A biblical appraisal of the Mosaic Congress held at the Mosaic Church in Fairlands, Johannesburg (4 – 5 Sept. 2009) (Part 1)

The new-old magical way to get in touch with God – “be still,” “be quiet,” “shut up,” “shhhhhhh”

The well-known song “Silence is Golden may have been a hit on the singles UK charts in 1967, but the refrain “Silence is Truth” has hit the Christian Church like a tsunami, carrying with it in it’s destructive wake many unsuspecting Christians. One of the major contributors to this utterly devastating “silent” storm is the Mosaic Church in Fairlands, Johannesburg.

As an introduction to my critique on the Mosaic Congress I would like to draw your attention to certain words and phrases that all the keynote speakers used throughout their presentations. A word that kept popping up like a well-watered toadstool in each of their corpulently worded lectures was the word “silence.” Bearing in mind that most of these speakers’ mentors and gurus have drunk from the wells of Buddhism (i.e. Thomas Merton, Thomas Keating, Marcus Borg etc.) it is no surprise that their entire spiritual journey revolves mainly around Buddhist spiritualities and not the cross of Jesus Christ. In fact, the only time they referred to the word “cross” was when they endearingly spoke of St John of the Cross, a Desert Father who coined the phrase “Silence is the first language of God.”

I attended the two-day Congress with Sarel van der Merwe and couldn’t help thinking what Paul would have said about the absence of any good and solid preaching on the cross, especially in the light of his own statement: “And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:1-2) Paul was saying in effect: “I have not come to you parading my own wisdom but to present to you the power and wisdom of God, which is the cross of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 1:18).

Was St. John of the Cross’ maxim something new and original? Hardly! The following survey will prove that it originated with Eastern religions and the New Age.

The significance of silence in Eastern religions, the New Age and Shamanism

Buddhism

In one of the many anecdotes on the life of Gautama Buddha (born circa 563 BC) it is told that a philosopher once visited Buddha and asked him: “Without words, without the wordless, will you tell me the truth?” Buddha remained silent. After a while the philosopher rose up gently, made a solemn bow and thanked Buddha saying: “With your loving kindness, I have cleared away all my delusions and entered the true path.” (1) This anecdote describes how Buddha sought the essence of truth through silence in his relentless and endless quest for the truth. Cognitive processes such as rational thinking, doctrinal or dogmatic studies and debates, the discernment or evaluation of facts and/or postulates played no part in Buddha’s quest for the truth. During the Mosaic Congress it was resplendently aggravating to hear again and again that wisdom is not found in dogmas, doctrines or propositions but in a way of life, a way of life that one enters into by following the Sage, Jesus Christ.

The path Buddha preferred was completely embedded in “mauna” (in English “silence”) which he hoped to achieve in seclusion and solitude. It is very interesting to note that the word muni (meaning “hermit” or “sage”) is derived from mauna. Buddha was also known as Sakyamuni, the gracefully silent one or sage from the Sakya clan. Please make a mental note of the word “sage” because it pops up frequently in Stephan Joubert’s paper titled ““Being a Radical Pilgrim and Prophet” which I intend to critique later in a separate comment. There are many stories and discourses in Buddhism that are attributed to Buddha himself and in nearly all of them Truth and Silence are intrinsically and inseparably linked. In fact, whenever Truth is mentioned in relation to Buddha it is always said in regard to Silence, so much so that it is believed that Silence in the presence of Buddha equals Truth. Fr. Chandrakanthan who earned his doctorate in theology at St. Paul University, Ottawa, where he also teaches Eastern Religions, wrote the following based on a talk he gave in July, 1986, at the Christian Meditation Centre, London.

Buddha’s Silence was not wordlessness or noiselessness. It had a transforming power, permeating and filling the atmosphere around him with such intensity that people seated at his presence experienced “the ineffable and the inexplicable.” His Silence had no movement, yet people around him moved closer to the Truth just by being in his presence, permeated and filled by the effulgence of his joyous stillness. His Silence was contagious. It was like the unseen powers of a magnetic field or the invisible sound waves that travel in the atmosphere.

The close affinity that is said to enjoin Truth with Silence is not uncommon in the mystical traditions of other religions including Christianity. Whether it be in the Sufism of Islam or in the Hasidim of Judaism, silence is always referred to as the prerequisite for an interior experience of the divine. Silence is often eulogized as the language of the heart. Buddha’s Silence reveals to us the nature and significance of an ideal form of silence. This becomes more evident when we contrast the mauna with our ordinary experience of silence. (Emphasis added)

Hinduism

The Hindu poet and teacher, Dryanadev (A.D. 1290) once wrote in his commentary on the Bhagavad Gita: “Your true praise consists in perfect silence.” God, he also said, does not put on any other ornament except silence.

In the Atharva Veda of Hinduism  the following is said about silence.

He cannot be seen by the eye, and words cannot reveal Him. He cannot be reached by the senses, or by austerity or sacred actions. By the grace of wisdom and purity of mind, He can be seen, indivisible, in the silence of contemplation. This invisible Atman can be seen by the mind wherein the five senses are resting.

In the Maitri Upanishad it is said:

There is something beyond our mind which abides in silence within our mind. It is the Supreme Mystery beyond thought. Let one’s mind and one’s subtle body rest upon that and not rest on anything else.

Adi Shankaracharya said:

Silence is the first door to spiritual eminence.

Sri Chinmoy tells a story about a pious man who studies the scriptures devotedly, and likes to discuss philosophy with a scholar who comes to visit him. They earnestly discuss the path to spiritual liberation, but deep in his heart, the man knows this endless talk is not bringing him any closer to attaining his goal. Now, it happens that the man has a little caged bird in his room, and he likes to hear it sing. But one morning he notices the bird is not singing at all, it has fallen completely silent. He speaks to the bird, tries to coax it, but it makes not a sound. Eventually the man opens the cage door and the bird, in an instant, escapes, flies out of the cage, through the open window of the room, and soars into the infinite freedom of the sky.

The bird taught his master an important spiritual lesson. Silence liberates!

We can talk endlessly, argue, discuss, debate. But the real truth of things, we discover in silence. Eventually we have to hush the mind and its chatter, discover that vastness in our hearts and soar into it.

New Age

Franz Kafka said:

You do not need to do anything; you do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. You do not even need to listen; just wait. You do not even need to wait; just become still, quiet and solitary and the world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked. It has no choice. It will roll in ecstasy at your feet.

Alice Bailey tells us that Sagittarius is called in some ancient books “the sign of silence”. She goes on to tell us that the lesson of Sagittarius is “restraint of speech through control of thought.”

‘Right use of thought, restraint of speech, and consequent harmlessness on the physical plane, result in liberation; for we are held in the human unit, we are imprisoned to the planet not by some outside force that holds us there, but by what we ourselves have said and done.’

Shamanism

(Practices concerned with communication with the spirit world)

In “An Encyclopedia of Shamanism Volume 2” on pages 448 and 449 the following insightful facts are given on the spiritual significance of silence.

It is the wisdom of shamanic peoples to leave in silence the things we cannot talk about clearly in words. There are states of being and numinous experiences that are central to shamanic altered states of consciousness and shamanic healing experiences which defy description through words.

Choosing not to talk about sacred experiences is a way to contain and protect the energy. Though powerful, the energy of the sacred is illusive and easily contaminated. Silence is both a form of protecting the sacred and a means by which to hold the sacred while the nonrational aspects of a sacred experience are integrated.

Silence is often a necessary prerequisite to having an experience of the sacred. This is in part the reason for the traditional vision quest that lasts for three to four days in silence. The vision quest is time designated for silence in the hope that a message from spirit will be “heard.”

Silence is both a way to open to the sacred and to integrate the numinous aspects of sacred experiences. Silence is one of four universal healing salves (storytelling. singing, dance) employed by indigenous peoples to maintain health and well-being. Discomfort with silence, or any of the four healing salves, indicates a state of soul loss. (Emphasis added)

The Word of God

Throughout the Bible God makes it abundantly clear that the preaching of His Word (the Word of Truth as Jesus referred to it in John 17:17) was and still is His way of making Himself known to mankind. The written and spoken Word of God, as we learn from Paul in Romans 10:17, is the mouthpiece, if you will, that produces true faith in the lives of those who obediently and wholeheartedly submit to it’s authority. In fact, Paul emphatically states that no-one can truly know or get acquainted with God unless they call upon His Name (entreat Him according to everything His Name represents) and no-one can call upon His Name (in this particular way) without someone proclaiming or preaching His Word, and no-one can preach His Word without having been called to do so. Their sound (the spoken words of these called and sent out preachers and not their “silence” or “shut ups” or “shhhhhhhs”) went out into all the earth (Romans 10:13-18).

Imagine Peter at Pentecost, placing his index finger in front of his mouth and saying “Shhhhhhh! silence is the first language of God,” and then bidding his audience to sit down with him in silence to experience the presence of God. Let’s do a quick survey. Do you think three thousand souls would have been saved that day if Peter, who had been in touch with God (through Jesus Christ) nearly every day of his life, had listened to Ron Martoia who spoke more than thirty five minutes (not in silence but in well articulated and yet unbiblical sounds) on the silly assumption that “silence is the first language of God?” You must be joking! If we were to accept St. John of the Cross’s and Ron Martoias’s silly notion that “silence is the first language of God” we would have had to rewrite the very first verse in the Bible: “In the beginning God shhhhhhh. . .d.” Not even Jesus Christ, the Word that became flesh, deemed it necessary to practice “silence” in order to “hear” the so-called “first language of God.” He said:

John 15: 3 You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.

Johan 18:20 Jesus answered him, I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in a synagogue and in the temple [area], where the Jews [habitually] congregate (assemble); and I have spoken nothing secretly.

When Jesus said “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32) He never intended the truth to be known through the practice of silence or quietness or stillness. The word “ginosko” means to perceive, understand, to attain knowledge of Him and his teachings through his spoken and written Word which is the Truth (John 17”17). We already have his Truth at our disposal in his written Word and therefore do not need to practice certain techniques so as to learn the truth or to enter into God’s presence. This is a far cry from the belief that the Buddha imparted truth merely through his silent presence and that he only had to look into the eyes of his devotees to impart all the teaching and wisdom that can ever be imparted to all those who are ready to receive it. I pretty much believe that this will be the way Antichrist is going to impart his knowledge (“truth”) to the world.

WHEN WILL WE SEE HIM?

He has not yet declared His true status, and His location is known to only a very few disciples. One of these has announced the soon the Christ will acknowledge His identity and within the next two months will speak to humanity through a worldwide television and radio broadcast. His message will be heard inwardly (silently), telepathically, by all people in their own language. From that time, with His help, we will build a new world. (Emphasis and parenthesis added)

Jesus also said “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” It evidently does not mean that we ought to hear an audible voice, but simply that his disciples follow Him in accordance with his commandments (his teachings, dogmas). They have come to know and discern his voice from other counterfeit voices by following his will as expounded in his decrees (written Word; His Truth).

2 John verse 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.

I sincerely hope to find adequate time to write more detailed comments on each of the speakers’ presentations at the Mosaic Congress, proving to you that many well-known and distinguished clergy in South Africa are already head over heels part and parcel of a full-blown last days apostasy and sadly many, I repeat, many South Africans and especially our youth are being drawn into this godless maelstrom of an end time apostasy. The irony is that most people want to hear the stuff they hear preached in many churches these days.

2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time is coming when [people] will not tolerate (endure) sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching [for something pleasing and gratifying], they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold, And will turn aside from hearing the truth and wander off into myths and man-made fictions.

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

(1) Paul Reps, (ed.), Zen Flesh, Zen Bones (London: Penguin Books, reprinted 1982), pp. 119-120

Wat is waarheid?

Pilatus het hierdie vraag aan die Here Jesus op die vooraand van sy kruisiging gestel nadat die gesprek soos volg tussen hulle verloop het:

Johannes 18:33-38 Pilatus gaan toe weer in die goewerneur se paleis en roep Jesus en sê vir Hom: Is U die Koning van die Jode? Jesus antwoord hom: Sê u dit uit uself, of het ander u dit van My gesê? Pilatus antwoord: Is ek dan ‘n Jood? U volk en die owerpriesters het U aan my oorgelewer. Wat het U gedoen? Jesus antwoord: My koninkryk is nie van hierdie wêreld nie; as my koninkryk van hierdie wêreld was, sou my dienaars geveg het, dat Ek nie aan die Jode oorgelewer word nie. Maar nou is my koninkryk nie van hier nie. Pilatus sê toe vir Hom: Is U dan tog ‘n koning? Jesus antwoord: U sê dat Ek ‘n koning is. Hiervoor is Ek gebore en hiervoor het Ek in die wêreld gekom, om vir die waarheid te getuig. Elkeen wat uit die waarheid is, luister na my stem. Pilatus sê vir Hom: Wat is waarheid? En toe hy dit gesê het, gaan hy weer uit na die Jode en sê vir hulle: Ek vind geen skuld in Hom nie. (Klem bygevoeg)

Kom ons wees sommer wansuit eerlik met mekaar en verklaar onomwonde dat enigeen wat daarop aanspraak maak dat hy die Here Jesus liefhet en hom volg maar versuim om netsoos HY vir SY waarheid (leerstellings, dogmas, doktrines) te getuig. is besig om homself te bedrieg. So’n persoon kan ‘n duisend keer op ‘n dag sê “Ek is ‘n volgeling van Jesus” maar as hy of sy, SY waarheid nie liefhet nie en nie vir SY waarheid getuig soos Hy dit self gedoen het nie, is besig om ‘n ander Jesus te volg. Ons leef in tye waar daar geweldig baie klem gelê word op liefde, verhoudings, onderlinge gesprek, verdraagsaamheid, barmhartigheid en respek (veral t.o.v. die onderskeie godsdienste in die wêreld), maar hierdie dinge word nagejaag ten koste van die waarheid soos ons in in God se Woord vind. Gevolglik word die waarheid waarvoor Jesus Chirstus as ‘n getuie mens geword en aarde toe gekom het in repies geskeur en in die snippermandjie gegooi. Enigeen wat in gehoorsaamheid vir Jesus Christus se waarheid wil getuig word sonder seremonie as liefdelose, arrogante fundamentaliste bestempel omdat hulle kwansuis veroordelend pleks van liefdevol optree.

Dis opmerklik dat Pilatus nie gewag het op ‘n antwoord van die Here Jesus nie, maar hom onmiddellik tot die Joodse gespuis gewend het om SY onskuld te verklaar maar ook om Hom in deselfde asem te verdoem deur Hom gerieflikheidshalwe in hulle hande oor te lewer. Ek verstout my deur te sê dat Stephan Joubert waarskynlik ‘n baie beter joppie sou doen om aan Pilatus te verduidelik wat waarheid is. Ek sê dit op grond van sy onlangse relaas oor wat hy as waarheid definieer op e-kerk se webblad. Kom ons wees gehoorsaam aan die Here Jesus, van wie Stpehan getuig dat Hy die essensie van warheid is, en stel alles wat hy op die webblad kwytgeraak het aan die hand van die Skrif op die proef om vas te stel of sy woorde uit God is, al dan nie.

Stephan begin deur te sê:

Die waarheid is nie proposisies, leerstukke, belydenisse of teologiese geskrifte nie. (Klem bygevoeg)

Stephan, soos die meeste ander ontluikende Kerk leiers, is ‘n baie goeie naprater. Trouens, hy gebruik  soms presies dieselfde woorde om sy idees oor te dra.

The truth of the Bible, like any truth, is not best seen ‘objectively’ . . . Where, then can I find authority that I can be sure of? Since God is (by and large) invisible, we are left with ordinary people holding a book. As we had said before, we cannot simply ‘go to the book.’ Truth cannot properly reside as a mere proposition on a paper. Truth lives in persons and relationships.” (Klem bygevoeg). Neil Livingstone

Indien dit nie nodig was om die waarheid in leerstukke (leerstellings, dogmas of dokrines) neer te skryf en in geskriffte saam te vat nie, sou die Here waarskynlik nooit sy eie gekose profete en apostels geïnspireer het om SY waarheid in 66 boeke op te skryf nie. Ons sou dus vandag geen geskrewe bewyse gehad het oor die kernleerstellings rondom Christus se maagdelike geboorte, sy fisieke kruisging, sy fisieke opstanding uit die dood en sy hemelvaart nie. Wat sê die Woord van God — die WAARHEID waarvoor die Here Jesus aarde toe gekom het om ‘n getuienis te wees.

1 Johannes 5: 13 Dit het ek geskrywe aan julle wat glo in die Naam van die Seun van God, sodat julle kan weet dat julle die ewige lewe het en kan glo in die Naam van die Seun van God.

2 Timotheus 3:16 en 17 Die hele Skrif is deur God ingegee en is nuttig tot lering, tot weerlegging, tot teregwysing, tot onderwysing in die geregtigheid, sodat die mens van God volkome kan wees, vir elke goeie werk volkome toegerus.

Dit is die geskrewe Woord, ‘n samevatting van God se leerstellings, wat God se kinders die sekerheid gee dat hulle nou reeds die ewige lewe as ‘n onontneembare werklikheid besit. Dis vir my tog te ironies dat almal, sekerlik ook Stephan Joubert, aanvaar dat ons land se wetgewing en konstitusie as geskrewe dokument bindend en geldend is vir alle burgers, maar sodra diie Woord van God se wetgewing en leerstellings ter sprake kom, kan ons maar daarmee maak wat ons wil. Dit sou voorwaar dom wees om van die land se burgers te verwag om binne die land se konstitusionele ordeningstukture te lewe as dit nie in ‘n algemeen geldende dokument saamgevat was nie. Objektiewe “kopgimnastiek” is miskien nie die uiteindelike doelwit nie maar dit is beslis die beginpunt vir ‘n lewe van gehoorsaamheid aan God en sy leerstellings. Jesus het dan self gesê: “En dit is die ewige lewe, dat hulle U ken, die enige waaragtige God, en Jesus Christus wat U gestuur het”  (Johannes 17: 3). Hoe sou ons ooit vir God en sy Seun leer ken as ons nie hulle leerstellings in ‘n leerstuk (die Bybel) beskikbaar gehad het nie. Maar nouja, wanneer Stephan later sê “Sy Waarheid word geleef, gedoen, gesien, gevoel. Hierdie Waarheid gaan veel meer oor die lewe as oor leerstukke” bedoel hy maar eintlik dat die Bybel nie ‘n geslote kanon is nie, maar dat elkeen se persoonlike spirituele reis, gesprekke (“converstations”) en mistieke ervaringe ‘n bydrae maak tot die voorgesette en voortdurende beskrywing, herskrywing en by-skrywing van die Bybel. Dit is dus ‘n “lewende boek” (“open-ended book”) wat nog nie klaar geskrywe is nie.

The Bible is not considered an accurate, absolute, authoritative, or authoritarian source but a book to be experienced and one experience can be as valid as any other can. Experience, dialogue, feelings, and conversations are equated with Scripture while certitude, authority, and doctrine are to be eschewed! No doctrines are to be absolute and truth or doctrine must be considered only with personal experiences, traditions, historical perspectives, etc. The Bible is not an answer book. (Brian, McLaren, A New Kind of Christianity, p. 52.)

EC leader Tony Jones, youth speaker and National Coordinator of Emergent Village, declared, “I am quite convinced that the Bible is a subversive text, that it constantly undermines our assumptions, transgresses our boundaries, and subverts our comforts. This may sound like academic mumbo-jumbo, but I really mean it. I think the Bible is a f***ing scary book (pardon my French, but that’s the only way I know how to convey how strongly I feel about this.)”(Tony Jones, “Why is the Emerging Church drawn to deconstructive theology?, The church and postmodern culture: Conversation website, 3-26-2007.) Lees hier. (Klem bygevoeg)

Tony Jones se uit die hel aangesteekte uitspraak dat die Bybel hulle grense oorskry en hulle gemaksug ondermyn, laat my dink aan Psalm 2

Laat ons hulle bande stukkend ruk en hulle toue van ons afwerp! Hy wat in die hemel woon, lag; die Here spot met hulle. Dan sal Hy hulle aanspreek in sy toorn, en in sy grimmigheid sal Hy hulle verskrik. (Klem bygevoeg)

Het dit nie tyd geword dat Stephan Joubert en sy e-kerk boeties ronduit vir ons sê waar hulle staan t.o.v. sulke sataniese uitlatings nie? Het dit nie tyd geword vir julle om die Ontluikende Kerk leierfigure soos Tony Jones, Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, en Leonard Sweet soos manlike mans in die openbaar te repudieer nie  . . . of moet ons aanvaar dat hierdie klomp God-haters se integriteit en aansien vir julle belangriker is as die allerheiligste Naam van Jesus Christus? Beteken julle vriendskap en broederskap met hierdie valse apostels en profete vir julle meer as julle volgeling-verhouding met Jesus Christus? Hoe kan ons aanvaar dat julle waarlik gered is as julle onbeskaamd voortploeter om hulle lof te besing terwyl hulle God die Vader, God die Seun en God die Heilige Gees se ewige en onveranderlike leerstellings in die Bybel bespot? Die Here sê tog uitdruklik in 2 Johannes 9 dat enigiemand wat nie bly in die leer van Christus nie, nie gered is nie, en tog hou jy, Stephan Joubert, en jou boeties nog steeds vol dat hulle ware en tere kinders van die Here is.

Ons sou vandag die ellendigste van mense wees indien God sou versuim om sy leerstellings m.b.t. die wedergeboorte, heiligmaking en die ewige lewe in sy Woord laat opteken het nie. Selfs ook die feit dat die Here Jesus die essensie van waarheid is, sou vir ons onbekend wees indien dit nie as ‘n leerstelling in ‘n teologiese boek soos die Bybel vir ons opgeteken was nie. Waar anders sou Stephan Joubert leer dat die waarheid ‘n persoon is en dat sy Naam Christus is? Jy kan nie ‘n enkele leerstelling soos dat Jesus die eesensie van waarheid is uit ‘n leerstellige boek soos die Bybel aanvaar nie sonder om ook ander leersstellige waarhede, ook uit ‘n teologiese geskrif soos die Bybel, te aanvaar nie. Dis egter tragies dat Stephan nie die rede waarom Christus die waarheid is volledig aanhaal nie. Hy is nie net die essensie van Waarheid nie, maar ook die enigste Weg en die Lewe na God die Vader. Hy is dus die enigste Waarheid omdat Hy terselfdetyd ook die enigste Weg en Lewe na die Vader is. Waarom versnipper Stephan Joubert Johannes 14:6 op so ‘n onvanpaste wyse? Is dit nie miskien omdat hy al in die verlede verklaar het dat daar ook waarhede in ander godsdienste soos die Boeddhisme en selfs in die ateïsme is nie? Wil hy daarmee te kenne gee dat jy Jesus, die essensie van waarheid, ook in ander godsdienste kan vind op voorwaarde dat jy sy essensiële eienskappe soos dat Hy ook die enigste Weg en Lewe is, weglaat?

