, rational, logical, and truthful approach to spirituality. It did not contain any form of self-righteous condemnation, but offered love and acceptance to all. It did not prey upon victims with terms such as “Sin” and “eternal damnation”. But most importantly, it had answers! It offered a practical approach to cultivating a relationship with divinity. It offered a systematic approach and an abstract approach to meet the varying temperaments of the spirituality hungry.

The second possibility was that Christianity was itself looking for answers. A small book filled with judgment, inflexibility, and condemnation was no longer fulfilling the needs of the masses or the leaders of the church. Offering yoga classes allowed the Christian to secretly practice Hinduism without having to renounce their Christian tradition. Possibly by embracing the technology of yoga and meditation, the Christian church could finally return to the idea of love and acceptance that it believed it was founded upon. It is ironic that one religion would need to look to another religion to teach them about love, peace, harmony, and forgiveness. If successful, it could embrace these ancient teachings and save itself from the fate it planted over the last few thousand years. (From: http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com) (Emphasis added).

This is exactly what happens to Christians who practice yoga. They become yoked to a Hindu god (a demonic entity) who teaches them that the Bible and the God of the Bible are no longer sufficient to meet the needs of people in a wretched world full of misery, suffering, poverty and disease. It has become a redundant “black-and-white” book that only makes people feel guilty about themselves while all they need is love, love and more love — they need a relational (an experience orientated) and not a rational theology.

The following excerpt comes from The Encyclopaedia of New Age Beliefs, p. 595

The Oxford American Dictionary defines “yoga” in the following manner: “1) A Hindu system of meditation and self-control designed to produce mystical experience and spiritual insight. 2) A system of physical exercises and breathing control (4414:1085). Most people only think of yoga in terms of the second definition. We will show that this is a mistake. When examining the true goal of yoga, one sees why these two definitions cannot ultimately be separated. In other words the one who practices yoga as “a system of exercises and breathing control” is also practicing a system “designed to produce mystical experience and spiritual (occult) insight.” For example, Ernest L. Rossi of the Department of Psychology at UCLA states how yoga is designed to induce altered states of consciousness.

“When one considers the ancient yoga science of pranayama (controlled breathing) to have relevance, then one must admit that the manual manipulation dyhana is the most thoroughly documented of techniques for altering consciousness. For thousands of years these techniques for the subtle alterations of nasal breathing have been gradually codified into classical texts: Hatha Yoga Pradipika (II, 6-9, 19-20) Siva Samhita (III: 24, 25), Geranda Samhita (V: 49-52) and Yoga Chudamani Upsanisad (V: 98-100). A new tradition of psychological and experimental research exploring these ancient techniques has been developing during the past decades (Gasegawa en Kern, 1978), the work of Vinekar (1966), Rao and Potdar (1970), Eccles (1978), and Funk and Clarke (1980) also provides a broad background of independent studies using Western laboratory methods in studying the relationship of this nasal cycle to the ancient yogic tradition of pranayama in achieving psychosomatic health and the transpersonal states of dhyana (deep contemplation and Samadhi or occult enlightenment) (1046:113-14).

The end purpose is for the individual to realize that he or she is one essence with God or ultimate reality. In other words, one must realize he or she is God. Whatever school of yoga is used (hatha, raja, bhakti etc.) whether it is Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Sufi, Tantric or some other, the goal is typically the same: occult enlightenment achieved by internal manipulation of occult energies (prana, chi) leading to altered states of consciousness in order to produce awareness of one’s inherent union with God or ultimate reality (611).

Read here what Rev. Guillaume Smit says about Ron Martoia who is a yoga instructor and practices yoga himself.

“Ron Martoia said in his book, Transformational Architecture, that we reduced the Bible to a set of propositional statements that explain salvation and that we further on focus on the communication of information. We miss the reality that the Bible testimony is of God’s work on earth by way of a collection of stories.”