Die Ontluikende Kerk plaas geweldig baie klem op barmhartigheidswerk, veral onder die armes en die vertotelinge, maar in 2 Timotheus 3: 16 en 17 sien ons baie duidelik dat as jy nie die hele Skrif as ‘n nuttige leerstuk beskou om leuens te weerlê, die afvalliges tereg te wys en hulle in die geregtigheid te onderlê nie, beteken jou goeie werke net mooi niks nie. Dis dan ook om hierdie rede dat die Here Jesus gebid het; “Heilig hulle in U waarheid; U Woord (leerstellige geskrifte) is die waarheid” (Johannes 17: 17). Heiligmaking word dus pertinent deur God se leerstukke in sy Woord bewerkstellig en nie deur goeie werke nie.

Stephan Joubert sê voorts:

Waarheid is nie objektiewe kennis wat in kerklike dokumente of teologiese laaie weggepak is wat mens na willekeur daar kan uithaal en objektief bespreek nie. Waarheid is nie blote kop-gimnastiek nie. Sulke soort waarheid kos jou nie veel nie.

Toegegee, waarheid wat stof in laaie of op rakke versamel beteken ook niks nie. Leerstellige waarhede wat jy alleen in God se Woord kan opdiep, moet in jou daaglikse lewenswandel ‘n werklikheid wees; dit moet jou hele uitkyk op God, jouself, die wêreld en veral ook die onglowiges in ander godsdienste sodanig moduleer dat jy daarna kyk volgens God se perspektiewe en nie jou eie vooropgestelde idees nie. Stephan het nog altyd die noodsaaklikheid en die belang van kosteberekning in die beoefening van die waarheid beklemtoon. Kosteberekning kom daarop neer dat elke Christen stil moet gaan sit om te besluit of hy werklik bereid is om “na Hom te gaan buite die laer om sy smaad te dra.” (Hebreërs 13:13). Wat is hierdie smaad? Christene wat dit hulle erns maak om die Here Jesus te volg al sou dit ook hulle lewens kos, moet verwag om die smaad en die hoon van hulle eie familielede, vriende, kollegas, mede-Christene, en kerkgenote te verduur. Hierdie smaad en hoon word hulle deel, veral wanneer hulle hard stry vir die leerstellings wat eenmaal deur die apostels aan ons oorgelewer is (Judas 1:3). U kan maar verseker weet dat as Jesus Christus wat aarde toe gekom het om vir die waarheid te getuig ter wille van hierdie waarheid gekruisiig is, gaan elkeen wat ook bereid is om vir dieselfde waarheid te getuig ook verguis, vervolg, verneder en selfs doodgemaak word (soos diit tans in baie lande die geval is). Dis die prys wat elke ware volgeling van Jesus besreid moet wees om te betaal.

Ek het eintlik nog nooit hierdie tipe kosteberekening om Jesus se smaad buitekant die laer te verra by Stephan Joubert of enige van sy mede-ontuikende broers gewaar nie. Trouens, van die toonaangewendste leierfigure wat nog steeds in Stephan Joubert se goeie boekies is, sê soms skreiend godddelose dinge sonder dat hy hulle in die openbaar repudieer, teregwys of ten minste so ‘n bietjie reghelp na aanleiding van 2 Timotheus 4: 1-3.

2 Timotheus 4:1-3 Ek besweer jou dan voor God en die Here Jesus Christus, wat die lewende en die dode sal oordeel by sy verskyning en sy koninkryk: ver-kondig die woord; hou aan tydig en ontydig; weerlê, bestraf, vermaan in alle lankmoedigheid en lering; want daar sal ‘n tyd wees wanneer hulle die gesonde leer nie sal verdra nie, maar, omdat hulle in hul gehoor gestreel wil wees, vir hulle ‘n menigte leraars sal versamel volgens hulle eie begeerlikhede, en die oor sal afkeer van die waarheid en hulle sal wend tot fabels. Maar wees jy in alles nugter; ly verdrukking; doen die werk van ‘n evangelis; vervul jou bediening. (Klem bygevoeg).

Indien die Evangelie van Jesus Christus die waarheid is, en ‘n mens sou nogal dink dat dit wel die waarheid is omdat Christus self verklaar het dat die waarheid die mens vrymaak, dan moet Stephan Joubert se ontluikende boeties besig wees om die waarheid te verkondig omdat hulle, volgens Stephan, die Evangelie in die wereld uitdra. Is dit die waarheid? Verkondig hulle werklikwaar die waarheid van die Evangelie. Stephan Joubert dink so.

Rob Bell — ek het hom al sien optree — baie keer. Hy stap op daai verhoog, met sy swart bril en sy weird klere en sy kitaar, maar as hy sy mond oopmaak dan is dit die Evangelie. Dieselfde met Dan Kimball. Ons sit en luister in Amerika, in Los Angeles, laasjaar en soos ek sê hierdie ou het nie een plek, het hy die Skrif oortree nie.  Hy sê “ek glo in die hel, letterlik.” “Ek glo in die opstanding, letterlik.” “Ek glo in die maagdelike geboorte.” “Ek dink homoseksualiteit is verkeerd.” Maar hy word beskou as die leier van die emerging church. Hy lyk net weird . . . . sulke mowhawk hare wat so staan. Dit lyk of daar een of ander, of iets in sy kop ontplof het. Maar dit is mense wat die vraag vra hoe gaan ek die wêreld in 2008, 2009, 2010 vir Jesus bereik? Maar moet ek die kerk transformeer op ’n nuwe manier?

Vir die waarheid om werklik waarheid te kan wees, moet dit onveranderlik, absoluut en onfeilbaar wees. Indien waarheid vandag so en more anders is, d.w.s. as waarheid sommer so goedmoeds aangepas of verander word om nuwe generasies en hulle behoeftes te akkomodeer, kan gister se waarheid hoegenaamd nie meer as die waarheid beskou word nie. Gister se waarheid sou dan nie meer betroubaar wees nie en indien gister se waarheid onbetroubaar is, sal vandag se waarheid oor ‘n klompie jare self ook onbetroubaar wees. Dis die einste rede waarom die ontluikende boeties en sussies voortdurend praat van hulle spirituele reis (“spiritual journey”), ‘n reis waarop hulle voortdurend soek na die waarheid. Brian McLaren sê “We need a new quest” bedoelende dat die ou waarhede uitgedien is.

Hoe dit ookal sy, Stephan Joubert stem blykbaar saam dat die waarheid onveranderlik moet wees want hy sê met oortuiging die volgende:

Maar is die waarheid net proposies, leerstukke en preke? Nee, die waarheid is ‘n persoon. Sy naam is Christus. Sy Waarheid is relasioneel, verhoudings-gedrewe. Sy Waarheid word geleef, gedoen, gesien, gevoel. Hierdie Waarheid gaan veel meer oor die lewe as oor leerstukke. Geen wonder nie dat die eerste volgelinge van Jesus “mense van die Weg” genoem is. Hulle het Waarheid geleef, Jesus se soort. (Klem bygevoeg)

Dit klink baie mooi en suiwer evangelies, maar dis beslis nie die waarheid nie. Christus Jesus het baie meer waarde geheg aan die waarheid van sy Evangelie as aan verhoudingsgedrewe relasies. Trouens Hyself het op ‘n kol baie duidelik gesê:

Moenie dink dat Ek gekom het om vrede op die aarde te bring nie. Ek het nie gekom om vrede te bring nie, maar die swaard. Want Ek het gekom om tweedrag te verwek tussen ‘n man en sy vader, en tussen ‘n dogter en haar moeder, en ‘n skoondogter en haar skoonmoeder. En ‘n mens se huisgenote sal sy vyande wees. Wie vader of moeder bo My liefhet, is My nie waardig nie; en wie seun of dogter bo My liefhet, is My nie waardig nie. (Klem bygevoeg).

Hoor u dit? Om enigiemand wat die Evangelie van Jesus Christus wil her-bedink of –oordink, wil herverwoord en “repaint,” as ware en suiwere evangelieverkondigers te loof en te prys, is nie besig om hulle verhouding met Jesus Christus te bou of te verstewig nie maar is juis besig om hulle verhouding met Hom te vernietig deur hulleself onwaardig te maak. Hulle heg meer waarde aan hulle verhouding met valse sg. evangelieverkondigers as aan Jesus Christus en sy waarheid. Hoe durf hulle dit doen as Jesus Christus self sy waarheid bokant sy eie Naam verhewe het?

Ps 138: 2 I will worship toward Your holy temple and praise Your name for Your loving-kindness and for Your truth and faithfulness; for You have exalted above all else Your name and Your word and You have magnified Your word above all Your name!

Indien Jesus Christus die waarheid is, en Hy IS inderdaad die waarheid, dan moet die waarheid ook ewigdurend onveranderlik, onbuigsaam, onfeilbaar en onaantasbaar wees omdat Jesus Christus gister en vandag en tot in alle ewigheid dieselfde is. En tog is Stephan Joubert en sy ontluikende boeties voortdurend besig om die Evangelie (die waarheid van God) te her-oordink (“re-think”), te herverwoord, en te “repaint” (soos Rob Bell dit in sy boek “Velvet Elvis” stel). Die spirituele reis waarop hulle hul begeef maak dat hulle voortdurend dinge verkondig wat hoegenaamd nie met die Woord van God ooreenkom nie. Hoe op deeske aarde kan Stephan Joubert in die openbaar in een van sy preke verklaar dat wanneer Rob Bell sy mond oopmaak dan is dit die Evangelie, as die man God se Woord (dié Woord wat die Evangelie van Jesus Christus bevat) verkleineer? Rob Bell het ‘n besondere lae dunk van die Woord van God. Syns insiens kan niemand met sekerheid sê “Ek ken die Here en sy waarheid” nie. Die beste wat ons kan doen is om inwaarts te keer en te luister na ons innerlike stem. Vir hom is die Bybel te misterieus om volledig verstaan te kan word.

“One of the great ‘theologians’ of our time, Sean Penn, put it this way: ‘When everything gets answered, it’s fake. The mystery is the truth. ”The mystery is the truth” (Velvet Elvis, p. 33).

“Jesus wants to heal our souls, wants to give us the shalom of God. And so we have to stop. We have to slow down. We have to sit still and stare out the window and let the engine come to an idle. We have to listen to what our inner voice is saying.” (Rob Bell: Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith p. 118). (Emphasis added)

Een van die groot teoloë van ons tyd, Sean Penn, het dit so gestel: “Wanneer alles ‘n antwoord het, is dit ‘n namaaksel. Die misterie is die waarheid. “Die misterie is die waarheid.”

Jesus wil ons siele heelmaak, wil ons die shalom van God gee. En daarom moet ons stop. Ons moet ons pas verminder. Ons moet stilsit en by die venster uitstaar en die enjin laat luier. Ons moet luister na wat ons innerlike stem sê.” (Klem bygevoeg)

God sê tog baie duidelik dat “sy goddelike krag ons alles geskenk [het] wat tot die lewe en godsvrug dien, deur die kennis van Hom wat ons geroep het deur sy heerlikheid en deug” (2 Petrus 1:3). Let asseblief daarop dat dit “deur die kennis van Hom” is dat sy kinders in staat gestel word om sy  godsvrug te belewe en uit te lewe. Dis nie iets hier binne-in onsself (die innerlike stem) waarna ons moet luister om die vrede van God en sy siels-helende werking te ervaar nie. Jou innerlike stem of intuitiewe waarneming is met een woord gesê onbetroubaar omdat jou hart bo alles bedrieglik en uiters verdorwe is m.d.g. dat jyself dit nie kan ken nie (Jeremia 17: 9). In weerwil hiervan, suggereer Rob Bell dat jou innerlike stem die medium is waardeur God ons siele wil heelmaak en ons die shalom (vrede) van God wil gee. Dit is niks anders as ‘n ander heils-evangelie nie (wat natuurlik nie, soos Paulus gesê het, bestaan nie – Galasiërs 1:6 en 7). Dit kom daarop neer dat jy jou heil in jouself moet soek deur die enjin so ‘n beitjie te laat “idle” sodat jy na jou innerlike stem kan luister. Is dit nie ironies nie? Rob Bell verruil God se Woord wat absoluut betroubaar is en ten volle aangeneem moet word (2 Timotheus 2:11) vir die “innerlike stem” wat geheel en al onbetroubaar is. Moet ons verbaas wees oor Rob Bell se onbybelse uitlatings? Hoegenaamd nie, veral nie wanneer ons in ag neem wat sy siening rondom die verkondiging en uitdra van die Evangelie van Jesus Christus is nie. Luister ‘n bietjie hierna:

“Oftentimes the Christian community has sent the message that we love people and build relationships in order to convert them to the Christian faith. So there is an agenda. And when there is an agenda, it isn’t really love, is it? It’s something else. We have to discover love, period. Love that loves because it is what Jesus teaches us to do. We have to surrender our agendas” (Velvet Elvis, p. 167).

Die Christen gemeesnkap het dikwels die boodskap uitgedra dat ons mense liefhet en verhoudings bou met die doel om hulle tot die Christelike geloof te bekeer. Daar is dus ‘n agenda. En wanneer daar ‘n agenda is is dit nie ware liefde nie, is dit? Dis iets anders. Ons moet liefde ontdek, punt. Liefde wat liefhet want dit is wat Jesus ons leer om te doen. Ons moet ons agendas prysgee.

Rob Bell het ‘n volkome skewe siening van wat ware liefde is. Maar, voordat ons sy baanbrekerswaarhede onder die loep neem wat, soos Stephan ons probeer oortuig, die suiwere Evanglie is sodra die man sy mond oopmaak, moet ons eers gaan kyk wat God sê:

2 Korinthiërs 5:11-14 Omdat ons dan die vrees van die Here ken, probeer ons om die mense te oortuig; maar voor God is ons openbaar, en ek hoop om ook in julle gewetens openbaar te wees. Want ons beveel ons nie weer by julle aan nie, maar ons gee julle aanleiding tot roem oor ons, sodat julle iets kan hê teenoor die wat hulle op die uiterlike beroem en nie op die hart nie. Want as ons uitsinnig is, is dit tot eer van God; en as ons by ons verstand is, is dit om julle ontwil. Want die liefde van Christus dring ons. (Klem bygevoeg)

Uit die bg. gedeelte is dit baie duidelik dat Paulus ‘n besondere agenda gehad het en daardie agenda was om mense te probeer oortuig om hulle tot die Here Jesus te bekeer omdat die liefde van Christus hom daartoe gedring het. Dit is uiters belangrik om te weet dat alleenlik diegene wat die vrees van die Here ken se kop reg opgeskroef sal wees om God se agenda van bekering, wederbaring en verlossing aan mense te verkondig. Hulle wat die vrees van die Here nie ken nie sal agendas, insluitende Paulus s’n, prysgee — en dit nogal ter wille van ‘n sg. liefde. Hoedat intelligente en hoogaangeskrewe mense soos Stephan Joubert sulke uitlatings as suiwer envangelie kan beskou, gaan ‘n mens se verstand te bowe. Dink ‘n bietjie daaraan, Rob Bell sê “Ons moet liefde ontdek – liefde wat liefhet want dit is wat Jesus ons leer om te doen.” Van watter Jesus praat hy? Dit kan beslis nie die Jesus van die Bybel wees nie. Paulus sê dat dit nie sy eie liefde is wat hom gedring het om mens met die Evangelie te bereik nie, maar die liefde van Christus (in Hom) wat hom daartoe gedring het. Dis dus ‘n liefde wat jy nie nodig het om nog te ontdek nie of waarvoor jy op ‘n eindelose spirituele reis moet gaan om dit te soek nie. Dis ‘n liefde wat nog altyd daar was omdat Jesus Christus gister en vandag en tot in alle ewigheid onveranderlik dieselfde is. Hy is die essensie van liefde en sy liefde kan jou alleenlik dring wanneer sy liefde in jou hart uitgestort is en dit geskied alleenlik by jou bekering. As jy nog nie tot bekering gekom het nie, sal jy beslis nog nie sy liefde in jou binneste ervaar nie en sal jy noodwendig op ‘n nimmereindigende reis moet gaan om ‘n ander soort “liefde” te ontdek, ‘n liefde wat God se agenda om mense te oortuig om hulle tot Hom te bekeer, eenkant skuiwe. En Stephan Joubert het die vermetelheid om in die openbaar te verklaar dat wanneer Rob Bell sy mond oopmaak, is dit die Evangelie en dat hy ‘n persoon is wat die vraag vra “hoe gaan ek die wêreld in 2008, 2009, 2010 vir Jesus bereik.” Vergeet dit! Hy sal nooit in der ewigheid ‘n enkele persoon vir Christus wen as hy Jesus, Paulus en die ander apostels se agenda om verlore sondaars tot bekering te lei, prysgee nie.

‘n Verkeerde sotereologie lei onomwonde tot ‘n verkeerde siening m.b.t. die ewigheidebestemming van gelowiges en ongelowiges asook ‘n onbybelse benadering tot die regverdige oordele van God. Die liefde wat Rob Bell sê ons moet ontdek, hou verband met sy siening oor die hemel en die hel. Die algemeen aanvaarde vooropstelling wat in baie geestelike kringe geld, is dat ‘n God van liefde nooit enige van sy skepsels ‘n ‘n verskriklike plek soos die hel, sal werp nie. Daarom probeer hulle voortdurend om die hel eerder op ‘n ander plek, soos hier op aarde, te lokaliseer. Rob Bell sê:

“Now if there is a life in heaven, and we can choose it, then there’s also another way. A way of living out of sync with how God created us to live. The word for this is hell: a way, a place, a realm absent of how God desires things to be. We can bring heaven to earth; we can bring hell to earth.

For Jesus, heaven and hell were present realities. Ways of living we can enter into here and now. He talked very little of the life beyond this one because he understood that the life beyond this one is a continuation of the kinds of choices we make here and now.

For Jesus, the question wasn’t, how do I get into heaven? But how do I bring heaven here? The question wasn’t, how do I get in there? But how do I get there, here?” (Velvet Elvis, p. 147).

Nou, as daar ‘n lewe in die hemel is, en ons kan dit kies, dan is daar ook ‘n ander weg, ‘n lewensweg wat nie in harmonie is met hoe God ons geskape het om te lewe nie. Die woord hiervoor is hel: a weg, ‘n plek, ‘n gebied waar God se begeertes vir dinge om te wees, afwesig is. Ons kan hemel op aarde bring; ons kan hel op aarde bring.

Vir Jesus was hemel en hel teenswoordige realiteite. Weë wat ons kan betree hier en nou. Hy het baie min oor die lewe anderkant hierdie een gepraat omdat Hy verstaan het dat die lewe anderkant hierdie een ‘n voortsetting is van die soort keuses wat ons hier en nou maak.

Vir Jesus as die vraag nie, hoe kom ek in die hemel? Maar hoe ek hemel hierheen bring? Die vraag was nie, hoe kom ek daar in nie? Maar hoedat ek hier daar uitkom?

Die Here Jesus het op ‘n dag gesê: “Dan sal Hy ook vir dié aan sy linkerhand sê: Gaan weg van My, julle vervloektes, in die ewige vuur wat berei is vir die duiwel en sy engele” (Matteus 25: 41). As ons, soos Stephan Joubert, ons sou oorgee aan die Rob-Bell-hemel-en-hel-evangelie, dan moet ons glo dat die Here Jesus, deur wie alles ontstaan het (Johannes 1:3), so wrintie waar die aarde vir die duiwel en sy engele gemaak het. U sien, sodra ‘n mens sulke Bybel-vreemde opmerkings maak dan val ander gedeeltes in die Woord so gevaarlik uit plek dat dit in ‘n sirkus ontaard. Ja, ek word kwaad en ek het die reg om kwaad te word wanneer ek sien hoedat ons jongmense deur sulke snert mislei en verlei word. Hulle vergeet gerieflikheidshalwe Jesus se woorde in Matteus 18: “ . . . maar elkeen wat een van hierdie kleintjies wat in My glo, laat struikel, dit is vir hom beter dat ‘n meulsteen aan sy nek gehang word en hy wegsink in die diepte van die see.” Rob Bell se heils-evangelie — dié een wat Stephan Joubert die ware Evangelie noem — berus op die soort keuses wat ons hierdie kant van die graf maak. As jy ‘n bietjie dieper delf, sal jy agterkom dat Rob Bell maar eintlik verwys na die Oosterse begrip van goeie en slegte karma.

Weer eens, enigiemand wat elke woord uit Rob Bell se mond as suiwer evangelie beskou, moet óf ‘n klap van die windmeul weghê óf moes reeds so ver van die Here af weggedryf het dat hy nie meer die ware evangelie van ‘n valse een kan onderskei nie. Trouens, die Woord van God waarsku baie ernstig teen die gevaar om al hoe verder en verder van die Here af weg te dryf.

Hebreërs 2:1-4 Daarom moet ons des te meer ag gee op wat ons gehoor het, dat ons nie miskien wegdrywe nie. Want as die woord deur engele gespreek, onwankelbaar was, en elke oortreding en ongehoorsaamheid regverdige vergelding ontvang het, hoe sal ons ontvlug as ons so ‘n groot saligheid veronagsaam wat, nadat dit eers deur die Here verkondig is, aan ons bevestig is deur die wat dit gehoor het, terwyl God ook nog saam getuig het deur tekens en wonders en allerhande kragtige dade en bedélinge van die Heilige Gees volgens sy wil?

Rob Bell dryf soms openlik die spot met die Evangelie van Jesus Christus. Hy skryf onder andere:

“The presentation often begins with sin and the condition of human beings, separated from God and without hope in the world. God then came up with a way to fix the problem by sending Jesus, who came to the world to give us a way out of the mess we find ourselves in. So if we were to draw a continuum of the story of the Bible, Jesus essentially shows up late in the game” (Velvet Elvis, p. 82).

Die aanbieding begin dikwels met sonde en die toestand van mense, geskei van God sonder hoop in die wêreld. God het toe met ‘n manier vorendag gekom deur Jesus te stuur wat na die wêreld gekom het om vir ons ‘n manier uit die gemors waarin ons ons bevind, te gee. As ons dus ‘n konrtinuüm van die verhaal van die Bybel moet deurtrek, dan het Jesus essensiëel laat in die spel opgedaag.

Volgens Rob Bell is God so ‘n bietjie onkant betrap deur die sondeval van die mens en het eers heelwat later in die konrtinuüm van die verhaal van die Bybel besluit om sy Seun te stuur, in die eerste plek nie om vir ons sondes aan die kruis te betaal nie maar om vir ons ‘n nuwe visie te gee omtrent die lewe wat ons met mekaar moet deel en om ons ‘n beter weg aan te dui vir die wêreld waarin ons lewe.

I’m part of this global, historic stream of people who believe that God has not left us alone but has been involved in human history from the beginning. People who believe that in Jesus, God came among us in a unique and powerful way, showing us a new kind of life. Giving each of us a new vision for our life together, for the world we live in” (Velvet Elvis, p. 12).

Ek is deel van hierdie globale, historiese stroom van mense wat glo dat God ons nie alleen gelaat het nie maar van die begin af betrokke was in die mens se geskiedenis. Mense wat glo dat God in Jesus op ‘n unieke en kragtige wyse onder ons kom woon het om ‘n nuwe soort lewe vir ons aan te dui, wat elkeen van ons ‘n nuwe visie vir ons lewens saam en vir die wêreld waarin ons lewe, te gee.

Die sg. herbeskildering van die Evangelie is nie om dowe neute nie. Die hele doel daaragter is om die mensdom en veral die vervalle Christendom voor te berei vir ‘n “Christus” wat ons ‘n nuwe visie sal gee om te leer hoe om met mekaar in vrede en harmonie saam te lewe en om die pad vorentoe vir ons aan te dui.

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 of 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 Hierrarchy 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 Bhuddists the fifth Buddha, the Moslims 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 neighbor’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.

WIE IS DIE CHIRSTUS?

Die mens se evolusie is dwardeur die geskiedenis deur ‘n groep verligte mans, die Meesters van Wysheid, gebaan. Hulle het hoofsaaklik in die verafgeleë woestyn en bergstreke van die aarde gebly en werk grotendeels deur hulle dissipels wat openlik in die wêreld woon. Hierdie boodskap van die Christus se herverskyning word hoofsaaklik deur so ‘n dissipel wat vir meer as 20 jaar opgelei is vir sy taak, uitgedra.

In die senter van hierdie Spiriutele Hiërargie staan die Wêreldleermeester, Heer Maitreya, wat vir die Christene bekend staan as die Christus. En soos die Christene wat wag vir sy Tweede Koms, so wag die Jode vir die Messias, die Boeddhiste vir die vyfde Boeddha, die Moslems vir die Imam Mahdi, en die Hindoes vir die Krishna. Dit is almal name van een persoon.

Sy teenwoordigheid in die wêreld waarborg dat daar nie ‘n Derde Wêreldoorlog sal wees nie.

WAT Sê HY?

My taak sal wees om julle te wys hoe om as broers saam in vrede te lewe. Dit is eenvoudiger as wat julle dink, My vriende, want dit verg maar net ‘n bereidwilligheid om mededeelsaam te wees.

Hoe kan julle tevrede wees met die maniere waarop julle nou lewe: wanneer miljoene honger lei en in ellende sterwe; wanneer die rykes hulle rykdom voor die armes paradeer; wanneer elke persoon sy naaste se vyand is; wanneer niemand sy broer vertrou nie?

Laat my toe om vir julle die weg vorentoe aan te dui na ‘n eenvoudiger lewe waar niemand gebrek lei nie; waar niemand dieselfde sal wees nie; waar die Vreugde van Broederskap deur alle mense gemanifesteer sal word.

Neem jou broer se behoeftes as die maat vir jou aksie en los so die probleme van die wêreld op.

Die bg. volblad advertensie het op Saterdag, 24 April 1982 in die Rand Daily Mail en in koerante dwarsoor die wêreld verskyn. Sedertdien is die Maitreya se dissipels verwoed besig om sy boodskap in die hele wêreld uit te dra. Die naam Christus (Gesalfde Een) moet noodwendig van al sy unieke karaktereinskappe gestroop word om aan te pas by die valse Christus (anti-Chris) wat sal kom om die wêreld onder Satan se heerskappy te bring. Om dit te kan doen moet die Evangelie van Christus natuurlik ook herbedink en herverwoord word om in te pas by die Antichris se doelwitte. Hierdie valse Christus kan hoegenaamd nie sondes vergewe nie en ook nie die ewige lewe in die hemel aan jou voorsien nie; al wat hy vir jou kan doen is om ‘n visie vir ‘n nuwe lewe hier en nou op aarde te verskaf, waarin die ganse mensdom saam onder een spirituele sambreel as broers en susters in vrede en liefde saam verkeer — en om dan te sê “DIE KONINKRYK VAN GOD HET UITEINDELIK HIER EN NOU OP AARDE GEKOM.”

Dit is dan ook een van die hoofredes waarom kennis en insig as sodanig uitgefaseer moet word want die Satan weet baie goed dat ‘n gebrek daaraan die Here se volk ten gronde rig (Hosea 4: 6), en daarom word daar voortdrend vir hulle gesê: “Julle kan die waarheid nie ken nie en daarom moet ons saam daarna soek op ons gesamentlike spirituele reis.” Daar is hoofsaaklik twee duidelike raakpunte in die doelstellings van die Ontluikende Kerk en dié van die sg. Maitreya – hulle wil die armes, die onderdruktes en die vertraptes se lewenspeil ophef en verbeter (wat natuurlik ‘n baie mooi en deugsame ding is) en hulle wil die Koninkryk van God hier en nou op aarde vestig (wat natuurlik ook ‘n baie mooi en deurgsame ding  blyk te wees).  Daar is egter een probleem hiermee: hulle wil dit doen deur die waarheid soos ons dit in die Woord van God opgeteken vind (sy leerstellings, doktrines of dogmas) “repaint,” en “rethink,” sodat dit nie meer langer ‘n beskrywing moet wees van Jesus Christus, die essensie van Waarheid, die Weg en die Lewe, nie maar van ‘n ander Christus wie se taak dit is om vir ons te wys watter pad ons moet loop op ons nimmereindigende spirituele reis sodat absolute waarheid geneutraliseer kan word en ons as broers en susters kan saamlewe (wat natuurlik ook ‘n baie mooi en deugsame ding blyk te wees).

2 Johannes 9-11 Elkeen wat ‘n oortreder is en nie bly in die leer van Christus nie, hy het God nie. Wie in die leer van Christus bly, hy het die Vader sowel as die Seun. As iemand na julle kom en hierdie leer nie bring nie, ontvang hom nie in die huis nie en groet hom nie.  Want die een wat hom groet, het gemeenskap aan sy bose werke.

Let Us Reason Ministries skryf as volg:

The attitude of liberalism is strong in the Emergent church as they try to reshape Christianity into something different. Experience is held above doctrine which is straight out of the New Age movement’s handbook. New age promoter the late Marilyn Ferguson wrote The Aquarian Conspiracy stating, “The radical Center of spiritual experience seems to be knowing without doctrine … the teacher does not impart knowledge but technique. This is the ‘transmission of knowledge by direct experience.’ Doctrine on the other hand, is second-hand knowledge, a danger” (Marilyn Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy pp. 371, 377.)

(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.

My favourite, highly dangerous quotes

The deadly downward spiral into apostasy is escalating at a furious pace and the Emergent Church via the e-church in South Africa is making a grand contribution to the end-time falling away.

My favourite and highly dangerous quotes come from the lips of a man who is known to be one of the greatest missionaries of all time, Paul of Tarsus. He said:

Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to and different from that which we preached to you, let him be accursed (anathema, devoted to destruction, doomed to eternal punishment)!

2 Thessalonians 2:9-11 The coming [of the lawless one, the antichrist] is through the activity and working of Satan and will be attended by great power and with all sorts of [pretended] miracles and signs and delusive marvels – [all of them] lying wonders – And by unlimited seduction to evil and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing (going to perdition) because they did not welcome the Truth but refused to love it that they might be saved. Therefore God sends upon them a misleading influence, a working of error and a strong delusion to make them believe what is false,

So what’s the point? . . . you may ask. We’ve heard you quote these passage from Scripture on several occasions in the past. The point is that Stephan Joubert of e-church fame has begun to write a series of commentaries on 17 September which he entitles “My favourite, highly dangerous quotes. The theologians he quotes indicate that he is not too concerned about Paul’s severe warning. In part 1 of this series he quotes the German biblical scholar of the pervious century, Ernst Käsemann, who was a student of the liberal theologian, Rudolph Bultmann. Stephan quotes Käsemann’s famous words:

People and institutions do not like to be kept continually on the alert, and they have constantly devised screens to protect themselves from too much heat­. In fact, they have even managed to reduce Jesus’ red-hot message, which promised to kindle a fire throughout the world, to room temperature.”

I can understand why Stephan Joubert singles this out as one of his favourite quotes, especially when you take into account that he is forever comparing himself and his emergent buddies with the so-called institutionalized church. It is also no strange thing that he and his contemplative buddies always end up with the certificates, diplomas and rewards of excellence while the others resemble gloomy and cold thermostats whose mediocrity follows them wherever they go. This is what he had to say about them.

From the time of the early church we are stuck with living thermostats in churches. These spiritual thermostats, including sleepy church leaders and agnostic theologians, want a safe, convenient Jesus. Therefore, they constantly regulate the Jesus story’s temperature to make him predicable. In this process they’ve “domesticated” the real Jesus and his teaching on the kingdom of God.

Frankly, the dangers facing the Bride Of Christ are not present in agnosticism, atheism, the institutionalized church, other religions or even in Satanism. The most sordid dangers are in the ranks of the Emergent Church, the reason being that they are not spreading the “red-hot” message of the Jesus Christ of the Bible (as we’ve seen expounded in Paul’s quotes above) but another Jesus who is imitating the real Jesus. Be my guest and read their articles and commentaries on their blogs and websites. They hardly or ever mention the necessity to receive forgiveness for your sins (through repentance and faith in the Gospel) in order to be saved but are ceaselessly trying to usher in the Kingdom of God here an now. And how do they propose to do that? – not by the preaching of the unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ but by teaching their congregants, with the help of the much esteemed gurus of contemplative disciplines such as Willem Nicol, Johan Geyser, Carel Anthonissen and others, how to enter into the very presence of God through the practice of silence. By the by, the only kingdom they are ushering in is the kingdom of Antichrist whose main aim it will be to unite all religions and to sit as their god in their newly erected temple of global unity.

In one of my very first comments since I started my blog I stated that association to a very large degree mirrors your faith or belief system, especially when you get into the habit of quoting the people with whom you don’t mind to be associated with. Stephan’s liberal use of a quote by Ernst Käsemann proves just that. As Stephan mentioned, he was a student of the liberal New Testament theologian, Rudolph Bultmann, in the previous century but what he failed to mention is that Bultmann did not believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a literal, historical event but merely as a culturally and spiritually conceived event in the minds of his disciples. He admitted that:-

“An historical fact which involves a resurrection from the dead is utterly inconceivable,” (1)

Although Ernst Käsemann rejected his mentor’s belief in a non-literal, spiritual resurrection of Jesus, he did as an adherent to the second quest for the historical Jesus together with Philipp Vielhauer and Hans Conzelmann reconstruct a non-eschatological and non-apocalyptic historical Jesus which equally violates the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In stead he emphasized the present “here and now” nature of the reign (Kingdom) of God. The “here and now” theory of the Kingdom of God must of necessity deny the literal futuristic contents of the Book of Revelation.

Stephan happily quotes Ernst Käsemann who said that people and institutions have managed to reduce Jesus’ red-hot message to room temperature. Now, that’s a very broad statement, especially when Stephan fails to define Jesus’ red-hot message. Could he perhaps have informally referred to Jesus following words?

John 8:21 & 24 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come. . . . That is why I told you that you will die in (under the curse of) your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He [Whom I claim to be--if you do not adhere to, trust in, and rely on Me], you will die in your sins.

Matthew 8:11-12 I tell you, many will come from east and west, and will sit at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, While the sons and heirs of the kingdom will be driven out into the darkness outside, where there will be weeping and grinding of teeth

Stephan Joubert and his emergent cohorts are so busy trying to usher in the Kingdom of God here and now that they have forgotten what the main prerequisite is for entering into God’s Kingdom. The red-hot message of Jesus boils down to one thing: If you do not repent and believe the Gospel as we find it expounded in Scripture you will never see the Kingdom of God. Even those who call themselves children of God and His Kingdom but refuse to accept Jesus’ red-hot message of repentance will be driven out into the darkness of hell where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth for all eternity.

Stephan, I would like to urge you to start preaching the unadulterated and red-hot message of Jesus Christ.

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

(1) R. Bultmann:Kerygma and Myth, 1:8, 39.

Ons eie eg Suid-Afrikaanse “Emergent Pinocchios”

Die ander Waarheid

Almal wat die kindervehaal Pinocchio ken en ook die fliek al gesien het, sal seker die volgende toneeltjie daaruit onthou waar die polisie vir Fox en Cat arresteer omdat hulle iets verkeerd gedoen het en toe probeer om Pinocchio se arm te draai om hulle uit die verknorsing te help.

Fox: My boy, Pinocchio! Come here, hurry!
Fox: [to the cat] It’s old Wood-legs.
Pinocchio: Oh boy, you two must have done something really bad.
Fox: Oh, no, no, no! Not we! Of course we did nothing wrong! Why, they picked up the wrong fellows.
Cat: Yeah. Now, how about you tell that nice policeman that you like, know us, Pinocchio, buddy? Maybe he’ll let us… scram.
Policeman: Right! What’s all this then, you know these two?
Pinocchio: Yeah. Yes, I do.
Policeman: And how is it that a nice hardworking kid like you would know a couple of bums like these two?
Pinocchio: Well, I…
Pinocchio: [to the fox and the cat] Do you want me to tell the truth?
Fox: Oh yes! Always tell the truth, Pinocchio.
Cat: Oh yeah, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, little buddy.
Pinocchio: [looks at Cricket, who nods] These two took my money!
Policeman: That’s what I figured. Well boys, that’s gonna add a little more time to your sentence.
Policeman: [to his horses] Aye, get up there!
Fox: Urgh, not that truth, you little wooden-headed netwit!
Cat: Oh, no, no, no, man. The other truth, tell him the other truth.
Cat: [to the fox] Hey, hey! Give me a little clue here. What was that other truth? (Klem deurgaans bygevoeg)

Ons weet almal dat Pinocchio die kuns geken het om ‘n leuen so oor te dra dat dit soos die reine waarheid geklink het. Daar was egter ‘n klinklare manier waarop sy leuens aan die lig gekom het – sy neus het langer en langer geword met elke leuen wat hy vertel het.

Soos Cat in die Pinocchio verhaal wil ek ook baie graag vir Willem Nicol en Carel Anthonissen vra “What was that other thruth? Voordat ek u op hoogte bring van die “ander waarheid” wat ons eg Suid-Afrikaanse Pinocchios vir hulle landgenote en veral ook hulle NGK Ontluikende kerkgenote opdis, wil ek net eers ter inleiding sê dat hierdie kommentaar gerig is op die onderhoud wat Johan Symington verlede Sondagaand (13/09/2009) op RSG in die program “Kruis en Dwars” met Nicol en Anthonissen oor Postmoderne spiritualiteite gehad het. Dr. Willem Nicol is ‘n bekende figuur in die NG Kerk wat Christelike meditasie en in die besonder die verskynsel van “stilte” in kontemplatiewe meditasie onder die aandag bring van die NG kerklui. Dr. Carel Antohosissen is betrokke by die Sentrum vir Christelike Spiritualiteit in Kaapstad. U kan hier meer oor hom lees.

Dié moet ek darem sê: Johan Symington het ‘n paar indringende vrae gevra. Een hiervan wat Willem Nicol ‘n “emerging” eierdans laat doen het, was die volgende. Ek is jammer dat ek my lesers moet toegooi met Willem en Carel se wyshede maar ek haal hulle eerder uitgebreid en volledig aan voordat hulle my daarvan beskuldig dat ek hulle buite konteks aanhaal.

Johan: As ek nou ‘n stildiiens gaan bywoon, wat kan ek verwag?

Carel: Ek dink ‘n ervaaaaring. Willem het vroeër daarna verwys dat ons in die kerke het gewoond geraak dat die hoofitem van jou diens is maar die prediking en dit appelleer baie sterk [op] die rasionaele, die verstaan van die Evangelie, maar ek dink wat hier gebeur is dat die Woord funksioneer nog steeds; ons lees die Bybel, maar die Bybel word binne heeltemal ’n ander konteks geplaas. So, ek wil amper sê, mense beter luister daarna en dit word ook omring en versterk met simboliese handelinge, litrugiese dinge.

Johan: Verduidelik ‘n bietjie, hoe verskil dit van ‘n gewone erediens?

Carel: As jy instap in die diens, wil ek amper sê, is die tema van die oggend wat uit die Bybel uitkom, ons volg eintlik die kerklike jaar se rooster, is die tema onmiddellik simbolies voorgestel; jy stap in en jy sien reeds met jou oë wat amper gaan gebeur en dan speel ons gewoonlik inleidende musiek; dit skep ‘n bepaalde stemming maar dit is nie net dit nie. Ek dink dit is meer as dit, dit probeer mense, ek dink, via ‘n ander kanaal nader bring aan die Bybel, aan die Woord.

Johan: [Is dit] dan “chanterig” soos die ou Klassieke tradisie was? (Johan het waarskynlik gesinspeel op die ou Gregoriaanse Gesange wat in die Roomse katolieke Kerk en veral in hulle kloosters deur monikke en nonne gesing word, ek wil amper sê, om Carel se uitdrukkihng te gebruik, soos die Bhoeddiste met hulle dreunsang).

Carel: Ons sing ‘n verskeidenheid liedere, . . . nee, nee, gladnie “chanterig” nie. Ek gryp terug op die hele ou tradisie, van die misse wat Mozart geskryf het, die Kyries en Benedictusse, deur tot nuwer interpretasies van Psalm 23. Ek het nou in Wallis wonderlike musiek opgespoor. Ek het amper al gedink ek gee vir Fanie Smit ’n bietjie kompetisie daar in ons diens want dit raak mense nogal; musiek vul baie sterk aan. Miksien kan ek net [iets sê] oor die liturgiese of die rituele wat ons wel gebruik. Ons wissel nogal af; ek dink Willem hulle doen ook iets soortgelyks. Ons sal redelik gereeld, amper tweemaal ‘n maand die eucharistie of die Nagmaal hou, tekens van brood en wyn, bedien of uitdeel, en dan is daar ook ’n ritueel waar mense gewoon kerse aansteek as ’n teken van toewyding of waardeur hulle ook ander mense bring voor God. En dan’t ons, wat vir my een van die mees sinvolle rituele is, is ’n helingsritueel waar ons met olie mense salf, eintlik nader nooi, vorentoe nooi om te kom kniel, en dit is baie betekenisvol vir mense en, ek dink Willem het dit reg in die begin gesê, ek dink ons ken ’n klomp waarhede maar êrens is ons nie ingeoefen om dit ook te leef en te beleef nie en ek dink dit is wat die stildiens vir my beteken . . . ’n Vrou, wat nou eintlik in die NG kerk grootgeword het en deur al die tradisies gekom het, by die Charismatiese kerke ’n draai gegooi het, het beland by die stildiens en vir my na ’n ruk gesê, dit is nou waar sy haar huis gevind het, dit is waar sy tuisgekom het maar sy wil net vir my as leraar een iets sê, dat ek nooit hier moet “intrude” nie, nooit moet inmeng hier nie. En, ek dink is, dit sê miskien alles van die stildiens is dat daar’s nie iemand wat nou domineer of manipuleer, die hele ding probeer . . . ek berei voor maar dis amper soos ‘n tafel wat ’n mens dek, ’n ruimte wat jy skep waarbinne . . . kom ek sê dit maar vroomweg, ek dink waarbinne jy toelaat, meer ruimte gee vir God se eie Gees om in die stilte, deur hierdie handelinge, iets te doen met mense . . . in elk geval wat jy nie kan beheer nie, wat jy nie kan organiseer nie.

Johan: Sal jy preek? (Johan ken blykbaar die gedeelte in die Skrif baie beter as ons twee Pinocchios, wat sê: Want: Elkeen wat die Naam van die Here aanroep, sal gered word. Hoe kan hulle Hom dan aanroep in wie hulle nie geglo het nie? En hoe kan hulle in Hom glo van wie hulle nie gehoor het nie? En hoe kan hulle hoor sonder een wat preek? En hoe kan hulle preek as hulle nie gestuur word nie? Soos geskrywe is: Hoe lieflik is die voete van die wat die evangelie van vrede verkondig, van die wat die evangelie van die goeie verkondig! . . . Die geloof is dus uit die gehoor, en die gehoor is deur die woord van God.” Ek kom later weer by hierdie gedeelte om vir u te wys hoe onbybels en selfs demonies die sg. Stildiens” is en, kom ek sê soos Carel dit maar sommer vroomweg, dat almal wat glo dat hulle hul tuiste gevind het in die stildiens, gruwelik mislei is.

Carel: Ek, ek het die goed, baie interessant, omgedraai en dit werk, dink ek, binne daai konteks baie goed  . . . die hoofhandelinge is dat ons saam luister na die Woord en dit word in Engels en Afrikaans gelees want daar kom ook Engelsesprekendes, maar voor ons die Woord lees, sal ek seker in drie, vier miniute net inleidend aanwysings [gee] hoe ‘n mens beter kan luister na die Woord. Wat kan jy hoor; wat het dit aan my gedoen reeds. . . .  Maar, om een of ander rede, daai klein bietjie wat jy sê, maak amper die sintuie oop om beter te luister na wat dan gelees word.

Willem: Dit is baie soos ons dit hierso ook doen.  Die doel van die hele opset is om die mense oop en sensitief te maak vir die sentrale Skrifgedeelte volgens die Revised Common Lecttionary van dié dag sodat daar nie na die Skrifgedeelte ‘n preek of iets dergliks is nie. Daar’s net ‘n iets van ‘n inleiding wat seker maak dat die persoon hom reg verstaan [waarmee] jy hom miskien n bietjie nuuskierig maak daaroor en hom dus oopmaak, maar dan is dit die eie, eerstehandse ervaring met daardie Skrifgedeeltes sonder ‘n dominee wat daar tussen jou en die gedeelte kom en “intrude” soos Carel sou sê, en om die volle kollig op daardie gedeelte te laat val, gebruik ons dan musiek en poësie en die hele atmosfeer. Die dominee sit dan ook nie voor nie. Hy’s agter. Voor is die kers en dan gebruik ons ‘n skerm sodat daar geprojekteer kan word skilderye en fotos wat help en natuurlik ook die liedere en “chants” wat ons sing . . . en [dit is] eintlik ‘n baie lekker ervaring van elkeen – direk, persoonlik, eerstehands voor ‘n Skrifgedeelte – en dan is die ervaring tog eintlik dat geen preek kan dit beter doen nie want jy is die ene wat die beste weet hoe daai gedeelte jou nou raak. G’n dominee kan dit beter as jy weet nie, want jy ken jou eie ervaring in jou eie binnewêreld en die betrokke Skrifgedeelte raak jou daarso.