Who is Ron Martoia? Look here:

In an interview (emergent conversation) with Ron Martoia 11/28/2006) he said:

“But I will say this, I am renewed in the commitment for a quiet daily centering prayer practice and the immense impact it brings. I have just come off a five-day integral Christianity conference with father Thomas Keating, eighty-three-year-old Benedictine monk. One of the things we did each day was at least two to four sessions of centering prayer at a minimum of twenty minutes a session. Total silence, total inner silence.” “I think the thing I am challenging is the either/or of your questions “either wholeheartedly Christian or ashamedly secular?” We have to have both of those . . . all out full card carrying members of both. When we start to see unity where we have seen distinction, and I mean this in the sacred/secular distinction way, we will see spiritual emergence is happening and arising all around us and it is up to us to clear the obstacles that would impede that emergence. This is really an articulation also of John 16 that lets us see the Holy Spirit is at work in the life of every unbeliever (just like every believer) and it is up to us to help point out that activity.”

Also read here.

Now to Rhythm…
“Spiritual solitude is key for me as well. I have already mentioned the value and importance of a regula fidei and I genuinely believe in it’s centrality. That said, there is one thing I do every day, that is centering prayer. I have been on this pattern for nearly 4 full years now. Two times a day/20 min. (sometimes only one but ALWAYS at least one) I do centering prayer of the Father Thomas Keating sort. This is the way I enact and live into Psalm 46.10. I am convinced a centering practice along with daily input channels are what accounts for whatever creative and theological reflection I have going on in my life. My writing flows from the confluence of these two patterns.”

“Seven years ago I started down the yoga trail. Ashtanga Yoga is the power yoga, get a hard sweaty workout type of yoga. Some of you hear the word yoga and all sorts of red flags go up. Get a grip and do some reading. Yoga practice does not require you to be Buddhist, so relax. My nearly daily practice has improved so much. Yoga’s interface with a centering practice is actually a very interesting interplay. Maybe sometime I will write a post on that.”

Thomas Keating is one of the frequent lecturers on Ken Wilber’s website “Integral Spirituality.” The introduction to his site consists of a logo depicting the many symbols of different faiths with a cross right in the middle which all come together and merge into one single abstract symbol of ultimate unity. One can hardly miss the meaning when we take into account that the entire world is rapidly moving toward a one-world religion in which the infiltration of yoga and especially the contemplative spirituality into the Christian church are playing a major part.

Ray Yungen speaks on Thomas Keating and Basil Pennington. Read here.

“In the book Finding Grace at the Center, written by these two Catholic monks, the following advice is given: ‘We should not hesitate to take the fruit of the age-old wisdom of the East and “capture” it for Christ. Indeed, those of us who are in ministry should make the necessary effort to acquaint ourselves with as many of these Eastern techniques as possible … Many Christians who take their prayer life seriously have been greatly helped by Yoga, Zen, TM and similar practices … “Thomas Keating and Basil Pennington have taken their Christianity and blended it with Eastern mysticism through a contemplative method they call centering prayer. I met a woman who once enthusiastically told me that in her church ‘we use a mantra to get in touch with God.’ She was referring to centering prayer … Keating and Pennington have both authored a number of influential books on contemplative prayer thus advancing this movement greatly. Pennington essentially wrote a treatise on the subject called Centering Prayer while Keating has written the popular and influential classic, Open Mind, Open Heart, and both are major evangelists for contemplative prayer.

This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that contemplative spirituality and yoga are wholly compatible and indeed strange bedfellows. These are the kind of issues we are dealing with — the infiltration of the New Age and the practices of other religions, particularly Hinduism and Buddhism. These are the dangers that are causing immense harm to the body of Christ, especially the younger generation (little lambs). What is the church going to do about it? Probably nothing, because most of them are already so deep into it that it would take a miracle to convince them they are playing with fire.

1 Tim 4:1 But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,

Re 18:4 I heard another voice from heaven, saying, “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not participate in her sins and receive of her plagues;”

The Ongoing Discussion with Rev. Guillaume Smit

Please read Rev Guillaume Smit’s rebuttal to my previous commentary here.

Bearing in mind that you have decided to stop any further discussions with me, I do however want to ask you to bear with me and at least grant me some grace to write a rebuttal to your scathing attack. Perhaps I should start off with your “loving” and “godly” description of my moral fibre.

You use a tactic of divide and intimidate and the spreading of slanderous comments about the integrity of people you disagree with under the guise of protecting the faith. In the mean time you have become an agent of the devil himself.

As a man of the cloth you should know that the only safe way to discern or to arrive at a final and conclusive verdict that someone is an agent of the devil is to consult the Word of God (i.e. the Bible) for it alone gives us a true insight into the character and work of the devil. Yet you categorically refuse to quote from the Bible when you converse with me in writing. You said:

I deliberately refrain from using Scripture references when I write to you. The Bible is not intended to be a proof text for one’s arguments. The Bible is also not intended to be used as a legalistic document viewed as containing only universal laws to be abided [sic]. The Bible is God’s Word, through the testimonies of the faithful believers who wrote it down.

How do you expect to make a fair judgment when someone contravenes our constitution without reading, quoting and referring to the constitution? Any court of law and its judge would be in direct contravention of the law if they refuse the opposing parties and their advocates to study and refer to previous cases? Furthermore, how can you judge me to be an agent of the devil when you yourself declared that the “Bible is not intended to be a proof text for one’s arguments.” This and I really mean “this,” is really and truly one of the most magnanimous enigmas of the emergent fraternity. The other side or the anti-emergent crowd is forbidden to use the Bible as a proof text, but the emergents themselves furtively afford themselves the right to use it as a proof text to identify their critics as agents of the devil. What kind of logical thinking is that?

While we’re on the subject of the law and in our particular case, the copyright law I humbly refer you to the term “Fair Use” which seems to have become an international law for copyrighted material on the internet.

Fair Use

. . . Courts have found that to be “fair” a use has to be transformative and not just reproductive. This means that someone cannot simply start up a blog and upload all the images from the Neiman Marcus website. This would be a merely reproductive use that was not in any way transformative. If, however, you upload select photos from the Neiman Marcus website in order to comment on or criticize the store, products, or even the photograph itself, you are not longer just reproducing the work, you are transforming it. If you are using an image for the following purposes, it is most likely a transformative fair use and not copyright infringement: criticism, comment, news reporting; teaching; scholarship or research; parody. (Emphasis added).

Nonetheless, with due respect to your request to remove your photo form my blog; I have decided to do so unceremoniously, but only on one condition. I will remove your photo from my blog if you remove your slanderous remark that I am an agent of the devil and, in addition, make an official and “Twitter”-like apology on the internet. Like you, I too have copyright on the use of my “picture,” especially when you take into account that the Bible itself provides me with that copyright (As I have already said; only the Bible presents us with a fair an unbiased description of the devil).

In your introductory sentence you said:

It is against my better judgment that I engage in this correspondence with you. I am afraid that you will take what I write and strip it of its original context and use the quote as if itself was what I meant to say.

Okay, I can live with that, only if you would be so kind as to put your gross and slanderous accusation that I am an agent of the devil in the right context for me. If my use of the quote itself distorts and undermines your original intention and the meaning thereof, how would you juggle and mix your original words to prove to me that you intended it to mean something entirely different? Could it be possible that you inadvertently used the word “devil” while you intended to use the word “saint”? This is just another one of the emergent’s magnanimous slight of the hands. When someone quotes you word for word you furtively and ingeniously cry “wrong context, wrong context.” I can only guess where you learnt this wondrous battle cry of defeat. (Does the institution’s name start with a “U” and end with a “P” or is it “U” and “S”?) Be that as it may, you make the most startling and unfounded statements.