Johan: As ek dit reg het, dan sou die kritiek teen so ‘n sisteem gewees het dat ‘n mens vir die duiwel eweveel kans lewer om influistering te doen, veral as jy die teks nie uitlê nie . . .  die duiwel kan daarmee maak wat hy wil. Hoe sal jule reageer op so ‘n standpunt? (Dis ‘n uitstekende vraag, Johan).

Willem: Ja, nee, ek hoor telkens daai ding dat in die stilte kry die duiwel nou kans. My gevoel is hy kry natuurlik sy beste kans in die lawaai, nê – as my kop lawaai van vrees of kommer of watter ander negatiewe emosies – dit is kos vir die duiwel daai. As my kop stil raak in geloof dink ek hy hou nie daarvan nie en nou die probleem dat die Skrifgedeelte dalk verkeerd verstaan kan word en die duiwel fluister nou vir my ‘n verkeerde verstaan in, dit is wat ‘n mens probeer seker maak met die kort inleiding of as jy mense heeltemal op hulle eie sou laat mediteer vir hulleself nou nie in ‘n diiens waar ‘n inleiding nie gegee kan word nie, dan sê jy maar net dat jy moet lees en mediteer oor wat jy wel verstaan en nie oor wat jy nie verstaan nie. Die probleem dat ‘n mens dan nou heeltemal verkeerde gedagtes gaan vorm uit die Bybel dië vind ek nie. Ek vind die mense wat wel wil mediteer is mense wat die Bybel darem al ‘n entjie ken. Hulle het in ‘n mate met hom grootgeword. Ek dink dit is ook nodig om te sê die rede moet sy rol speel; daar moet genoeg verstaan en kennis wees van die Bybel en sy boodksap. Maar dan kan ‘n mens gerus verder beweeg sodat dit nie net die rede is en die Bybelstudie nie maar ook die belewenis, die intuïtiewe en die emosionele kant van die ding.

Dis net hier waar die “Emergent Pinocchio” neuse langer en langer word. Miskien moet Willem eers weer ‘n slag gaan lees wat hy in sy eerste gepubliseerde boek “Stem in die Stilte” oor die influisteringe van die duiwel geskryf het. Op bls. 97 sê Willem Nicol.

As mens op ingewings wag, kan jou eie innerlike of selfs bose magte ook met jou praat.” (Stem in die Stilte :97) (Klem bygevoeg).

Willem Nicol erken dus dat kontemplatiewe meditasie die duiwel en bose magte die kans gun om hulle eie bose idees en gedagtes in te fluister. Sir John Eccles, Nobelpryswenner vir sy navorsing op die brein, het gesê die brein is ”A machine that a ghost can operate.” Enige vorm van meditasie wat daarop ingestel is om jou gedagtes leeg en passief te maak sodat God kwansuis in die stilte met jou kan kommunikeer en jy in sy teenwoordigehid kan kom, is dus niks anders as ‘n medium waardeur ‘n ander geestesentiteit jou gedagtes kan oorneem om sy eie bose idees by jou in te fluister. Carel se stelling dat die simboliese handelinge, rituele en stilte vir die Gees van God ruimte gee om iets te doen met mense wat geen dominee kan doen nie, is net nie waar nie. Die Here Jesus self het verklaar dat sy Gees alleenlik dié dinge aan ons bekend sal maak wat Hy van Hom gehoor het (Johannes 16:13-16), m.a.w. die Gees sal nooit buite-om die waarheid soos dit in die Skrif vir ons uitgespel word, iets sê of doen nie.

Dié moet ek darem toegee; Willem glo  ten minste nog in die bestaan van die duiwel en bose magte terwyl ander NG predikante ruiterlik ontken dat hy wel bestaan en glo dat ons die naaste aan ‘n duiwel kom wanneer ons in ‘n spieël kyk, bedoelende dat die boosheid per se binne-in die mens die duiwel is. Maar nouja voordat ons Willem voor stok kry oor sy eierdans moet ons darem onthou dat daar nie sulke goeters soos leuens in die Ontluikende Kerk is nie. Dis maar net “’n ander waarheid” soos Pinocchio se twee “vriende” gesê het. Ek vind dit uiters tragies dat die ontluikende broederskap die Bybel alhoemeer minag omdat dit kwansuis teësprekende gedeeltes bevat of soos hulle dit stel die Bybel hom weerspreek, terwyl hulle met leepogies en ‘n afgodiese aanbidding van hulle ghoeroes (soos o.a. Willem Nicol) eerder na hulle “ander waarhede” (nie-weersprekende leuens) luister as na die Woord van God. Dit maak dus nie saak of hulle ghoeroes hulleself telkens weerpsreek nie want hulle “weersprekerigheid” is maar net “ander waarhede” maar wee die Bybel omdat hy hom kwansuis weerpreek.

Carel Anthonissen plaas die hele uitgangspunt en doel van die ontluikende spiritualiteit baie goed in konteks wanneer hy sê, “die Bybel word binne heeltemal ’n ander konteks geplaas.” Om in ‘n ander konteks ingebed te word moet dit noodwendig eers van ‘n bestaande konteks losgemaak of losgeskeur word alvorens dit in die nuwe konteks ingemessel kan word. Dit kom dus daarop neer dat die tradisionele of ou gevestigde erediensgebruike van die Bybel heeltemal ontdoen moet word om plek te maak vir die nuwe konteks waarvan Carel en Willem praat. Ek het reeds vluggies verwys na die gevestigde konteks van die Bybel toe ek Romeine 10:13-17 vir u aangehaal het. Hiervolgens is dit baie duidelik dat God die Bybel (sy Woord) aan ons gegee het om ons te leer en te oortuig wat ons nodig het om gered te word. Die prediking van God se Woord het dus ‘n reddinggewende funksie omdat almal wat dit hoor en terselfdertyd deur die geloof daarop reageer soos die Skrif sê (Johannes 7:38), gered word. As sodanig MOET die Woord van God te alle tye die middelpunt van die erediens inneem, en nie soos die vrou wat Carel vermaan het om nie te “intrude” nie, op ‘n syspoor gerangeer word nie. Sê die Here dan nie self van sy Woord dat dit lewend en kragtig en skerper is as ‘n tweesnydende swaard wat deurdring tot die skeiding van siel en gees en van gewrigte en murg nie, en dat dit ‘n beoordelaar is van die oorlegginge en bedoelinge van die hart? Die murg in die gewrigte is ‘n metafoor van die mens se diepste en donkerste geheime wat hy geneig is om te verbloem met mooi woordjies en goeie dadetjies (soos die blare waarmee Adam en Eva hulle naaktheid bedek het). G’n wonder die Bybel sê dat die mens se hart bedrieglik is bo alle dinge en uiters verdorwe is en dat niemand, nie eens jyself, dit kan ken nie (Jeremia 17:9). Alleenlik die woord an God wat skerper is as ‘n tweesnydende swaard kan die gewrigte (harde been) oopsny en oopkloof om die murg daarin bloot te lê en aan die lig te bring. Juis dan, wanneer sondaarmense hulleself in die lig van God se Woord sien en leer ken, sal dit hulle na die Here uitdryf om Hom aan te roep vir die vergifnis van hulle sondes en hulle redding (Romeine 10:13).

Maar nee, die postmoderne Pinocchios “skree” in die “stiltes” van hulle kontemplatiewe ekskursies: “Weg met die Here se manier om SY Woord in ons eredienste aan te wend. Ons gaan sy Woord binne ‘n heeltemal ‘n ander konteks plaas, ‘n konteks wat ons gaan haal in die verre verlede toe die Woestynvaders die Bybel op ‘n kontemplatiiewe wyse gelees het om hulle in die teenwoordigheid van God te bring (Lectio Divina). Om hierdie “heilige” atmosfeer te skep wil ons as predikante – wat nie gestuur is nie – eerder as huurlinge agter in die kerk gaan sit sodat ‘n aangesteekte kers voor in die kerk ons kontemplatiewe boeties en sussies in die regte stemming kan bring sodat die Woord beter te kan verstaan. Ons is nie juis begaan oor hulle sieleheil nie en ons gee werklik nie om of hulle gered is of nie. Almal, gered of nie, kan op die maniere wat ons in ons stildienste vir hulle aanbied in die teenwoordigheid van God kom.

Multi-sintuiglike of -sensoriese aanbidding

Ten spyte van die Here se opdrag in Johannes 4: 24 dat ons God (wat Gees is) in gees en in waarheid moet aanbid, dring die kontemplatiewe ontluikende voorbankers daarop aan dat jy al jou sintuie moet gebruik om die Here in die “stilte” te kan ervaar. U sal onthou dat toe Johan Symington Carel vra wat ‘n mens kan verwag as jy ‘n “stildiens” bywoon, het hy hom geantwoord met ‘n uitgerekte “ek dink ‘n ervaaaaring.” Hiermee saam gaan natuurlik ook die opsyskuif of marginalisering van die Woord van God as die episentrum van sy waarheid. Gesonde leerstelling word eenvoudig net geminag ter wille van die ervaring.

Doug Paggit (die mede-outeur saam met Tony Jones van die boek “An Emergent Manifesto of Hope”) se voormalige Pastoor, Leith Anderson het in 1992 die volgende redes aangevoer vir die soeke na ervaring in die plek van gesonde leerstelling.

The old paradigm taught that if you had the right teaching, you will experience God. The new paradigm says that if you experience God, you will have the right teaching. This may be disturbing for many who assume propositional truth must always precede and dictate religious experience. That mindset is the product of systematic theology and has much to contribute … However, biblical theology looks to the Bible for a pattern of experience followed by proposition. The experience of the Exodus from Egypt preceded the recording of Exodus in the Bible. The experience of the crucifixion, the resurrection and Pentecost all predate the propositional declaration of those events in the New Testament. It is not so much that one is right and the other is wrong: it is more of a matter of the perspective one takes on God’s touch and God’s truth. [1]

Anderson sê in werklikheid dat die Bybel by wyse van die ervaring van mense met nuwe en vars idees beskrewe word. Daarom lê Willem soveel klem op elkeen se eie, direkte, eerstehandse en persoonlike ervaring omdat geen preek, soos hy dit stel, mense se ervaring kan verbeter nie. Die Bybel is dus nie ‘n geslote kanon nie maar word voordurend aangevul met dié dinge wat mense gedurende hulle kontemplatiewe reise ervaar. Dit klink amper soos Doug Pagitt wanneer hy sê: “putting words around people’s experiences to allow them to find deeper connection in their lives.” Die rede hiervoor is natuurlik om jou eie “kontemplatief-ervaarde waarhede” en ook die “ander kontemplatief-ervaarde waarhede” van ander persone met mekaar te versoen sodat die een nie vir die ander kan sê dat sy of haar ervarings verkeerd is nie; dis maar net ‘n “ander waaheid” en kan  dus as sodanig gebruik word om die immer wordende en groeiende Bybel aan te vul. Die sg. “conversation” (gesprek) in die kontemplatiewe kultuur gaan dus juis oor die oorvertel en die sg. inkarnerende deelname aan mekaar se ervarings. Dis ‘n nimmmereindigende spirituele reis waarin elkeen se ervaring saam bou aan die “waarheid.” Daarom korrigeer Thomas Keating hom baie gou in die onderstaande uittreksel uit die video waarin hy praat oor “oneness” met God en met mekaar, wanneer hy aanvanklik sê “There is one final . . .” en  homself dan gou=gou herstel met die woorde: “since oneness’s are many, maybe its adventurous to say “one final” because there are probably many more final ones after that.”

Al jou sintuie, sig, reuk, gevoel, smaak en gehoor, word tydens stildienste ingespan. In teenstelling met die geloofsvoorwaardes in Romeine 10 wat verklaar dat geloof deur die prediking van die woord en deur predikers met lieflike voete in mense se harte ingebrurger word, glo die ontluikendes dat geloof aangewakker word deur te kyk na skilderye, die aanraking van beelde of ikone, die reuk van kerse of reukwerk en die aanhoor van “chants” en dan eers volg die Woord. Dit sluit aan by wat Carel gesê  het: “Ek, ek het die goed, baie interessant, omgedraai en dit werk.” Leonard Sweet verwys daarna as “EPIC culture” – Experiential, Participatory, Image-Driven, Connected.”[2] Beelde van Jesus wat aan die kruis hang of groot houtkruise asook beelde van die Moeder en die Kind is nie ongewoon in sulke “stildienste” nie.

Thomas Keating, van wie Willem Nicol met lof praat op bladsy 60 van sy boek “Gebed van die Hart” speel al sedert 1940 ‘n leidende rol in die herondekking en heropdieping van die kontemplatiewe/sentreerde gebeds-spiritualiteit en werk ook baie nou saam met Ken Wilber, ‘n sinkretis wat d.m.v. sy webblad die integrasie van alle spiritualiteite en godsdienste bevorder. Die “EPIC culture” (Experiential, Partipatory, Image-Driven, Connected) van Leonard Sweet word op treffende wyse deur Thomas Keating beskrywe waar hy in ‘n video vertel hoedat die Boeddha op ‘n dag 80 000 dissipels op vulture Peak byeengebring het om die konsep van “oneness” met God te illustreer.

There’s one final – since oneness’s are many, maybe its adventurous to say “one final” because there are probably many more final ones after that. But, perhaps this can be communicated by this story which seems to me the Buddhist writer has captured exactly what I’m referring to here.

In one of the Zen stories the Buddha is recorded to have brought together 80 000 disciples . . . and they met on Vulture Peak and there the Buddha chose a Lotus, as you know, the very important symbol of human transformation in the Buddhist and Hindu traditions, and so somewhat like a Eucharistic celebration he raised his Lotus flower and all the monks and nuns, I presume, gazed upon this symbol of unity and spiritual wanton and forgot themselves or lost themselves in the deepest silence of communion with the Absolute and with each other, and because of their numbers the intensity of this divine communication was . . . unsurpassed. And as this deep silence trickled deeper and deeper into the inmost being of all the monks one of the senior monks standing beside the Buddha,  . . . started to laugh and it wasn’t just hee hee hee, it was ho, ho ho ho; he was just bellowing of laughter that resounded off the mountain peaks and shocked all the monks into a kind of spiritual stupor so that their silence of the spiritual kind was utterly shattered.

He lowered the Lotus, the laughter subsided, he turned to this senior student and he gave him the fullness of the dharma, that is to say ultimate enlightenment. Of course the Zen people never tell you what it means. . . . . That’s exactly what it means when you say there is no other; in other words the divine oneness is so unique, no word, no concept can come anywhere close to it; nor can any experience, even the highest kind in this life and probably in the next. In other words, its so transcendent and immiment at the same time that it blows you away and the only possible response when that experience of oneness has reached its peak is to laugh. Nothing is sacred compared to this experience however sacred we try to make it. It just means, “God Is.” There’s nothing else to say or do in that and yet at the same time this very experience, because of God’s infinite diversity is the source of every true ministry or service or love . . . but the acts are nothing compared to the source, to the love; it just is and is always happening and nothing can take anything away from it, nothings can add to it; it intervents reality that we poor little creatures, barely evolved from the vegetables and the animals, are invited.

What does that say if you believe that? What does that say about the ultimate? It must be that God is so humble, he doesn’t want to be God. He’s ready to throw it all away. Of course in Christian terms this is what the incarnation means. Paul says explicitly the Word of God and the Son of God didn’t consider being equal to God something to hang onto. To hell with it! That means God is so close that nobody is uninvited to this banquet of divine love, no matter who the hell you are or what you have done.

Hope, theolizing hope, is not about the past whether you did well, it doesn’t matter whether you did sins  . . . Its not of future because we don’t know whether that leads in. Its about right now, that God, the Ultimate host, is offering us his hospitality which goes to the extent of giving himself away, totally to each of us on condition that we consent. So in this perspective being is more important that doing. Being is more apostolic or evangelizing, to use those terms than silence. Sacrifice is the meaning of this universe. In heaven the total giving away of all that one has is delightful. In this world its hell but you can’t change God and the dynamic of manifesting this infinite humility of God involves for us the total loss of self – not just the false self but of any attachment to an identity that is not God. And so, if reincarnation really exists, its not us who are being reincarnated but Christ or whatever term you have for God. (Klem bygevoeg)

Willem Nicol verwys ook na sekere fisiese ervarings tydens meditatiewe stiltes in sy boek Gebed van de Hart:

“Daar kan allerhande fisiese ervarings wees, byvoorbeeld ’n gejeuk of tinteling, ’n kriewel in die keel, hoofpyn of ’n vreemde gevoel in die kop, ’n swaar gevoel of selfs ’n gevoel van gewigloosheid. Ander begin sug, lag of huil. Alles is tekens dat daar iets aan die gang is.” (Gebed van die Hart :135‑136).

Die geestelike ervarings waarna Carel en Willem verwys gaan dus nie net gepaard met sigbare elemente soos gedomplede ligte (donkerte, volgens Dan Kimball, verteenwoordig spiritualiteit in die ontluikende kultuur en is ook deel van die Bhoeddistiese en Roomse spiritualiteite. Donkerte dui daarop dat iets baie ernstigs besig is om te gebeur), gebedstasies, kerse, reukwerk, skilderye, fotos en ikone nie maar ook soms met ‘n onbedaarlike gelag of gehuil wat die geestelike ervaring van eenwording met die Absolute en met mekaar waarmerk of bekragtig. Die sg. “oneness” met God of die Absolute en met mekaar word dus aangebring deur hierdie mistieke ervarings wat in die stilte deur fisieke, sigbare en tasbare elemente aangehelp word, soveel so dat dit reeds beskou word as dié oppermetode om die Christendom met ander gelowe te versoen, selfs ook met Islam. Die liberale evangelis, Tony Campolo wat nie so lank gelede nie op uitnodiging van die Moreletapark NG gemeente na Suid-Afrika gekom het, glo soos die okkultis, Aldous Huxley dat mistisisme die “higest common factor” is. Campolo skryf in sy boek, Speaking My Mind, as volg op bladsye 149 enn 150:

Beyond these models of reconciliation, a theology of mysticism provides some hope for common ground between Christianity and Islam. Both religions have within their histories examples of ecstatic union with God … I do not know what to make of the Muslim mystics, especially those who have come to be known as the Sufis. What do they experience in their mystical experiences? Could they have encountered the same God we do in our Christian mysticism?[3]

Die hoofdoel van die mistieke ervarings wat mense in die stilte ondergaan is dus in die eerste plek om die skeidsmure tussen alle gelowe af te breek, al sou dit dan ook moes beteken dat die God van die Bybel se vleeswording (inkarnasie) op vernederende wyse afgewentel word tot op die vlak van iemand wat so nederig is dat hy nie meer God wil wees nie en selfs met afsku aan sy eie godheid bereid is om dit hel toe te stuur. Jesus Christus se bereidheid om nie aan sy goodheid vas te klem nie (Filippense 2:6) was beslis NIE omdat Hy in algehele nederigheid nie meer God wou wees nie, maar Hy het sy godheid as’t ware in sy vleeswording eenkant toe geskuif sodat hy as ware mens aan ‘n vloekhout kon sterwe vir ons sondes. Hier sien ons weer eens baie duidelik dat die ontluikende kerk alle grondwaarhede in die Bybel moet herverwoord en manipuleer sodat dit ‘n ander inhoud en betekenis moet kry, hoofsaaklik om dit soveel makliker te maak om die Christendom met ander gelowe te versoen. Daarom kan Suid-Afriikaanse ontluikende leiersfigure soos Stephan Joubert sonder om te blik of the bloos in ‘n preek verklaar dat daar ook waarhede in ander godsdienste soos die Bhoeddisme is en iemand soos Brian Mclaren kan deelneem aan Isalm se Ramadanfees as ‘n gebaar van eer en verheerliking aan God. Dis amper soos Aaron wat ‘n goue kalf gemaak het vir die volk van Israel en toe gesê het: “Môre is daar fees tot eer van die HERE.” (Exodus 32:5).

Môre is daar fees tot eer van die HERE.

Dieselfde gees wat hierdie leuens tydens die ontluikendes se stildienste by hulle ore influister, is diselfde gees wat reeds sedert die begin alles in die stryd werp om God te ontroon en self as God in die tempel te sit en as God aanbid te word. Hierdie gees van Satan is besig om die ontluikendes voor te berei vir ‘n ander Christus, by name die Antichris en die tragiese rondom die hele ou penarie is dat hulle dit nie agterkom nie terwyl hulle alle waarskuwings om hulle daarvan te bekeer in die wind slaan.

‘n stil – en leeggemaakte, passiewe gemoed

Die Bybel leer ons nêrens tussen sy blaaie vanaf Genesis tot Openbaring dat die mens sy kritiese denke moet prysgee deur sy “mind” leeg te maak met behulp van mistieke kontemplatiewe dissiplines nie. Die Woord van God sê juis dat die mens verander moet word deur die vernuwing van sy gemoed (Romeine 12: 2). Die King James sê dit so mooi: “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” Die  woord “anakoinosis” (vernuwing) beteken om ‘n algehele gemoedsverandering te ondergaan, in so ‘n mate dat dit jou in staat sal stel om God se soewereine wil vir jou lewe te verstaan en uit te lewe. Dit word beslis nie meegewerk deur mistieke kontemplatiewe gebruike nie maar deur die Woord van God. Ek sê dit op grond van die Here Jesus se woorde in Johannes 17: 17: “Heilig hulle in u waarheid; u woord is die waarheid.” Petrus waarku ons baie duidelik dat ons te alle tye nugter en waaksaam moet wees. Die Amplified Bible stel dit so:

1 Peter 5: 8 Be well balanced (temperate, sober of mind), be vigilant and cautious at all times; for that enemy of yours, the devil, roams around like a lion roaring in fierce hunger], seeking someone to seize upon and devour.

Die ontluikende kontemplatiewe kerklui se teenargument is natuurlik Psalm 46:10 wat soos volg in die King James lui:”Be still and know that I am God.” Die Amplified stel dit as volg: “Let be and be still, and know (recognize and understand) that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations! I will be exalted in the earth!” Beide die ou en nuwe Afrikaanse vertalings sê  nie een “Wees stil” nie. Die Ou vertaling sê “Laat staan en weet dat ek God is” en die nuwe vertaling sê “Bedaar en erken dat ek God is.” Die woord “raphah” beteken nie om jou mond te hou of om niks te sê nie, of om jouself aan algehele stilte oor te gee nie. Die konteks  van Psalm 46 is dat God vir Jakob (Israel) ‘n veilige toevlug en beskutting sal wees wanneer Hy die nasies gaan oordeel en dat hulle dus nie nodig het om hulle oor enigiets te kwel nie. Die Engelse woord “relax” dra die betekenis daarvan baie beter oor omdat God vir hulle sê om nie op hulle eie vleeslike vermoëns staat te maak nie maar op Hom en sy magtige dade. Ons vind dieselfde begrip van “relax” in Eksodus 14:13 waar Moses die volk troos met die woorde:

“Moenie bang wees nie. Staan vas, kyk hoe die Here julle vandag gaan red, want soos julle die Egiptenaars nou daar sien, sal julle hulle nooit weer sien nie.”

Dit is absoluut verstommend om te sien hoeveel Suid-Afrikaners uit alle raasegroepe reeds deur die Ontluikende Kerk en hulle kontemplatiewe, mistieke spiritualiteit mislei is. Mag die Here voorsien dat sommiges van hulle so gou moontlik loskom van die gevaarlike web van mistisisme wat niks anders as ‘n Christelik-verbloemde vorm van die okkultisme is nie.

Ope 18:4 En ek het ‘n ander stem uit die hemel hoor sê: Gaan uit haar uit, my volk, sodat julle nie gemeenskap met haar sondes mag hê en van haar plae ontvang nie.

---

[1] Leith Anderson, A Church for the 21 st Century, p. 21.

[2] Leonard Sweet, Postmodern Pilgrims (Nashville, TN: Broadman Holman Publishers, 2000), p. 28.

[3] Tony Campolo, Speaking My Mind (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2004), pp. 149-150.

The subtle inhibition or suppression of the true meaning of the cross of Jesus Christ

A review of the Congress held at the Mosaic Church in Fairlands, Johannesburg (4 –5 September 2009)

Main speakers: Ron Martoia, Stephan Joubert, Johan Geyser, Trevor Hudson, Willem Nicol and Gys du Plessis

During the Break-out sessions the speakers were Willem Nicol, Gavin Sklar-Chik, Rex van Vuuren and Annemarie Paulin-Cambell

Huge wooden crosses draped with beautiful white, red or purple cloths have become one of the most fashionable accoutrements in the Emergent Church’s places of worship. Its inescapable visibility on the elevated stages of their churches and congress venues may be an awe-inspiring reminder of Jesus Christ’s cruel sacrificial death more than 2000 years ago but sadly their teachings which is solidly embedded in contemplative spirituality impede and even out rightly shun the true meaning of His cross. At best it has become one of the many objects they use to facilitate and enhance their experiences of an altered state of consciousness during their contemplative or centered prayer binges. Before I venture into an evaluation of all the speakers’ contributions in the light of Scripture during the next few weeks, I would like to get down to the nitty-gritty of contemplative spirituality in my following introductory notes.

In the Presence of God

What lies at the heart of contemplative spirituality? What inspires contemplatives in the Emergent Church to indulge in practices that have their origin in Eastern mysticism? Thomas a Kempis wrote that man will remain restless until he has been united with Christ (De Imitatione Christi, Book II, chapter 1) and others have maintained that man will remain restless until he finds rest in God. This is a sound biblical principle which we find beautifully expounded in the book of Jeremiah and in Jesus’ words in Matthew 11:28.

Isaiah 48 22 There is no peace, says the Lord, for the wicked.

Isa 57:20, 21 But the wicked are like the troubled sea, for it cannot rest, and its waters cast up mire and dirt. There is no peace, says my God, for the wicked.

Matthew 11:28 Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy-laden and overburdened, and I will cause you to rest. [I will ease and relieve and refresh your souls.] Take My yoke upon you and learn of Me, for I am gentle (meek) and humble (lowly) in heart, and you will find rest relief and ease and refreshment and recreation and blessed quiet) for your souls.

Although the majority of people may deny it, man has  been acutely aware of his separation from God (or a Higher Entity as some would like to refer to him, her or it) ever since the Fall. Had mankind not been so acutely aware of this separation religion as such would have been a complete obsolete. In fact, all religions with the exception of Christianity, are man’s own efforts to outmanoeuvre his separation from God. However, there is a vast difference in semantics between the biblical view of separation and that of the Eastern view thereof.

The biblical view simply says: “BEHOLD, THE Lord’s hand is not shortened at all, that it cannot save, nor His ear dull with deafness, that it cannot hear. But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:1, 2). It is evident that God wants to eliminate the separateness between Himself and wicked sinners but is unable to do so unless the cause of the separateness (sinfulness of man and his lost status) is effectively dealt with according to His standard and not ours.

The Eastern mystical view of separation from God is that there is actually no such thing as a separation. Any notion of a separation is merely an illusion caused by a lack of a deeper understanding and attitude which you can change by practicing eastern mystical disciplines of meditation and yoga. Your inevitable interconnectedness with God, and non-separateness from him, stems from the belief that “God is all and All is God, and since you are part of the All, you’re part of God.” Feelings of separateness are caused by wrong attitudes in regard to this belief. You simply need to adjust your attitude, turn to God, as it were, to see God benevolently waiting for your return and thus eradicate the illusionary separateness. Yet another Eastern mystical view of separation from God is based on the assumption that when we see separations among people we also see a separation between ourselves and God. Only when everyone realizes that there is one God, one race ands one prayer, as Sufi Sheikh explains, will there be peace to the human race.

God has never and will never accept any effort on the part of mankind to bridge the huge chasm between Him and us. His magnanimously holy standard, and His alone will suffice while all our own efforts to reach Him and to come into and dwell in His presence will inevitably lead to a presence that is not of God. Even the contemplative practitioners, such as Willem Nicol, admits in his book “Stem in die Stilte, p. 97” (“Voice in the Silence, p. 97”) that “evil spirits may speak to you while you wait on promptings.” Why would anyone in his right mind want to indulge in spiritual disciplines and practices that have the potential to bring you in touch with evil spirits? To say the least, it borders on insanity to yield to spiritual disciplines that have the potential of inviting evil spirits to speak to you.

That God cannot and will not accept our efforts to approach Him in his holy presence is already evident in die Old Testament when God commanded Moses:-

Exodus 20:25 And if you will make Me an altar of stone, you shall not build it of hewn stone, for if you lift up a tool upon it you have polluted it.

Mankind’s “tools” of whatever kind to build a humanly hewn altar in order to reach and enter into God’s magnanimously holy presence is defiled and polluted. The next question of course, is: what is it that pollutes our humanly hewn “altars?” There’s only a single answer to this question — our inherited self-centered old Adam nature. This nature, of which Paul wrote so extensively in Romans 7, has the natural inclination to think and believe it can please God by doing and accomplishing something good. This reminds me of what Ron Martoia said at the conference held at the Pierre van Ryneveld DRC on 28 August this year on the “goodness” of man. He said that the emergent church is in the business of making better humans which, of course, implies that all of humanity is already good and that we only need to make them better. That’s not what the Gospel teaches, and by the way this is the Gospel Ron Martoia, Stephan Joubert, Nelus Niemandt and all their emergent buddies claim to proclaim. Jesus, whom they also claim to follow, said that no one is good but God. It not only means that God alone is one hundred percent good but also that He is the only One who is able to judge righteously between good and “good.” Now wait a second, you may want to argue, shouldn’t that be between good and bad or good and evil? Nope! God is the only One who can judge righteously between good and “good.” Many things seem to be good in our estimation because it works. Anything that has the desired effect and accomplishes what we anticipate it to do, is good. Pragmatism has done more harm to our societies than anything else because it inspired us to develop the warped idea that, like Robin Hood, we may steal from the rich to give to the poor because it is the “good” thing to do.

There is a continued and concerted global effort to validate and corroborate the “goodness” of paranormal and “spiritual” experiences induced by meditation and contemplative disciplines such as contemplative or centering prayer through science. The entire field of quantum physics is focused on bridging the gap between the paranormal and science. Some very interesting research has already been done on the human brain to prove that man’s perceptions and ideas of God and who He is, is mapped in his brain. In their book How God Changes Your Brain, Andrew Newberg and Mark Robert Waldman wrote the following on page 10 :-

One of the main purposes of this book is to help readers expand their understanding and appreciation of spiritual practices and experiences. In fact, religious beliefs are vastly more complex and diverse than public opinion polls show. From a neurological perspective, God is a perception and an experience that is constantly changing and evolving in the human brain, and this implies that America’s spiritual landscape is virtually impossible to define. You can’t nail God down for good or for bad. And you can’t intuit a person’s innermost values based upon their creed or the church they choose to attend. If more people realized that everyone was talking about something fundamentally personal and different, perhaps a degree of distrust would fall away. (Emphasis added) [Thomas says: Only the Christian fundamentalists fundamentally different way of thinking and talking is way off base because it is intolerably anti the fundamentally personal and different views of other relisions. Therefore it should be fundamentally marginalized.]

To survive in a pluralistic society, we must evolve our spirituality and our secularity, integrating religion and science in a way that can beneficial to all. But to do this we must overhaul antiquated religious notions that interfere with the religious freedoms of others. Most important, we will need to devise innovative ways to promote peaceful co-operation between people, especially between those who hold different religious views. In this respect, scientists, psychologists, sociologists, theologians, and politicians must forge new cooperative alliances in order to improve our global interactions with others. (Emphasis added)

The spiritual practices and experiences to which they refer are all related to meditation and contemplative exercises. In fact, their entire approach is based on the assumption that “God” can change your mind for the better (the word Ron Martoia and other contemplatives use is  the biblical “metanoia” but in a completely and fundamentally different way. I will elaborate on his use of the word in a later comment) through contemplative exercises. On pages 6 and 7 the two authors explain in more detail the alleged benefits of contemplative disciplines.

Along with my research staff at the University of Pennsylvania and the Center for Spirituality and the Mind, we are currently studying Sikhs, Sufis, yoga practitioners, and advanced meditators to map the neurochemical changes caused by spiritual and religious practices. Our research has led us to the following conclusions:

1. Each part of the brain constructs a different perception of God.

2. Every human brain assembles its perceptions of God in uniquely different ways, thus giving God different qualities of meaning and value.

3. Spiritual practices, even when stripped of religious beliefs, enhance the neural functioning of the brain in ways that improve physical and emotional health.

4. Intense, long- term contemplation of God and other spiritual values appears to permanently change the structure of those parts of the brain that control our moods, give rise to our conscious notions of self, and shape our sensory perceptions of the world.

5. Contemplative practices strengthen a specific neurological circuit that generates peacefulness, social awareness, and compassion for others. (Emphasis added).

In a nutshell it means that the changing of your brain through spiritual contemplative disciplines such as contemplative and centering prayer or meditation is a very powerful tool to change the world, simply because it produces and enhances like-mindedness, but it is a like-mindedness (unity) that contradicts the unity the Bible teaches. Sadly, however, this is a very far cry from Jesus Christ’s command to go into all the world, make disciples of the nations and to teach them to observe everything He taught us. The emergent contemplatives have an enormous problem with this particular way in making followers of Christ. Oh yes! they have nothing against making men followers of Christ (Jesus Christ who?) but the offence of His cross must be removed from people’s brains. It is steeped in rigid doctrines and as such hampers man in his contemplative endeavours to achieve peacefulness, social awareness and compassion amongst all peoples and their great variety of spiritualities. An observant New Age adherent made the following interesting remark on his site.

Personally I really love the sciences exploring spirituality. Walderman and his co author on the book Andrew Newberg go deep into the kind of territory that could potentially begin to unify our understanding of some of the aspects of religion and spirituality from a non dogmatic or ideolagized view. That is of course from the perspective of their own scientific ideology. Within it though there is a clear intent to explore and explain within the parameters of psychology and neuroscience.  (Emphasis added)

The contemplatives’ main purpose is to uproot every form of fundamentalism (particularly Christian fundamentalism that clings to rigid biblical doctrines and dogmas) and to use and promote mysticism as the crossing bridge of ultimate boundaries.

Crossing Boundaries

Wayne Teasdale sums up the crossing of boundaries through mystical practices as follows on the site called “Council of Spiritual Practices”

Interspirituality is a term to describe the breaking-down of the barriers that have separated the religions for millennia. It is also the crossing-over and the sharing in the spiritual, aesthetic, moral and psychological treasures that exist in the different traditions of spirituality living within the world religions. The deepest level of sharing is in and through one another’s mystical wisdom, whether teachings, insights, methods of spiritual practice, and their fruits, The mystical life, in its maturity, is characteristically, naturally, even organically interspiritual because of the inner freedom and liberation the mystical Journey ignites in the depths of the person. It frees us from the obstacles within us that would hold us back from that generosity and willingness to partake from the mystical springs of other traditions. To drink this precious nectar requires openness and a capacity to assimilate the depth experience of these venerable traditions. More and more it is becoming common for individuals to cross over the frontiers of their own faith into the land of another or others. So much so is this the case that we can speak of this new millennial period as the Interspiritual Age. This development is momentous news for the human family because up until this point humankind has been divided, segregated into spiritual ghettos. Out of this separation has come so much misunderstanding and thousands of wars sparked by mutual suspicion, isolation, competition and hostility.

The Interspiritual Age promises to melt away the old barriers, and with them, the old antagonisms. This is one reason why it should be nurtured and encouraged. Interspirituality opens the way to friendship among members of differing faiths. Friendship creates bonds of community between and among the religions through their members, and community’ represents a shift from the old competitive, antagonistic model to a new opportunity, a new paradigm of relationship that seeks to meet on common ground.

If the mystical experience of other traditions is genuine and if it is on the same level as Christian contemplation in its fullness in the transforming union, the spiritual marriage between God the soul, then one implication is that Christianity does not have a monopoly on wisdom as it relates to the nature of the Divine. Christian theological formulations do not exhaust the infinite reality and subtlety of the Divine nature. This means that we can learn from the inner experience of other forms of spirituality. Christianity’s understanding of God is not complete in this sense, nor is the experience and understanding of the other traditions complete without the Christian contribution. Buddhism, for example, needs the insight on the Divine, an insight won from thousands of years of mystical consciousness. Complementarity is thus the direction toward which the mystical leads us. In this way, humankind can cross the boundaries to reach the further shore of our eternal homeland.

The moment Christians begin to partake in the dangerous disciplines of contemplative or centering prayer (also called “Christian meditation) a paradigm shift “emerges” in their brains that leads them to believe that the Christian faith does not have a monopoly on divine truth. It is for this very reason that distinguished and well-respected people like Stephan Joubert and many others as well as church communities such as Mosaic Church, e-Church, e-Kerk and many other emerging DRC churches can say without the slightest compunction that truth can be found in other religions such a Buddhism and even atheism.

We are indeed living in perilous times when, as Paul succinctly stated, men will have the form of godliness but will deny the power of the Gospel. What is the power of the Gospel?— to gaze intently at huge crosses or candles with the purpose of bringing on mystical experiences that induce euphoric feelings of happiness, contentness, peace, compassion, love and an interconnectedness between all religious persuasions? Certainly not! The power of the Gospel is the cross of Christ and His cross alone. Most sadly, the Mosaic Church is not following the way of the cross but that of Cain which is a Christ-less, cross-less and blood-less religion. (Hebrews 9:22). Their leadership is misleading multitudes into a mystical world of contemplation, believing that they are leading them into the very presence of God but, in fact, are being led astray from the One Who died for them on the cross and Who said: “If the world [including the religions of the world] hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you (John 15:18).

1 Corinthians 1:18  For the story and message of the cross is sheer absurdity and folly to those who are perishing and on their way to perdition, but to us who are being saved it is the [manifestation of] the power of God.

You are invited to watch this space on my blog for I intend to evaluate every speaker’s contribution at the Mosaic Church Congress in the light of God’s Word. My intention is to bring those who have been deceived back to the Word of God and Jesus Christ who warned: “Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.” (Luke 21:8)

Why . . . why . . . why do the Emergents fear controversy?

The best way to learn patience and how not not to lose your cool is when your toddlers begin to ask questions and you have to give the same answers over and over again. Their kind of  questions usually only consist of two words — “Why daddy?” You should never try to pacify them with one word answers such as “Because!!” Forget it! It only inspires them to ask you again — why daddy? The emergent fraternity who are continuously striving to improve one another from being “good” humans to “better” humans never seem to be satisfied with the answers others offer them. They too, like little toddlers, are forever asking, “WHY?” Could it be that they are unintentionally and unwittingly fulfilling Bible prophecy that says “they are forever inquiring and getting information, but are never able to arrive at a recognition and knowledge of the Truth.” (2 Tim 3:7). One of our emergent toddlers, Stephan Joubert, (I am not using the word here in a derogatory way because the Emergent Church is still in its toddler shoes but growing fast) recently wrote the following on Twitter.

weird to see how some show up at conferences only to find reasons to disagree with the speakers and nail them on websites. Why? (Emphasis added)

I have a very faint suspicion that he was referring to two of my brethren in Christ and myself who attended the conference in the Pierre van Ryneveld DRC on the 28th August where Ron Martoia en Nelus Niemandt were the two main speakers. Ron entertained the audience with a well-thought out and truly emergent presentation under the title of “Transforming the Church – The 2009 Way” The main thrust of his presentation revolved around the assumption that the church is going nowhere very fast and that we ought to engage and meet the changing cultures on the other side of the bridge which Nelus Niemandt introduced to the audience in his well-structured and well-thought out presentation. Those of you who have read Nelus’ book “Nuwe Drome vir Nuwe Werklikhede” (“New Dreams for New Realities”) may recall that he borrowed the metaphor of the bridge from Brian McLaren. The bridge of which McLaren has a photo was built by a Japanese company over the Choluteca river in the South American state of Honduras. They were extremely proud of there engineering  prowess. The real test came in 1998 when the hurricane Mitch struck the Northern parts of South America and poured out 3 meters of rain in a very short time. Flooded rivers came down with a vengeance. The bridge over the river survived the ordeal but the enormous flood changed the course of the river and destroyed many roads. The bridge still stands in all its majesty but leads to nowhere. Nelus Niemandt says in his book that this metaphor can easily be used to describe the present state of the church that is constantly being peppered by huge tidal waves. The institutionalized church still stands but like the bridge is leading to nowhere. Ironically Brian McLaren who provided Nelus with the distressing metaphor of a bridge leading nowhere clings to a bridge built on a crumbling foundation because he does not know what it means to be saved and deliberately joins in on the Muslim Ramadan Festival in honour of God, peace, reconciliation and mutual respect for one another’s religious affiliation. Here’s what he said:

“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)

“Perhaps our ‘inward-turned, individual-salvation-oriented, un-adapted Christianity’ is a colossal and tragic misunderstanding, and perhaps we need to listen again for the true song of salvation, which is ‘good news to all creation.’ So perhaps it’s best to suspend what, if anything, you ‘know’ about what it means to call Jesus ‘Savior’ and to give the matter of salvation some fresh attention. Let’s start simply. In the Bible, save means ‘rescue’ or ‘heal’. It emphatically does not mean ‘save from hell’ or ‘give eternal life after death,’ as many preachers seem to imply in sermon after sermon. Rather its meaning varies from passage to passage, but in general, in any context, save means ‘get out of trouble.’ The trouble could be sickness, war, political intrigue, oppression, poverty, imprisonment, or any kind of danger or evil.” (A Generous Orthodoxy, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004, p. 93).

Well, I feel like a fundamentalist who is losing his grip—whose fundamentals are cracking and fraying and falling apart and slipping through my fingers. It’s like I thought I was building my house on rock, but it turned out to be ice, and now global warming has hit, and everything is crumbling. That’s scary you know? I went ro seminary right out of college, and it was great, and 1 thought I was getting the truth, you know, the whole truth and nothing bur the truth. Now I’ve been a pastor for fourteen years, and for this last year or so I feel like I’m running out of gas. It’s not just burnout.. It’s more like I’m losing my faith—well, not exactly that, but I feel that I’m losing the whole framework for my faith. You know, l keep pushing everything into these little cubbyholes, these little boxes, the little systems got in seminary and even before that—in Sunday school and summer camp and from my parents. But life is too messy to fit. And I’m supposed to be preaching the truth, but I’m not even sure what the truth is anymore, and—that’s it, really, I just feel dishon­est whenever I try to preach. I used to love to preach, bur now every time—Well, maybe not every time, but quite often—when I start to pre­pare a sermon, it’s agonizing and … and people come to me with their problems and I used to be so sure of what to say but now I try to act con­fident but I don’t know. The only thing I’m confident about is that I don’t have all the answers anymore. I’m sorry. I’m not making any sense.”   (A new kind of Christian: a tale of two friends on a spiritual journey, p.12 (Emphasis added)

We, as Christians, humbly seek to join Muslims in this observance of Ramadan as a God-honoring expression of peace, fellowship, and neighborliness. (Read here for more info).

Some may regard McLaren’s frank acknowledgement that he does not have the answers anymore as a sign of true humility but it is in fact a unrestrained denial of Jesus’ words in John 8:33, “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

That the professing church, and especially the one known as the Emergent Church, needs to be transformed or reformed is an undisputed fact but their suggestion that the Church (“Ecclesia” or all the believers who make up the body of Christ) needs to be transformed is to me personally an affront to Jesus Christ who said: “I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” What HE builds will remain for evermore for it is built on a Rock (Himself) and no tsunami, tidal wave, perfect storm of whatever power or strength, or even hell itself will ever be able to overcome and destroy it. The emergents’ demand for change and transformation implies that Jesus is making a mess of everything and that they need to intervene to prevent a calamity. To accomplish the desired transformation the church needs to be in a constant ebb and flow of transformation (reformation), they say. However, it is not a regressive reformation in the sense of turning back to the old Protestant Reformation but a progressive and ever changing one that has no experts in its ranks (those conceited Christian fundamentalists who believe they have the truth nicely sealed in a box and are forever quoting doctrine from Scripture) but only leaders who lead like Jesus. Ron Martoia made it very clear that the church is supposed to be in the business of making better humans. During the Q&A session I asked two questions that were more or less the following.

“The bottom line is that we should make better humans? Am I correct in saying that?