For the record: I did not say or even imply in the very slightest that you are a follower of Stephan Joubert’s thoughts, and I can appreciate your innovative thoughts in forging a new missiology (1997) that eventually and quite naturally flowed into the emergent stream, but are your thoughts biblically correct? I have always wondered why people want to deconstruct the old and reconstruct allegedly new ways of presenting the Gospel to a lost world. Isn’t Jesus’ words in Matthew 28 sufficient? —“ All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” If His power on high provides us the ways and means to present His Gospel, why do we need new uncharted ways? Oh! Sorry, I have just overstepped your unwritten law not to quote Scripture in our discussions. What I did say, was that you trusted Stephen Joubert’s testimonial of Rob Bell without examining what Bell says in the light of Scripture. I quoted to you word for word what Rob Bell said in his infamous “Yoga” video, but you conveniently prefer to ignore it. Is your relational philosophy such an overriding impulse that you do not care at all what they say about the Jesus you are claiming to follow and love? What did Jesus mean when He said:

Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

I’m sorry, but I smell a rat and that rat’s name is “relational.” I am all for a loving and right relationship with my brethren but then it must be embedded in the truth as we find it in God’s Word. Any other relationship is forced and disregards God’s truth; it is not genuine and it cannot last because it is built on sand and not the solid rock of truth whose Name is Jesus Christ. There are many other Jesusus, Christs and spirits in our society today and we must make dead sure that we are following the right one.

Rest assured, I wasn’t that concerned about your typo about Rob Bell in your other post. I am more concerned about your false impression of his teachings. Typos will have no effect on your spiritual make-up; wrong doctrines will.

You continued saying:

It seems that your underlying issue is with the New Age Movement. You force remarks from leaders in the Dutch Reformed Church, as well as people associated with the emerging church movement, into a common denominator, by declaring them all to be New Age adherents or worse. There is a saying that goes something like this: If you look for the devil behind every bush, all you will eventually see is the devil. In this process you and Sarel van der Merwe take remarks from its intended context and meaning; you intentionally attack and belittle the integrity of people who sincerely love and serve Jesus Christ; you spread malicious half-truths to the people who read your blog or attend your workshops; you intimidate ministers of religion and other Christian leaders by trying to hijack every meeting where your favourite subject is being discussed or your current enemies are involved. In all this you forget the overarching principle of Christ’s love as the ultimate driving force in Christian dealings. My actual problem is that you consequently accuse everybody associated with the Emerging Church Movement of being deluded by New Age Philosophy, but nowhere do you provide substance to your accusations (i.e. you do not explain why it is new age or how any reasonable reader or listener will be induced into new age philosophy by listening or reading it). You also expect your readers/listeners to know what the true gospel is that you so vociferously defend without putting it forth as alternative to that with which you differ. All I read is biblical verses that you use as support for your own arguments. Please, help me here, what exactly should we preach, in your opinion? Perhaps you could devote a blog post to elaborating on your beliefs and theology? It should be a recurring thing, however, because from time to time newer readers should be able to understand why you think the way you do.

Allow me to correct you on some of your remarks.

• Love is not the overarching principle and the ultimate driving force in Christian dealings. Let me set it down for you in biblical terms: Love without God’s truth is not the overarching principle and the ultimate force in Christian dealings. Please bear with me while I try to explain this to you in the words of the apostle of love — our beloved John.

3 John 2 and 3: Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. For I rejoiced greatly, when the brethren came and testified of the truth that is in thee, even as thou walkest in the truth.

Wow brother John, what about love? Jesus taught us to love one another as He loved us. How can you prioritize truth and not love? I’m sure John’s answer would have been more or less the following: “Love can never be divorced from truth, for the simple reason that Jesus Christ is both love and truth. He is the essence of both truth and love. If it were possible to divorce love from truth you would have had to divide Christ into two halves — the one Truth and the other love in which case you would have had two false Christs. That is impossible because love and truth are the indivisible essence of Jesus Christ.” Moreover, without absolute truth there can be no justice. No court of law would ever be in a position to prosecute and bring to justice a criminal without a justice system that is able to distinguish between right and wrong and true and false. And yet you expect God who is the Great Judge of all people to relinquish His right to judge between a black and white situation (right and wrong, true and false). I can assure you that you are no candidate for Rev. Jannie Pelser’s initiative to instil acceptable norms and values in our society. The words “norm” and “value” entail the necessity to distinguish between right and wrong and true and false (black –and-white as you coined it). Your value system can only lead to total chaos. You said:

You do not acknowledge for a single moment your own shortcomings in the way you interpret Scripture, expecting from your readers to accept your interpretation as the one and only single possible reading. From this viewpoint you spend all your time and energy attacking Christian leaders and pastors and thinkers – people who mostly stood up to the challenge of communicating Jesus’ redemption to a group of people who cannot be reached by your way of evangelism or your black-and-white theology anymore. You use a tactic of divide and intimidate and the spreading of slanderous comments about the integrity of people you disagree with under the guise of protecting the faith. In the mean time you have become an agent of the devil himself. When I read the Bible I see that Jesus reserved his most scathing criticism for the Pharisees and rabbis of his time, people who used the Old Testament in exactly the same legalistic way you are doing today with the whole Bible. In stead of attacking Christians who are trying to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to a increasingly broken generation, why don’t you start spending your considerable energy and knowledge to find ways to help broken, lost and destitute seekers see the light of God’s presence, and the love of Jesus, without judging them?

If you do not accept my interpretation of Scripture you should at least show me where I had misinterpreted it. Neither you nor any other doctors, professors and reverends have ever taken the time to prove to me (from Scripture) that my interpretation is faulty. Nonetheless, you insidiously refuse to quote Scripture to me. How on earth can you prove to me that I am wrong when you refuse to quote the only book that distinguishes justifiably between right and wrong (black-and-white as you put it)? You remind me of Jesus’ words in John 18.

And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?

I wonder who the real Pharisees of today are. Like the officers of the then self-righteous Pharisees they accuse Jesus’ disciples with all kinds of horrendous things but never once  do they take the time to witness (from Scripture) of their evils. Perhaps they are unable to do so because they have rejected the Word of God as the only infallible truth (by cuddling up to the alleged truths in other religions and cultures) and therefore do not know how to distinguish between black and white. Instead they strike the disciples of Jesus with malice and hatred, calling them “agents of the devil.” You were in high spirits and ecstatic with joy when I engrafted your name in the hall of fame, containing the names of Jannie Pelser, Nelus Niemandt and Stephan Joubert. I prefer to be associated with the wonderful Name of Jesus Christ who once said:

Mt 10:25 It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?

• My underlying issue was not with the New Age, at least as far as my comment on Rev. Jannie Pelser’s programme “Brandpunt” is concerned. Ironically, it was Jannie Pelser who mentioned the New Age as a possible enhancement and enrichment of the truth in the Bible. You may recall that he said:

“Is God’s revelation, God’s work, not bigger than just Christianity? Could there not be elements, could we not learn from one another, even if it had to be the New Age? But when we think of the contemplative . . . a being silent in die presence of God, an opening up to God. Is it not a rewarding moment?”

Have you forgotten that you immediately answered in the affirmative by saying:

“Of course it is a rewarding moment . . . but I also specifically want to say the rewarding moment is that we have the opportunity to engage in a conversation with cultural expressions that enable us to come to a standstill so that we may hear what God wants to say to us in a new and fresh way.”

Jannie Pelser referred to the New Age as one possible avenue Christians may explore to learn more about God’s general revelation and you heartily went along with him. What do you mean by “cultural expressions” and “enable us to come to a standstill?” Do you mean that Christians should learn from Eastern religions prevalent in the New Age, such as meditation, contemplation and silence in order to find new ways for God to speak to them?

You claim to bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ to an increasingly broken generation and advise me to start spending my considerable energy and knowledge to find ways to help broken, lost and destitute seekers see the light of God’s presence, and the love of Jesus, without judging them? You seem to know quite a lot about my evangelical outreach to other people. You’re dead wrong, you will never know anything about me because I prefer to obey Jesus who said that my left hand should never know what my right hand is doing.

Are you sure you are following the real Jesus and bringing His Gospel?

2Co 11:4 For [you seem readily to endure it] if a man comes and preaches another Jesus than the One we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the [Spirit] you [once] received or a different gospel from the one you [then] received and welcomed; you tolerate [all that] well enough!

Should you ever decide to continue your discussion with me, kindly refrain from beginning your comments with “Dear Tom” and rather begin with “Dear agent of the devil.”  That would at least prove to me that you are not hypocritical.