[He shook his head in the affirmative]

I put it to you that Jesus did not come to the earth to improve humanity but to seek and to save the lost. The word “better implies that the thing or person to be improved is already good. All religions take credit for making good people a lot better but there is only One who is able to save the lost. In 2 John 9 we are warned that biblical doctrine is extremely important and anyone who dares to run ahead of God (is not satisfied with what Jesus taught) does not have God or his only begotten Son. [A pregnant silence follows while Stephan, Ron en Nelus look at one another, possibly to demonstrate by example that silence is the first language of God.] The audience begins to laugh.]

My second question was “Would you say that I’m an expert when I reiterate Jesus in saying ” And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free?

I don’t know whether Stephan has ever considered the possibility that Homo Sapiens (“wise man” or “knowing man”) has  been given the ability to discern right from wrong, left from right, light from darkness, good from evil etc., etc., in order to make choices that are congenial to mankind’s well-being and that he has the honourable duty to disagree with anyone whose ideas are detrimental to mankind?. Or has Stephan never disagreed with anyone in his entire life. How odd that he should scold the dissidents who disagree with his friends but never moves a finger when they are in disagreement with God and his eternally infallible Word (sound doctrine).

Imagine for a moment two travellers are on a journey together. They arrive at a fork in the road, each with its own sign board. The sign by the side of the road that leads to the left reads: “Warning! Do not take this road!” The one that leads to the right simply says: “Denver, 20 kilometres” The one traveller begins to argue “I really do not trust any of these signs alongside the road. I have learnt to trust my own judgment and have decided to follow the left road.” “No!,” says the other person, “I disagree with you. Can’t you see that it poses a potential danger to you?” The man answers back.“You are only prodding for reasons to disagree with me. You always disagree with me and I don’t like it.” “I’m very sorry” says the person who is in disagreement with him, “but I would rather follow the right road which the appropriate authorities have prepared for us. So long and fair well!” And so the two travellers’ roads parted for ever.You may already have linked the metaphor I used of two travellers with two well-known passage in Scripture.

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

Proverbs 16:25 There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

I recently came across the following quote from a book, “Preaching to the Heart” by Jay Adams, which reminded me of what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11: 19, “For doubtless there have to be factions or parties among you in order that they who are genuine and of approved fitness may become evident and plainly recognized among you.”

In some circles, the fear of controversy is so great that preachers, and congregations following after them, will settle for peace at any cost — even at the cost of the truth, God’s truth. The idea is that peace is all important. Peace is a biblical ideal (Rom 12:18 makes that clear: “If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with everybody”), but so is purity. The peace of the Church may never be bought at the cost of the purity of the Church. That price is too dear. But why do we think that we can get along in this world or for that matter, even in the Church, without conflict and controversy? Jesus didn’t. Paul didn’t. None of the preachers of the apostolic age who faithfully served their Lord were spared controversy. Who are we to escape controversy when they did not? The story of the advance of the Church across the Mediterranean world from Jerusalem to Rome is a story of controversy. When the gospel is preached boldly, there will be controversy. The life of Paul is a life of controversy. Tradition tells us that every apostle, except John, who was exiled for his faith, died a violent death.

Jay Adams, Preaching to the Heart, p. 17.

Paul would certainly have felt ill at ease in our postmodern society of no absolutes (relativity), tolerance and love and peace at the cost of God’s truth. In fact, he would have been, branded as an agent of the devil indicted and thrown in Jail if he had nailed his two theses on the doors of the emergent church.

Galatians 1:8-12 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to and different from that which we preached to you, let him be accursed (anathema, devoted to destruction, doomed to eternal punishment)! As we said before, so I now say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel different from or contrary to that which you  received [from us], let him be accursed (anathema, devoted to destruction, doomed to eternal punishment)! Now am I trying to win the favor of men, or of God? Do I seek to please men? If I were still seeking popularity with men, I should not be a bond servant of Christ (the Messiah). For I want you to know, brethren, that the Gospel which was proclaimed and made known by me is not man’s gospel [a human invention, according to or patterned after any human standard]. For indeed I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but [it came to me] through a [direct] revelation [given] by Jesus Christ (the Messiah). In our day and age of tolerance we’ve become so fearful of speaking the truth in love that the Gospel itself is being compromised more and more each day.

Ah! but the emergent fraternity will tell you: “We’re not sacrificing God’s truth for the sake of peace, unity, tolerance and love. We’re merely taking the ancient disciplines of the Christian saints as well as the truths in the Bible and incarnating them into the cultures of our time in new and fresh ways. Institutionalized churchgoers’ buckets have been filled to overflowing with information supplied by the self-appointed experts.

I don’t think Christians should make a point of being controversial for the sake of controversy. Controversy should be the natural outflow of a Christian’s standpoint on Biblical truths especially when they are confronted by opinions, thoughts and ideas that are diametrically opposed to God’s Word. In fact the Word admonishes us not only to oppose anything that is anti-biblical but to expose it so that others may fear (1 Timothy 5:20)

2 Corinthians 10:3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:  (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds; Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ (Emphasis added).

In one of my previous comments I have shown that the emergent brotherhood is prone to self pity. Allow me to elaborate a bit more. Jesus taught his disciples that they should rejoice when they encounter opposition for His sake and that of his truth. In fact, it is a great honour and privilege to be demeaned and disgraced as an agent of the devil (rev. Guillaume Smit has called me an agent of the devil twice already) because Jesus Himself had been accused of being in cahoots with the devil on several occasions during is life on earth (Matthew 10:25; Mark 3:22). If Stephan Joubert and his buddies are so sure they are doing the right thing, why are they so sensitive and full of self-pity when someone does not agree with them? Is it because they know that they do not have the truth in tact and therefore experience any opposition as a frontal attack on their personages and not their teachings and doctrines, to such an extent that they see themselves being nailed on their oppositions’ websites? They are strong words; strong words indeed because they imply that they are being crucified by those who do not agree with them. Unfortunately their self-pity is blinding them to the fact that they are the ones who are crucifying  Jesus (nailing Him to the cross) afresh. Apostasy and a falling away from the truth is equated with the deed of crucifying Jesus all over again.

Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible [to restore and bring again to repentance] those who have been once for all enlightened, who have consciously tasted the heavenly gift and have become sharers of the Holy Spirit, And have felt how good the Word of God is and the mighty powers of the age and world to come, If they then deviate from the faith and turn away from their allegiance–[it is impossible] to bring them back to repentance, for (because, while, as long as) they nail upon the cross the Son of God afresh [as far as they are concerned] and are holding [Him] up to contempt and shame and public disgrace. (Emphasiis added).

And now back to the serious business of answering Stephan Joubert’s ever emerging question”Why?” I doubt whether he or any of his emerging friends will listen when I quote to them certain passages from Scripture to prove that it is of the utmost importance and indeed a command of God to disagree with others when they do not regulate their lives according to His Word. Anyhow, whether they like it or not, here goes.

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].

Have you noticed the “all things”, Stephan? All things include everything you and your friends have said in the past or will say in the future on your blogs, your websites, during conferences, in churches, in your sermons etc. etc. None of you are exempt from God’s command to be scrutinized by His Word to make sure that whatever you say now, have said in the past or or will say in the future is in harmony with His Word. Oh yes! indeed, I myself should never be left off the hook when I overstep the boundaries of God’s truth. However, whenever we disagree we should always go back to God’s Word, humble ourselves before Him and allow Him to provide us with the correct answers. You have the honourable duty to repudiate me in public whenever I say things that are not in line with God’s Word, but then you should wield the Sword of the Spirit which is God’s Word (Ephesians 6:17) to straighten me out and not attack me personally as Rev. Gullaume Smit has done so often by labelling me an agent of the devil. Subjective arguments such as his have never impressed me in the very least. What I would prefer for you to do is to refer to passages in Scripture that refute my arguments.

Ephesians 4:13-14 [That it might develop] until we all attain oneness in the faith and in the comprehension of the full and accurate knowledge of the Son of God, that [we might arrive] at really mature manhood (the completeness of personality which is nothing less than the standard height of Christ’s own perfection), the measure of the stature of the fullness of the Christ and the completeness found in Him. So then, we may no longer be children, tossed [like ships] to and fro between chance gusts of teaching and wavering with every changing wind of doctrine, [the prey of] the cunning and cleverness of unscrupulous men, [gamblers engaged] in every shifting form of trickery in inventing errors to mislead.

From the above passage it is clear that there is an inaccurate knowledge of Jesus Christ and an accurate knowledge of Him. An inaccurate knowledge of Him tends to lead one astray into labyrinths of false doctrine, lies, deceit and deception. An accurate knowledge of Him, on the other hand, provides one with the correct food and nourishment to grow into matured saints who, unlike children tossed like ships to and fro between chance gusts of teaching and wavering, has learnt to discern the things in the spiritual realm.

I am really saddened by the journey the emergent church has ventured to take, a journey that to them seems to be the way in which the Kingdom of God should be ushered in here and now, but in fact are ways that lead to destruction.

“Stel ‘n hemelse wag aan voor jou mond” . . . sodat derduisende mislei kan word?

‘n Mens hoor dikwels sommige van ons hedendaagse “toleransie-predikers” vir jou sê: “As jy niks positiefs of moois oor iemand kan sê nie, bly dan maar liewer stil.” Ongelukkig het hierdie mooi ongeskrewe reël baie mense in die afgrond help dompel eerder as om vir hulle van enige werklike waarde te wees. Ek het gevind dat wanneer die “toleransie-predikers” jou kritiek op hulle openbare en onbybelse uitsprake nie vanuit die Skrif kan repudieer nie, hulle na die “persoonlikheids-lat” gryp om jou aan te kla van karkatermoord omdat jy hulle kwansuis persoonlik aanval en nie die dinge wat hulle sê of skryf nie. Hulle skroom nie om jou te besluldig van halwe waarhede nie, maar versuim gerieflikheidshalwe om die halwe waarhede wat jy kwansuis oor hulle uitbasuin duidelik uit te spel. Om vir u ‘n aanduiding te gee wat ek bedoel, neem ek u graag na Stephan Joubert se e-kerk webblad waar hy onlangs onder die opskrif “Stel ‘n hemelse wag aan voor jou mond” met verwysing na Psalm 141:3 o.a. die volgende gesê het.

Navorsers het bevind dat wanneer mense baie negatief oor iets of iemand anders voel, dan vertel hulle dit vir 17 ander mense. Maar wanneer hulle baie positief voel, dan vertel hulle dit slegs vir 11 mense. Nou ja, daar het jy dit! Nou weet jy hoekom ‘n handjievol negatiewe mense dit regkry om ‘n ganse gemeenskap lam te lê met hulle negatiewe praatjies oor ‘n leier, of oor een of ander nuwe inisiatief, ook al voel die meeste mense positief. Slegte nuus trek gewoonlik strate verder as goeie nuus . . .

Dis verstommend hoe baie kerkmense eerder ‘n koerant of ‘n plaaslike skindermond sal glo as om hulle tonge onder beheer van die Here te stel. . . .

Die beste geneesmiddel vir ‘n gevaarlike tong is om ‘n hemelse Wag voor jou mond aan te stel (Psalm 141:3). Vra die Here om jou tong elke dag op te pas.

‘n Verkeerde eksegese van Bybeltekse en –hoofstukke lei onafwendbaar tot verkeerde lering en selfs ergerlike dwaallering. In Psalm 141 is daar geen sprake dat Dawid

View Full Album

daarop aandring dat jy niks mag sê oor iemand se leerstellige eierdanse nie. Ja! natuurlik bedoel hy hier dat die Here hom moet bewaar van slegte dinge en om slegte dinge te sê, menenende dat Hy hom moet keer om verkeerde dinge te sê; dinge wat indruis teen God se Woord en sy Wette. Dit is opvallend dat Dawid in die lig hiervan in vers 5 sê “Laat die regverdige my met liefde slaan en tugtig—hoofsalf sal my hoof nie weier nie.” Hoewel Dawid met hoofsalf deur Samuel as koning gesalf is en hy die hoogste gesag in die land beklee het, het hy nogtans ‘n leerbare gees (“teachable spirit”) gehad. Hy was bereid om hom te verneder onder die tug van die regverdiges wanneer hulle hom sou bestraf oor enigiets wat hy verkeerd gesê of gedoen het. Vir hom was dit soos hoofsalf. Dis interessant dat Dawid se seun Salomo ‘n soortgelyke ding in Spreuke 27:5 gesê het: “Openlike teregwysing is beter as verborge liefde.” Hy skryf o.m. ook die volgende:

Spreuke 10:17 Wie hom laat leer, ken die pad na die lewe; wie teregwysing verwerp, dwaal van dié pad af.

Spreuke 12:1 Wie hom laat leer, wil graag kennis ontvang; wie hom nie laat teregwys nie, is ‘n dom mens.

Spreule 13:18 [Geetselike] Armoede en vernedering wag vir iemand wat hom nie wil laat leer nie, wie ‘n teregwysing ter harte neem, word geëer.

Spreuke 15:31  Wie op ‘n teregwysing ag slaan, sal lewe en ‘n tuiste vind tussen mense wat wysheid het.

Spreuke 15:32 Wie onderrig in die wind slaan, gee nie om vir homself nie; wie op ‘n  teregwysing ag slaan, kry insig.

Paulus sluit pragtig hierby aan wanneer hy in 2 Timotheus 3:16 die volgende skryf:

Die hele Skrif is deur God ingegee en is nuttig tot lering, tot weerlegging, tot teregwysing, tot onderwysing in die geregtigheid,

Teregwysing, vermaning, bestrawwing en tugtiging is dus ‘n integrale deel van die liggaam van Christus. Ongelukkig sien die postmoderne mens en veral die toleransie-predikers en leierfigure hierdie vermaning en bestrawwing  as ‘n aanval op hulle persoon, so asof hulle sooooo belangrik is.  Pleks daarvan om gesonde vermaning met nederigheid te aanvaar en om ‘n “leerbare gees” te kweek, verkondig Stepan Joubert die volgende Twitter”-twak:

If you can’t be a good example, at least be a horrible warning—this is the motto of thousands of churchgoers. Dont follow them. 10:53 AM Aug 6th from web

Kom ons vergewis ons dan nou eers van die goeie voorbeeld wat die e-kerk en e-church familie veral vir ons jeug stel deur ‘n slag weer te kyk na die mense met wie hulle so graag langs dieselfde vuur sit. E-kerk ondersteun en onderskryf verkeie leierfigure in the ontluikende kerk wat onbeskaamd ‘n kontemplatiewe, “New Age” en intergeloof spiritualiteit verkondig terwyl hulle daarop aanspraak maak dat hulle toegewyde Christene is. Brian McLaren, een van e-kerk se voorbeeldigste sg. “volgelinge van Jesus,” is besig om toenemend die Naam van Jesus deur de modder te sleep. Suid-Afrikaanse geestelike leiers in die ontluikende kerk soos Guillaume Smit, Dries Lombaard, Dries Cronjé, Cobus van Wyngaard, Nelus Niemandt en natuurlik ook Stephan Joubert, e.a. praat met groot lof van Brian Mclaren op hulle onderskeie blogs en adverteer veral sy boeke “A Gennerous Orthodoxy,” “The Secret Message of Jesus” en “Everything Must Change.” Hier’s wat Brian McLaren onlangs op een van sy blogs kwytgeraak het. Terwyl u dit lees hou asseblief in gedagte wat ek onlangs oor die onmensllike onthoofding van Christene deur die Moslemgroep, al-Shahaab, in die Suide van Somalië geskryf het sodat u ‘n idee kan kry waarmee Brian McLaren en sy meelopers hulle deesdae vereenselwig, en ook die soort mense wat die-kerk familiekring ondersteun. U kan die volledige artikel hier lees.

Ramadan is the Muslim holy month of fasting for spiritual renewal and purification. It commemorates the month during which Muslims believe Mohammed received the Quran through divine revelation, and it calls Muslims to self-control, sacrificial generosity and solidarity with the poor, diligent reading of the Quran, and intensified prayer.

This year, I, along with a few Christian friends (and perhaps others currently unknown to us will want to join in) will be joining Muslim friends in the fast which begins August 21. We are not doing so in order to become Muslims: we are deeply committed Christians. But as Christians, we want to come close to our Muslim neighbors and to share this important part of life with them. Just as Jesus, a devout Jew, overcame religious prejudice and learned from a Syrophonecian woman and was inspired by her faith two thousand years ago (Matthew 15:21 ff, Mark 7:24 ff), we seek to learn from our Muslim sisters and brothers today.

Muslims observe Ramadan in the same basic way world-wide: they fast from food, water, sex, etc., from dawn to dusk. We Christians who are joining in the fast will share these four common commitments.

We, as Christians, humbly seek to join Muslims in this observance of Ramadan as a God-honoring expression of peace, fellowship, and neighborliness. Each of us will have at least one Muslim friend who will serve as our partner in the fast. These friends welcome us in the same spirit of peace, fellowship, and neighborliness.

We will seek to avoid being disrespectful or unfaithful to our own faith tradition in our desire to be respectful to the faith tradition of our friends. For example, since the Bible teaches us the importance of fasting and being generous to the poor, we can participate as Christians in fidelity to the Bible as our Muslim friends do so in fidelity to the Quran. (Klem bygevoeg)

Waarom sou iemand wat daarop aanspraak maak dat hy deel is van die liggaam en die bruid van Jesus Christus hom met die Ramadan-fees vereenselwig waarvan die feesgangers ontken dat God ‘n Seun het en die vermoording van Jode en Christene goedkeur? Benewens die feit dat die Moslems ontken dat Jesus self God is en dat Hy die Seun van God is omdat God nie ‘n Seun het nie, verwerp die Moslems ook Jesus Christus se kruisiging en verklaar dat iemand anders in sy plek gesterwe het, i.p.v. dat Hy in ons en in die Moselms se plek gesterwe het. Hulle verklaar ook dat enigeen wat in die Drie-Enige God glo direk hel toe gaan en dat Moslems nie vriende moet maak met die Jode en Christene nie. Kan u sien waarheen die Ontluiikende Kerk (“Emreging Church” of “Emergent Church”) op pad is? Sal u werklik deel wil wees van so ‘n kerk wat ‘n ander Jesus navolg? Dié is seker; die eindtyd Babiloniese kerk (Openbaring 19:2) waarin almal van watter godsdiensoord ookal ‘n heenkome sal vind, is baie vinnig besig om deur die fasiliteerders (“change agents) in the Ontluikende Kerk gevestig te word.

So van fasiliteerders (“change agents”) gepraat. Ron Martoia wat tans op besoek is in Suid Afrika noem homself ‘n “transformational architect.” Die volgende berig het op Dave Hunt en Tom McMahon se webblad The Berean Call verskyn.

[McLaren has joined forces with individuals such as Linnea NIlsen Capshaw. According to her resume, Capshaw works with Dr. Ron Martoia who is a transformational architect . . . . His area of expertise is on the new and shifting landscape of church/cultural intersection, where he helps churches consider how they can shift their theological outlook which in turn will shift and adjust their ministry trajectory and cultural interface. . . . Ron is using his cultural intonation to help churches shift paradigms from the old Newtonian world to the Quantum world of the 21st century context.

“In addition to monthly consultations, Ron currently facilitates a new experimental learning community model in Jackson, Michigan called Vortex. Meeting in an arts enclave with over 20 other artists, there are weekly facilitated conversations on everything from string theory and the origins of the universe to the insights of Aristotle on personal development, as well as theological discussions about world religions and global spiritual formation praxis. Vortex hosts immersive learning experiences as well as weekly yoga classes. This experiment hopes to be part of shaping a new learning container for 21st century spiritual and personal formation.” (Klem bygevoeg).

http://www.velocityculture.com/aboutron.html

Dis hoegenaamd nie moeilik om af te lei nie dat Ron Martoia se kerklik/kulturele en “transformerende argitektuur” (“transformational architecture”) in ‘n baie groot mate geskoei is op kontemplatiewe spiritualiteite en selfs ook joga, ‘n Oosterse merditatiewe praktyk wat Hindoes met hulle Hindoegode saam in dieselfde juk laat trek. Lees gerus hierdie artikel oor die gevare van joga en transendentale meditasie. Die volgende aanhaling toon baie duidelik hoedanig Ron Martoia meditasie propageer en aanwend om transformasie in die kerk en kulture te bewerkstellig.

“I want to infuse you with the insight and energy to assist you in attaining the transformation you desire. My experience in my own personal life and as a transformational architect helping other people along on the journey is that most of us realize the obvious growth barriers we face.”

“We must become aware of being aware and make a commitment to make that happen. If we were to do this on our own personal level it would transform who we are. If we begin to do that on the inner personal level with spouse and friends and kids, what might that do to transform the very systems of our lives and the very family units we live in. Second, we need to cultivate a daily practice of meditation. . .

The fact is meditation is a concentrated dose of awareness. It is quite clear that those who cultivate a daily practice of meditation have that as an anchor all day and can at times throughout their day go back to it and affirm the quiet center they are attempting to maintain. . . a quiet center, the place from which our true life flows. . . For us to grow at all we have to be aware.”- (Klem bygevoeg)

Ron Martoia – www.vortexdownload.com

En wil baie graag u aandag vestig op Martioia se gebruik van die woorde “journey,” en “growth barriers.” Thomas Keating, ‘n Rooms Katolieke mistikus wat as een van die belangriikste aavoerders van die moderne kontemplatiewe beweging beskou word, het soortgelyke terme gebruik om die struikelblokke en die oorkoming daarvan op jou geestelike reis (“journey”) in sy boek “A Contemplative Journey, Vol. II” te omskryf. U kan meer hieroor lees hier.

From infancy, Father Keating teaches, we accumulate emotional layers, or “programs,” as a result of traumatic experiences. The practice of Centering Prayer engages directly with the unconscious and loosens old traumas that hinder your spiritual development. This form of “divine therapy” draws from a contemplative method that has brought profound inner transformation into the lives of thousands of practitioners. The Contemplative Journey is Father Thomas Keating’s great masterwork: a complete curriculum devoted to a Christian path for achieving the “still point” of resting in God. Each volume includes a study guide.

Soos u reeds hierbo gesien het, noem Ron Martoia die “still point” waarna Thomas Keating verwys die “quiet center, the place from which our true life flows.” U het seker ook dadelik opgemerk dat die woord “transformation” telkens in die kontemplatiewe ghoeroes se taalgebruik opduik. Dis nie om dowe neute nie want “transformasie” wat aan die hart lê van die Evangelie van Jesus Christus moet ten alle koste vervang word met ‘n parallel-klinkende “transformerende argitektuur,” d.w.s. ‘n ander weg en nie dié Weg nie (Jesus Christus) om transformasie in individue en samelewings te bewerkstellig. Nouja, so ‘n argument klink miskien by die eerste aanhoor ‘n bietjie vreemd, maar laat my toe om te verduidelik. Wanneer ek sê “transformasie” lê aan die hart van die Evangelie van Jesus Christus dan verwys ek spesifiek na die essensie van bekering wat deur die woord metanoeo { met-an-o-eh’-o} omskryf word. Die woord beteken om ‘n algehele gemoedsverandering te ondergaan, soveel so dat jy anders begin dink oor God, sy geregtigheid, sy regverdige oordele, en sy genade asook oor jou eie sondige en verlore toestand. Die Engelse verklaring vir die woord lui as volg:

1) to change one’s mind, i.e. to repent

2) to change one’s mind for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one’s past sins

Bekering begin dus in die mens se gemoed of verstand. (Let asseblief noukeuring op ek sê “BEGIN” in die mens se gemoed deurdat die Heilige Gees die verlore sondaar oortuig van sondes, geregtigheid en oordeel. Jou gemoedsverandering is nie jou redding nie. Dis slegs die aansporingselement in jou gemoed om terug te draai na God toe en jou na Hom te wend vir redding deur Hom daadwerklik aan te roep vir jou redding—om van bo gewederbaar te word.–Kyk gerus weer na Romeine 10:13). Daarom sê die Here Jesus ook baie pertinent: “Kom na my toe, almal wat vermoeid en belas is en ek sal julle rus gee.” (Mattheus 11:28-29). Die “aanroep” om redding geskied dus wanneer die verlore sondaar hom na Christus wend (na Hom toe gaan in die gebed) om sy saak met Hom reg te maak (Jesaja 1:18).  Die noodsaaklikheid van ‘n veranderde gemoed ten aansien van redding en ‘n voortdurende transformasie in jou lewe word baie goed deur Paulus opgesom in Romeine 12:2: “En word nie aan hierdie wêreld gelykvormig nie, maar word verander deur die vernuwing van julle gemoed, sodat julle kan beproef wat die goeie en welgevallige en volmaakte wil van God is.” Diie Engelse weergawe lui as volg:

And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Japie Grobler skryf:

Oosterse meditasie wat as “Christelike meditasie” voorgehou word is ’n inwaarste reis wanneer mense hulle gedagtes leeg maak van alle gedagtes in hulle soeke na God sonder die gebruik van woorde, sodoende word God se Woord nietig gemaak. Deur op hierdie manier te mediteer beweeg die persoon na ’n alternatiewe bewussynsvlak waarin hy ontneem is van sy onderskeidingsvermoë. Sy rasionele denke is afgeskakel, dus kan hy nie analities dink nie en sodoende is hy onmagtig om sy gedagtes in die lig van sy kennis van die Skrif onder leiding van die Heilige Gees te toets. Dit is ’n heidense praktyk wat in totaliteit verwerp behoort te word.

Die mens se denke en gedagte is aktief betrokke by die bestudering en oordenking van die Woord. Die Here Jesus stel geloof bo die onsienlike en ondervinding, en die Skrif waarsku teen misleiding en stel dat alles aan die Skrif as maatstaf getoets moet word: (Joh 20:29; 2 Kor 5:7; Rom 10:17; Jes 8:20; Hand 17:21; 1 Tess 5:21; 1 Joh 4:1; 2 Kor 12:1‑4; Matt 24:4)

Nouja! Daar het u dit. Dis klinkklaar duidelik dat God nie buite-om die mens se verstand of gemoed te werk gaan in die voltrekking van sy redding en ook nie in sy heiligmakende werk in ‘n gelowige se lewe nie. Die Calviniste kan dus maar gerus vergeet dat die mens nie ‘n vrye-wil het nie. God wil juis hê dat die mens se gemoed (verstand) nugter, waaksaam, wakker, aktief en vernuwe moet wees wanneer Hy hom tot redding en daarna tot heiligmaking, diens en aanbidding oproep. En nou kan ‘n mens ook beter verstaan waarom die duiwel die gemoed (verstand) wil uitskakel en verblind (2 Korinthiërs 4:4) en hy het beslis ‘n baie gevaarlike wapen in die hande gekry toe die sg. Westynvaders kontemplatiewe spiritualiteit gewild gemaak het. ‘n Passiewe gemoed is voorwaar ‘n baie gevaarlike instrument in die hande van die duiwel, óf dit nou deur Oosters-geïnspireerde sg. Christelike meditasie is, óf deur die val–in-die-gees fenomeen is, en óf dit deur die leuen dat ‘n mens nie ‘n vrye-wil het nie is, hy vryf sy hande met bose vergenoegdheid wanneer hy jou gemoed (verstand) kan uitskakel.

Dat daar gevaar in lê word deur meditasieskole erken en selfs ook nie deur Dr Nicol ontken nie. “Hy skryf:

As mens op ingewings wag, kan jou eie innerlike of selfs bose magte ook met jou praat.” (Stem in die Stilte :97) (Klem bygevoeg).

Hiermee erken Willem Nicol dat meditasie (die onderbou van die kontemplatiewe spiritualiteit) ook ‘n kanaal na die Satan kan wees. ’n Voormalige en bekeerde New Ager, Richard Baer, beaam Nicol se ruiterlike nerkenning in sy beskrywing van sy vreesaanjaende ervaring, wat ook die ommekeer in sy lewe gebring het, tydens ’n meditasiesessie so:

“…my spirit was roaming some of the farthest reaches of ‘heavenly light’ that I had ever perceived…I was surrounded by a virtually overwhelming luminosity—it was as if I was looking straight into the sun. Waves of bliss radiated through my spirit. I was totally captivated by the power. Suddenly another force stepped in. It took me by complete surprise. In the twinkling of an eye, it was like a supernatural hand had taken me behind the scene of the experience that I was having. I was taken behind the outer covering of dazzling luminosity and there saw something that left me literally shaking for a full week. What I saw was the face of devouring darkness! Behind the glittering outer facade of beauty lay a massively powerful, wildly churning face of absolute hatred and unspeakable abominations—the face of demons filled with the power of Satan.” (Richard Baer, Inside the New Age Nightmare, Huntington House, Inc., 1989:55)

View Full Album

Daar’s verskeie ander metodes wat die Satan gebruik om die gemoed of verstand uit te skakel. Een van die gevaarlikste hiervan is die sg val-in-die-gees fenomeen (“slain in the spirit). God TV en TBN asook ander bekende Christen TV-netwerke is deesdae deurweek met wonderwerkende genesers wat mense agteroor laat val en hulle met die sg. vuur van God doop. Miskien het u onlangs 50 opeenvolgende dae op Andre en Jenny Roebert se epiese TV-reeks “Days of Glory in Oos-Londen gesien hoedat hulle gasspreker, die sg. “lag-gees ghoeroe en Heilige Gees kroegman,” Rodney Howard-Brown sy lag- en huilgees hier in ons land kom loslaat het. Dit is uiters interessant maar hoegenaamd nie vreemd nie dat Willem Nicol presies dieselfde fisiese ervarings beskrywe wanneer hy sy “Christelike meditasie” tegnieke in sy boek Gebed van die Hart bespreek.

“Daar kan allerhande fisiese ervarings wees, byvoorbeeld ’n gejeuk of tinteling, ’n kriewel in die keel, hoofpyn of ’n vreemde gevoel in die kop, ’n swaar gevoel of selfs ’n gevoel van gewigloosheid. Ander begin sug, lag of huil. Alles is tekens dat daar iets aan die gang is.” (Gebed van die Hart :135‑136).

Daar is beslis iets aan die gang maar dit is nie van God nie (1 Johannes 4:1)

Ek wil nie nou langer oor die gevare van Ron Martoia en andere se sg. achieving the “still point” of resting in God” uitwei nie (ek beoog om later ‘n vollediger artikel te plaas oor die begrip “stil word”), maar dié is seker: Sommige van ons land se bekendste en toonaangewende predikers is besig om derduisende mense, en veral ons jongmense, in ‘n doolhoof (laberint) van kontemplatiewe duisternis en ellende te ly waaruit hulle nie sal kan kom nie, tensy hulle hul heelhartig tot Jesus Christus (van die Bybel) bekeer en Hom smeek om hulle genadiglik daaruit te red. Hy alleen kan dit doen. Intussen woeker hierdie toonaangewende predikers en hulle navolgers teen ‘n dolle vaart voort en bevorder hierdie uiters gevaarlike spiritualiteit in hulle preke, in hulle kerke, op hulle blogs (kyk gerus hierna) en in hulle boeke. Maar nouja, dis nog lank nie die einde nie. Die valse apostels, leermeesters en profete wat die e-kerk en e-church in hulle midde toelaat, lees soos ‘n regte “who’s who.” So gepraat van BBP’s. Stephan Joubert en Nelus Niemandt bied saam met die besoekende spreker Ron Martoia op Vrydag, 28 Augustus ‘n Oggendleierskap Seminaar in die Pierre van Ryneveldt NG Kerk aan.

Ek sluit af om julle te herinner aan die volgende Skrifgedeeltes.

1 Timotheus 4:1 Maar die Gees sê uitdruklik dat in die laaste tye sommige van die geloof afvallig sal word en verleidende geeste en leringe van duiwels sal aanhang.

Openbaring 18:2-5 En hy het met ‘n groot stem kragtig uitgeroep en gesê: Geval, geval het die groot Babilon, en dit het geword ‘n woonplek van duiwels en ‘n versamelplek van allerhande onreine geeste en ‘n versamelplek van allerhande onreine en haatlike voëls, omdat al die nasies gedrink het van die wyn van die grimmigheid van haar hoerery, en die konings van die aarde met haar gehoereer het, en die handelaars van die aarde ryk geword het deur die mag van haar weelderigheid. En ek het ‘n ander stem uit die hemel hoor sê: Gaan uit haar uit, my volk, sodat julle nie gemeenskap met haar sondes mag hê en van haar plae ontvang nie. Want haar sondes reik tot aan die hemel, en God het haar ongeregtighede onthou.

Jer 6:17 Ek het ook wagte oor julle gestel en gesê: Luister na die geluid van die basuin. Maar hulle het geantwoord: Ons wil nie luister nie.

Volgens Stephan Joubert is dit negatiewe mense wat ‘n hele gemeenskap lam kan lê. Ek wonder wie dit werklik is wat besig is om ‘n ganse gemeenskap lam te lê met hulle demonies geïnspireerde kontemplatiewe spiritualiteit.

Belangrike naskrif:

Ons kontemplatiewe vriend Guillaume Smit het intussen ‘n lys op sy blog beskikbaar gestel waarin hy aandui wie van die invloedrykste kontemplatiewe predikers in ons land is.

Some guy on Twitter gave me this idea – he made a list of the top ten pastors in America who’s twitter thoughts you should follow. That got me thinking on the influential Christian leaders of my own country: If I would have to propose blogsites and Tweeters to someone asking me, who would I suggest?
Let’s see …

* Braam Hanekom
* Andries Louw
* Dries Cronje
* Reggie Nel
* Tom Smith
* Cobus van Wyngaard
* Roger Saner
* Dries Lombaard
* Jan van der Watt
* Stephan Joubert
* Hennie Stander
* Theo Geyser
* Francois Mulder
* Frederick Marais

Miskien is Guillaume te nederig om sy eie naam by te voeg, maar ek dink regtig hy verdien ‘n ereplek in die bg. lys van name. Ek wil baie graag Stephan se goeie raad op Twitter navolg en ook vir u sê “Don’t follow them.”

Is “onthoofding” in “Stander-taal” minder belangrik as “tandetrek?”

‘n Baie hooggeleerde professor verbonde aan UP se Departement van Antieke Tale het die onmenslike onthoofding van Christene in die Suide van Somalië deur die al- Shahaab Islamitiese groep so “effentjies” versag toe hy onlangs op sy immer gewilde blog eerder klem gelê het op hulle gebruik om mense te ontvoer en die silwer en goue stopsels uit hulle tande te haal as op die menigvuldige onthoofdings van Christene. Trouens, hy het die onthoofdings geheel en al geïgnoreer en met mening teen Christene uitgevaar wat kwansuis net so geweldadig kan wees. Ons weet nie of die al-Shahaab moordenaars die silwer en goue tandestopsels net uit hulle mede-Moselms se monde verwyder nie maar dit kan selfs ook wees dat hulle Christene se silwer en goue tandestopsels verwyder voor of selfs na hulle onthoofding, maar dié is seker, Prof. Hennie Stander sal weer ‘n slag moet gaan kyk na sy “vergelykende UP-semantiek.” Hier’s Hennie se weergawe van die geweld in die Suide van Somalië:

Die Islamitiese groep al Shabaab in die suide van Somalië is tans besig om met geweld die silwer en goue stopsels in die tande van mense uit te haal. Hulle gebruik sommer die mees basiese gereedskap om dit te doen. Die Islamitiese groep sê dat silwer en goud vir mode en skoonheid is, en dit is teen die streng wette van Islam. Hulle “ontvoer” die mense teen hulle wil, en haal dan die silwer en goue stopsels uit hulle tande.

Mense is soms baie wreed in die beoefening van hulle godsdiens. Dit gebeur in alle godsdienste – ook in die Christendom. (Klem bygevoeg)

Kom ons laat vir eers ons hooggeleerde professor so ‘n bietjie agterweë om ons deeglik te vergewis van wat die werklike toedrag van sake in die Suide van Somalië is. Somalië word beslis nie net deur wrede “selfaangestelde tandartse” geteister nie. Was dit maar al sou ‘n mens dit glimlaggend met die Middeleesue tandetrek tegnieke kon vergelyk, maar dit is maar ‘n kleinigheidjie in vergelyking met die barbaarse onthoofding van Christene wat gereeld in Somalië  plaasvind.

WorldNetDaily Exclusive het op 11 Augustus 2009 sos volg berig.

1. Vier Christene wat in Somalië gewerk het om weeskindertjies op te pas, is deur al-Qaida belanghebbedes onthoof.

Dis verstommend dat Prof. Hennie Stander slegs sy misnioë te kenne gee oor die silwer en goud wat sonder die basiese gereedskap uit mense se tande gehaal word nadat hulle geweldadig ontvoer is, terwyl die ontvoering en onthoofding van Christene sy geheue skynbaar ontglip het. Die dra van silwer en goud, al is dit ook om die gate in jou slegte tande toe te stop, is skynbaar ‘n baie groot oortreding van die sharia-wette van Islam. Nee professor, jy’t die kat by die stert beet. Die grootste oortrediing van die sharia-wette in Moslemlande is nie die dra van silwer of goud op jou persoon of self in jou tande nie, maar die dra van die Naam van Jesus Christus. Die Christene kom nie met so ‘n  ligte “straf” weg nie. Hulle word summier onthoof en die werklike rede vir hulle onthoofding is omdat hulle weier om hulle Saligmaker en Heer, Jesus Chrristus te verloën, en onder dwang die Islam geloof aan te neem. Die familie mog nie eens die liggame van die onthoofdes ontvang of begrawe nie omdat Somalië geen voorsiening maak vir begraafplase vir Christen-“ongelowiges” nie. Blykbaar word hulle sommer so vir die honde gegooi.

1. Die Islamitiese al-Shahaab groep het verlede maand ses mense onthoof omdat hulle hul tot Jesus Christus bekeer het.

2. WND het ‘n paar weke gelede op Compass Direct News berig dat al-Shahaab twee seuntjies ontvoer en onthoof het omdat hulle geweier het om inligting te verskaf oor die doen en late van ‘n sekere kerkkleier. Let asseblief op, Prof. Stander, die twee seuntjies het met ware heldemoed en mannemoed hulle geliefde pastoor beskerm en nie met hande in diie lug uitgeroep: “O! ons Christene is maar net so wreedaardig soos julle” nie. Dank die Here vir sulke seuntjies wat sonder enige hooggeleerde opleiding in die oorspronklike Hebreeuse en Griekse tale tog weet wat dit beteken om ‘n ware Christen te wees. Vir sulke mense het ek respek — die hoogste respek. “Ek het gekyk hoedat hulle my drie seuns hulpeloos wegsleep terwyl my jongste gehuil het” het hulle moeder gesê. “Ek het geweet hulle gaan geslag word.” ‘n Kort rukkie later het haar sewejarige seuntjie met trane in sy oë sy ma vertel hoedat sy 12-jarige en 11-jarige boeties onthoof is. Die moordenaars was op soek na hulle pa, wat die leier was van die ondergrondse kerk in Yonday in Somalië voordat hy en sy gesin in April na die Keniaanse kamp gevlug het.

Hoe Hennie Stander in die res van sy kommentaar die kloutjie by die oor kry om die misdaad van geweldadigheid ook aan die deur te lê van die Christene en veral dan ook die Christene wat so wreed onthoof is, weet net hy alleen. Om sout in die wonde te smeer, vergelyk hy die wreedheid wat kwansuis ook aan Christene toegedig kan word met die Fariseërs se sonde om allerlei reëls op mense af te dwing sonder dat hulleself die reëls nagekom het. Hy verwys dan spesifiek na Lukas 11:46 waar Jesus die Fariseërs bestraf het oor hulle huigelary.

Julle wetgeleerdes! Ellende wag vir julle ook, want julle laai ondraaglike laste op die mense, en self verroer julle geen vinger om die laste te dra nie (Luk 11:46).

Hennie Stander kom dan tot die gevolgtrekking dat Christene vandag steeds allerlei laste op mense lê. As voorbeeld verwys hy na ‘n predikant wat sy misnoë uitgespreek het omdat een van Hennie se vriende sy kar op ‘n Sondag gewas het terwyl die predikant self later in ‘n buite-egtelike verhoudiing betrap is. Hy roem dan daarop dat hy nog baie sulke voorbeelde kan gee. Dit, moet ek sê, wil darem gedoen wees, hoor. . . . ! Hennie! Leer die Skrif ons nie dat hy wat dink dat hy staan, moet oppas dat hy nie val nie? Dis juis wanneer ons so maklik val, wanneer ons, soos die Fariseërs wat swaar laste op ander geplaas het, dink dat ons nie so sleg is soos ander mense nie en dink dat ons vasstaan. Kom ek herinner jou aan Jesus se woorde in Matteus 5:28!!

Maar Ek sê vir julle dat elkeen wat na ‘n vrou kyk om haar te begeer, reeds in sy hart met haar egbreuk gepleeg het.

As jy net een enkele keer in jou  hele lewe, ek herhaal—net één keer—na ‘n vrou gekyk het om haar in jou hart te begeer, het jy presies dieselfde sonde gedoen as wat daardie predikant gedoen het. Nie jy of ek is enigsins beter as die predikant waarna jy verwys nie, en ook nie die ander voorbeelde wat jy met soveel sorg kan noem nie.

Wat hoor ek jou sê, Hennie? Jy het nog nie ‘n enkele keer in jou hele lewe na ‘n vrou gekyk om haar in jou hart te begeer nie? Sjoe! Halleluja! In daardie geval het jy Jesus Christus nie nodig nie. Jy’s dan volmaak. As jy nog nooit nodig gehad het om die sonde in Matteus 5 by Jesus te bely nie, dan is daar darem ten minste een wat jy wel by Hom kan bely en dit is die sonde om met oop oë en ‘n glimlag op jou gesig te lieg.

As ons in ag neem wat ek so pas gesê het, dan hoef ons nie juis verbaas te wees oor Hennie se UP-belaaide verklaring van Matteus 11:28-30 nie. Hier’s Hennie se siening daaromheen nadat hy verwys het na die owerspelige predikant wat sy (Hennie) se vriend verbied het om sy kar op ‘n Sondag te was:

En ek sal nog baie sulke voorbeelde kan gee. Jesus het egter ’n ander boodskap gehad vir die mense wat so swaar gebuk gegaan het onder reëls. Hy het gesê: “Kom na My toe, almal wat uitgeput en oorlaai is, en Ek sal julle rus gee. Neem my juk op julle en leer van My, want Ek is sagmoedig en nederig van hart, en julle sal rus kry vir julle gemoed. My juk is sag en my las is lig.” (Mt. 11:28-30)

Het u Hennie se dartelende woord-omwentelende betekenis van Matteus 11:28-30 raakgesien? Om dit vir u makliker te maak sal ek herhaal wat hy gesê het:-

Jesus het egter ’n ander boodskap gehad vir die mense wat so swaar gebuk gegaan het onder reëls.

Werklik? Het Jesus werklikwaar mens geword, gely en gesterf, weer opgestaan uit die dood en weer opgevaar na sy Vader sodat ons ‘n stel reëls kan vryspring? Wat sê die Heilige Skrif?

Matteus 5:17 Moenie dink dat Ek gekom het om die wet of die profete te ontbind nie. Ek het nie gekom om te ontbind nie, maar om te vervul.

Johannes 14:15 As julle My liefhet, bewaar my gebooie.

Johannes 14:21 Wie my gebooie het en dié bewaar, dit is hy wat My liefhet; en wie My liefhet, hóm sal my Vader liefhê, en Ek sal hom liefhê en My aan hom openbaar.

Johannes 15:10 As julle my gebooie bewaar, sal julle in my liefde bly, net soos Ek die gebooie van my Vader bewaar en in sy liefde bly.

Matteus 7:24 Elkeen dan wat na hierdie woorde van My luister en dit doen, hom sal Ek vergelyk met ‘n verstandige man wat sy huis op die rots gebou het.
Matteus 7:26 En elkeen wat na hierdie woorde van My luister en dit nie doen nie, sal vergelyk word met ‘n dwase man wat sy huis op die sand gebou het. (Klem deurgaans bygevoeg)

Hoe nou gemaak? Waarom moet die kinders van God sy gebooie (reëls) doen en bewaar as Hy dan self die gebooie volmaak vervul het? Sê Paulus dan nie ook dat God se kinders nie meer onder die Wet is nie maar onder die genade? (Romeine 6:14)

Onthou asseblief dat die essensie en die grondslag van die sonde die oortreding van God se gebooie is. Indien God nie sy Wet aan ons gegee het nie, sou niemand van ons ooit geweet en verstaan het wat sonde is nie. Daarom is God se gebooie, soos Paulus dit in Galasiërs 3:24 beskrywe, die tugmeester (of spieëlbeeld  waarin ons onsself sien) na Christus toe. In die tyd van die Ou Testamentiese Tabernakel en later die tempel is die koperwaskom wat tussen die koperaltaar en die ingang tot die heilige en allerheiligste gestaan het se bodem met spieëls uitgelê. Elke keer wanneer die Hoë Priester en die Priesters hulle in die kopwerwaskom gewas het, het hulle hulself in die spieëls gesien om hulle te herinner hoe oop en bloot hulle sondige lewens voor God was en hoe intens noodsaaklik dit vir hulle was om gereinig te word daarvan. Wanneer Christus (die finale en volmaakte Brandoffer van God) in Matteus 11 roep: “Kom na My toe, almal wat vermoeid en belas is, en Ek sal julle rus gee,” was dit nie om sondaars wat onder reêls gebukkend gegaan het, vry te maak nie. Hy het dit juis gedoen om almal wat in hulle selfgesentreerde, roekelose, reël-lose en rigtinglose (Jesaja 53:6) lewenspatroon van sonde en rebellie vasgevang is en blindelings voortwoeker, aan Hom en sy gebooie te juk-band sodat Hy wat sy Vader se gebooie volbring het dit ook in en deur sy volgelinge kan volbring. Daarom sê die Here Jesus dat sy gebooie nie swaar is nie (1 Johannes 5:3) omdat Hy deur sy Gees sy volgelinge in staat stel om sy gebooie te bewaar. Word die Heilige Gees dan nie pertinent die “Parkletos” (die Trooster) genoem nie? Die “Enhanced Strongs Lexikon” beskryf die woord “Parakletos” as volg:

in the widest sense, a helper, succourer, aider, assistant

of the Holy Spirit destined to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), to lead them to a deeper knowledge of the gospel truth, and give them divine strength needed to enable them to undergo trials and persecutions on behalf of the divine kingdom.

Waarom sou Hennie Stander dan so graag wil hê dat die laste in Matteus 11:28-30 na “reëls” verwys. Ag nouja! dis tog seker nie te moeilik om ‘n antwoord daarop te vind nie, veral nie as ‘n mens in ag neem dat die brose wesentjies van ons post-moderne eeu se nekhare gewoonlik rys wanneer ‘n mens praat oor sonde en die verskriklike gevolge daarvan as hulle hul nie bekeer nie. “Weg daarmee!” skree hulle. “Ons wil hoor hoe om ons selfbeeld op te kikker en nie hoe sleg ons is nie.”

Weet verseker dat die laste waarna die Here Jesus verwys nie die las van ‘n klomp reëls of regulasies is waaronder die mens kwansuis gebukkend gaan nie, maar die sonde waarin die mens versonke geraak het juis omdat hy God se reëls oortree het en nog steeds oortree. Die vloek van die Wet (Gebooie) is nie die Wet self nie, maar die voortdurende oortreding van die Wet.

Galasiërs 3:10 Vervloek is elkeen wat nie bly in alles wat geskryf is in die boek van die wet om dit te doen nie.

Dink daaraan, die Here Jesus wat die enigste Persoon was om God se Wet volmaak te vervul, het ‘n vloek geword (soos een wat God se Wet oortree het en tot sondaar gemaak is) om ons vanuit die greep van die vloek van die Wet (ons eie oortredinge van sy Wet) te ruk en te red. Dit het Hy vir ons almal (nie net vir die sg. Calvinistiese uitverkorenes nie) aan die kruis van Glogota gedoen. “DIT IS VOLBRING,” het Hy triomfantelik uitgeroep toe Hy sy Gees in die hande van sy Vader oorgegee het en dit  behoort ons almal met so ’n oorweldigende liefde vir Hom te vervul dat ons bereid sal wees om ons eie lewens vir HOM op die altaar af te lê en soos daardie twee jong knapies in die Suide van Somalië te sê: “Kap my kop maar af, maar ek weier volstrek om die lieflike Naam van my persoonlike Saligmaker en Meester, Jesus Christus, te verloën.”

Mag die Here voorsien dat daar, soos in die geval met Paulus wat Stefanus se moord goedgekeur het, onder die al-Shahaab moordenaars ten minste een wees wat vanweë die bloed van God se twee martelaartjies tot bekering kom om hierdie wonderlike Evangelie van Jesus Christus aan hulle eie mense te begin verkondig.

Ons hoor voortdurend uit die monde van super apostels en predikers soos Angus Buchan, Rodney Howard-Browne, Elza Meyer en nog vele ander dat Suid-Afrika reeds ‘n geweldige groot herlewing belewe. Ons is beslis nie nou midde-in ‘n groot herlewing nie. Skryf dit maar gerus op jou magie en vee dit met jou hempie af. Daar is hoegenaamd nie so-iets in ons land aan die gang nie. Wat as herlewings voorgehou word, is  valse sogenaamde herlewings. Wie se herlewing moet ons as ‘n egte herlewing aanvaar? Rodney Howard-Browne s’n waarin almal soos afgekapte boomstoompe agteroor val (val in die gees-fenomeen) en onbedaarlik begin lag of huil omdat hulle kwansuis die vuur van God ontvang het? Of miskien Angus Buchan se herlewing wat deur “God” self bevestig word met wondertekens soos hartvormige wolkies wat oor sy byeenkomste verskyn het? Of miskien Elza Meyer se herlewing wat ook deur hartvormige voorwerpe, maar in haar geval, hartvormige klippies wat oral deur haar volgelinge opgetel word, deur “God” self bevestig word? Of miskien Rick Warren se fenomenale sukesvolle herlewing (Die Doelgerigte Lewe) deurdat byne elke denkbare kerk in Suid-Afrika sy boeke in hulle Bybelstudies, selgroepe en gebedsgroepe lees en bestudeer? Of miskien Stephan Joubert van e-kerk en e-church faam wat glo dat die redding van die anorganiese wêreld netso belangrik is as die redding van verlore siele of selfs nog belangriker is omdat God net ‘n dag spandeer het om die mens te skape en vyf dae geneem het om die aarde en die uitspansel te skep. Wie s’n is die ware herlewing? Wie s’n word deur God bewerkstellig? Suid-Afrika het gewis nie ‘n gemis aan herlewings nie. Jy’s vry om te kies watter een jy wil navolg.

Ons het nie ‘n herlewing nodig nie, maar vervolging sodat ons soos Christene wat elders in die wêreld ter wille van hulle geloof in Jesus Christus vervolg en geslag word, kan weet wat dit is om waarlik kind van God te wees. Miskien sal ons dan kan onderskei dat onthoofding ‘n groter oortreding is as tandetrekkery.

Hierdie kommentaar word opgedra aan die Christenmartelare wat onlangs in die Suide van Somalië en elders in die wêreld onthoof is. Dit is terselfdertyd my poging om die skandalige minagting wat Hennie Stander op sy blog daarteenoor geopenbaaar het deur slegs te verwys na die verwydering van die silwer en goud uit mense se tande en nie die onmenslike onthoofding van Christene nie, in die reine te probeer bring. Wat my diep grief is dat Hennie Stander die verwydering van die silwer en goud uit mense se tande spesifiek as wegspringplek gebruik het om sy onbewese en onwetenskaplike uitspraak dat Christene netso gewelsadig kan wees, te loods. Weet hy en sy bloglesers wat dit beteken om ‘n Christen te wees?

E-church heresies or “genuine copies of the original”

I have it on the highest authority that the sowing of doubt is one of the most dangerous forms of telling a lie. Think of it . . . the most idyllically beautiful place on the earth became the backdrop for the downfall of the whole of mankind and it all started with “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” or as the Amplified Bible renders it.”Can it really be that God has said, You shall not eat from every tree of the garden?” No wonder the author of Genesis described the serpent as the most subtle and crafty beast of the field and Jesus called him the father of all lies from the beginning whose lies are murderous tools, killing, maiming and destroying everyone who believes his lies. Another equally dangerous way of sowing doubt is to juxtapose the truth with the lie without demarcating the lie from the truth. In layman’s terms it is called NOOMA /015 or “YOU ARE THE GOSPEL.” I’ll explain what I mean in a minute or two. [You can watch the video clip here.]

Genuine copies of the original

As a kid, years ago, I saw a movie that fascinated me. A bunch of criminals hired (by “gentle” persuasion) an amateur painter who had an exceptional talent to reproduce the oil paintings of the old masters. The thieves would then break into art museums, swap some of the original paintings with the reproductions and make a fortune by selling the  stolen paintings on the black market. The reproduced paintings were so perfectly done that even the most educated art dealer was unable to distinguish between the fake and the original paintings. However, there was one man who had studied the original paintings all his life and was able to effortlessly detect a fake painting. Needless to say, the criminals tried to kill the man but he outwitted them again and again.

Reproductions or copies in the spiritual realm are one of Satan’s cleverest methods to steer people away from Jesus Christ and his salvation. In fact, he is a past master at reproducing a “gospel” that comes so close to the original that multitudes of people are led astray on a daily basis. Peter, whose testimony that Jesus is the Son of the living God became the rock on which Christ promised to build his church, had scarcely finished uttering these profound divinely inspired words when Satan viciously and maliciously provoked him to not have the things of God in mind but the things of men (Matthew 16:23). Multitudes of deceived preachers and teachers who believe they have the things of God at heart are being used of Satan in a similar way to promote his counterfeit “gospel.” Rob Bell, one of the more popular young preachers in the emergent church, who has been dubbed the new Billy Graham, is one of the major proponents of the emergent church’s Gospel reproductions. His presentation of these reproductions, particularly in his series of videos called NOOMA, are so convincing that the unsuspecting listener is easily hood-winked into believing that it is the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is very alarming to see that the electronic church in South Africa, known as e-church and e-kerk under the  auspices of Stephan Joubert, Dries Lombaard and Dries Cronje are increasingly promoting him on their blogs and websites. In a short article written by Dries Cronje that appeared on e-church (6 June 2008) he sings the praises of Rob Bell that just about tops the praises Jesus received when He entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday to present Himself publicly and openly as the Jewish Messiah. In his discussion of Bell’s NOOMA video #15, Dries Cronje makes the following statement:

Rob Bell sketches the background for his important message by sharing the origins of words like evangelical and ecclesia from his vast knowledge of the first century world. He touches issues at the heart of what it means to be a Christian and part of the Church of Jesus Christ.

Then he reaches a stunning conclusion. I don’t want to spoil the NOOMA for you, but he makes the bold claim that… You are the good news. You are the gospel.

Only someone who does not know the original and genuine Gospel is capable of saying something so utterly anti-God and anti-biblical. He may as well have said “You are God” because the Gospel (the Word of God) was made flesh and dwelt among us as Immanuel (God with us). Where did this anti-God and anti-biblical reproduction of the Gospel stem from? It has its roots in the infamous incarnational spirituality that espouses the belief that Christ ought to be incarnated into the world cultures by means of community service and the doing of humanitarian deeds. It was probably Eugene Peterson, the author of a transliteration of the Bible called The Message, that introduced the idea of an incarnational spirituality to an unsuspecting church. His transliteration of 1 Thessalonians 1:7-10 reads as follows:

^7-10Do you know that all over the provinces of both Macedonia and Achaia believers look up to you? The word has gotten around. Your lives are echoing the Master’s Word, not only in the provinces but all over the place. The news of your faith in God is out. We don’t even have to say anything anymore—you’re the message! People come up and tell us how you received us with open arms, how you deserted the dead idols of your old life so you could embrace and serve God, the true God. They marvel at how expectantly you await the arrival of his Son, whom he raised from the dead—Jesus, who rescued us from certain doom.

Jim Montgomery from DAWN Ministries, claims that the LORD spoke to him these words.

‘See to it that I, the Lord, truly become incarnate… in every small group of people on earth.”

In an interview with Relevant Magazine Leonard Sweet responded as follows to one of their questions:-

Relevant Magazine: You’ve said a bit in the past about the church needing to use the medium of pop culture as a vehicle for the Gospel. Why is that?

Leonard Sweet: Because it’s the Roman road; it’s the road people are traveling on; it’s the dominant global culture. For the church not to speak to pop culture, not to use images that come from it and sounds that come from it, smells that come from it, well … that’s not being very incarnational … In order to incarnate Christ into the culture that is there, then we have to look to redeem pop culture.

I remember some time ago a dear sister of mine in the Lord, who makes much ado about nothing (Peterson’s The Message), told me that we should stop preaching the Gospel and start living it. Well! that sounds just grand, but is it the Gospel truth? Even Jesus, the only Person who ever lived a perfect sinless life and did more good deeds of love and compassion than anyone else in the entire family of the human race, once said: “ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you” (Johan 15:3). The preaching of the Gospel, the spoken word of God, is sharper than a two-edged sword that divides asunder soul and spirit and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart and not you or your wonderful life of community service to put a broken world back together again. Saving faith comes by hearing and hearing by the preaching of the unadulterated Gospel of God (Romans 10:17). If I were to sum up the main purpose of those who espouse an incarnational spirituality I would have to say their main aim is to downplay and even openly denigrate the uniqueness of God’s Word. If you can get people to believe that the Bible is just another holy book with no inherent uniqueness of its own, and indeed to sow seeds of doubt as to the distinctive matchlessness of the Bible, you can mesmerize people into believing just about anything you say. This is exactly what Rob Bell sets out to do in his NOOMA video no. 15. Let us now place some of the things he says in his video under the microscopic scrutiny of the Word of God to see whether the things he says are true.

He kicks off by saying “Sometime in the First Century, around the year 30, a movement was started by a group of Jews who insisted that their Rabbi, a man named Jesus from the Galilee region in Israel had risen from the dead after being crucified by the Roman Empire. They claimed that after His resurrection they had seen Him and that they had had conversations with Him and eaten meals with Him. And then they said that He had ascended to heaven and that someday he would return.” I would like you to take special note of two things he says that are completely out of touch with the Word of God.

• A movement was started by a group of Jews. (The Christian faith is not just a movement that was started by a group of Jews. In fact, his disciples were hardly in any position to start anything due to their timidity and fear of being captured and crucified like their Lord subsequent to his crucifixion, resurrection and shortly after his ascension. When Mary Magdalene, Mary and Salome went to Jesus’ grave to anoint his body, they found the great and heavy stone that sealed the sepulchre rolled away. Inside they saw a young man clothed in a long white garment who told them that Jesus had risen from the dead. Did they immediately go out to start a new movement proclaiming that He had risen? Hardly! because the Bible says the women who first visited his grave were sorely afraid and did not tell anybody that He had risen, despite the angel’s bidding to tell his disciples that He was going to meet them in Galilee. Only when Jesus  personally appeared to Mary Magdalene did she take courage to tell the disciples that she had met with Him and seen Him. What were the disciples reaction when they heard the awesome news of his resurrection? Did they immediately start a new movement insisting that He had risen from the dead? Hardly! because they did not believe Mary Magdalene. Eventually, when more and more of his followers were informed that He had risen from the dead but failed to believe, He rebuked them sternly for their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 16:14). It was only on the Day of Pentecost, when the promise of the Holy Ghost’s indwelling power became a reality, that the disciples and everyone who received the life quickening empowerment of God’s Spirit were able to preach the Gospel with conviction and without fear. Jesus and His Spirit inaugurated the Christian faith. They did not merely start a movement or a club or an institution. They did not even establish a Gospel, but the Gospel and the only Gospel that saves sinners from God’s eternal judgment in hell. None of these facts are even once mentioned by Rob Bell in his NOOMA video. Could it be that he is following a certain agenda and this this agenda is to rethink and re-interpret the Gospel?)

• The Roman Empire crucified Jesus Christ. (The Roman judicial system put Jesus on trial and through a series of illegal processes found him guilty and crucified him. Roman soldiers drove the nails through his hands and feet and it was a Roman soldier who pierced his side with his spear. But, it was the Jewish Sanhedrin, through the heinous betrayal of Judas (a Jew), who delivered him over to the Roman authorities. And yet Jesus declared that no man had the power to take his life unless He willingly and lovingly laid it down Himself [John 10:18]. He expressly told Pilate at his bar that he could have no power at all against him except it were given him by his Father [John 19:11]. Isaiah 53: 10 says that it pleased God to bruise his Son and Peter declared on the Day of Pentecost: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” [Acts 2:23]. The wicked hands that crucified Him were merely the instruments God used to prove his unfathomable love and to accomplish his will in saving the many who would believe. These facts are supremely important and cannot be ignored because they speak of the magnanimity of God’s love for a dying world. Nevertheless, Rob Bell fails to mention these facts even once. The question is: why does he circumvent the essence of the Gospel of Jesus Christ by the omission of these facts?)

Although it is evident that Bell has no intention of putting “the movement a group of Jews started,” as he refers to the Christian faith, on par with many other religious movements that existed during the reign of the Roman Empire, the inherent danger of his statements is that they may and actually do sow doubt in the hearts of his listeners. To prove that the Jewish movement was not regarded as that unique in the Roman Empire and that its first century citizens were not particularly impressed by these Jewish Christians’ claim that their God had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven, he mentions several idolatrous practices in those days that also believed their gods had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven. He proceeds to explain that the gods Mithra and Attis were believed to have risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. In his short history lesson he also mentions that the Caesars were worshipped as gods and that many of the words the early Christians used to describe their movement were derived from the Caesars vocabulary — words such as euangelion and ekklesia which the Caesars used to propagandize their military conquests and political achievements, and the places of worship they established where their subordinates declared them to be Lord. The new Jewish movement usurped these words and changed them into evangelical and church, according to Bell, and used them to describe their own places of worship where they declared Jesus Christ as their Lord. Bell’s interpretation of the meaning of these words aren’t correct. For one, the word ekklesia or ecclesia means “called out ones” and expresses the essence of the new birth which is to be called out of the corrupt world system and to be grounded in God’s Kingdom where everyone worships and obeys Jesus Christ as their Lord and King. Paul explained this spiritual principle in Colossians 1:12-14.

Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Emphasis added)

The alarming thing about Rob Bell’s Nooma video is that, while he downplays the very core of Christianity by juxtaposing Christ’s death and resurrection with those of other Roman gods such as Mithras and Attis, he brings to the fore both the Roman Caesars’ and the early Christians’ efforts to make a better place of this world. Both had the same idea but the only difference is that the Roman Empire with her Caesars pledged to do it through military might, coercion and strict laws while the Christians ventured to do it through love, compassion and service. Here’s what Bell says in his video:

Now, for them [the Christians], this future restoration had nothing to do with leaving this world, it was all about the restoration, the renewing and the reclaiming of this world. And so they saw in Jesus’ resurrection the beginning of this universe-wide movement to put it all back together. Well. This, of course, brought them into direct conflict with the Roman Empire, because remember, for the Caesars, it was all about Caesar’s belief that he was making a better world through his power, through his armies and through his wealth . . . For them, this Gospel was about serving the world, especially those on the underside of the Empire. For them it was about serving, not ruling. And so they took this Empire propaganda term “gospel,” and they used it to describe this new world that Jesus and his followers were making right under the nose of the Empire, because their way, the way of Jesus, was totally opposed to the way of Rome. And so, when we read accounts of how they lived, we read that they shared their possessions, they fed the hungry and that they carried each other’s burdens. Well, it’s because the Gospel for them was a whole way of life, a whole new world, right in the midst of this one.

The Gospel according to Bell which is a very clever counterfeit of the original Gospel of Jesus Christ, revolves around the restoration of the world through acts of love, compassion and selfless sacrificial living amongst the poor, the destitute and especially those on the underside of the world. Although these humanitarian deeds should be part of every Christian’s make-up, Peter and the disciples seem to have been very careful not to place too much emphasis on it for fear that it might deter them in the preaching of the Gospel, something Bell hardly ever does according to Scripture.

Acts 6:1-4 NOW ABOUT this time, when the number of the disciples was greatly increasing, complaint was made by the Hellenists (the Greek-speaking Jews) against the [native] Hebrews because their widows were being overlooked and neglected in the daily ministration (distribution of relief). So the Twelve [apostles] convened the multitude of the disciples and said, It is not seemly or desirable or right that we should have to give up or neglect [preaching] the Word of God in order to attend to serving at tables and superintending the distribution of food. Therefore select out from among yourselves, brethren, seven men of good and attested character and repute, full of the [Holy] Spirit and wisdom, whom we may assign to look after this business and duty. But we will continue to devote ourselves steadfastly to prayer and the ministry of the Word.

Negligence of the unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ for the sake of humanitarian deeds of love and compassion is not a service but a gross disservice to the community. In that case you may as well become a second Mother Theresa who abounded in deeds of love and compassion but sent thousands into a Christ-less eternity because she believed it was her duty, not to make the people she cared for disciples of Jesus Christ, but to make of a Hindu a better Hindu, of a Muslim a better Muslim and of a Catholic a better Catholic . . . and in doing so to make a better place of our crooked and corrupt world. Or perhaps, like Rob Bell, you may want to attend one of the Dalai Lama’s Seeds of Compassion Conferences and learn how to join hands with other religions in making a better place of our world. The incarnational spirituality doesn’t seem to care by whom or what the incarnation is done. All that matters is the restoration, the renewing and the reclaiming of this world which is nothing short of a giant resurrection rescue of this world as Rob Bell describes it. Really? Is that what Jesus taught his disciples to do — to restore this world to a new euphoric Garden of Eden where everyone may continue to live as he pleases, worship whom he pleases and to just love, love and compassionately love one another without really caring where people are going to spend eternity?

Did Jesus send his disciples out to restore all things and to renew and reclaim the world?

The word “ecclesia” as I mentioned earlier means “that which is called out,” and conveys the idea that a sent messenger heralds a stern warning to everyone to come out (separate) themselves from the world of the lost and indeed the world of Satan. In the book of Revelation this herald not only sounds a word of warning to come out of the world but also out of the Babylonian religious system (end-time church) which is going to provide a haven for every conceivable religious persuasion (Revelation 18:4). Therefore, the call of God is not to restore, renew and reclaim the world but to separate oneself from it. This of course does not mean that the present-day disciples or followers of Christ should turn a blind eye to the suffering caused by sin and the injustices in the world; it means not to compromise the Gospel of salvation for the sake of an interreligious collaboration to make a better place of our world. It is not of God. In fact, the Spirit of the Lord expressly warns that in the last days when all the religions of the world begin to work together to bring about peace through love, compassion and service, sudden destruction is going to come upon them (11 Thessalonians 5:3).

From whom or what must we reclaim the world? From Satan, the god of this world?

When Satan tried to tempt Jesus into worshipping him by offering Him all the kingdoms of the earth, He did not deny the devil’s claim that all the kingdoms of the earth belonged to him. Indeed, he is presently the god of this world (2 Corinthians 4: 4) and will not capitulate his position until He is forced to do so by Jesus Christ when He returns to set up his Kingdom of Peace for a thousand years. Only then all things will be restored (Isaiah 65; Revelation 20).

Matthew 4:8-10 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

The Emergent Church may be of the opinion that they are restoring, renewing and reclaiming the world and that they are instrumental in the giant resurrection rescue that is allegedly underway, but they are actually succumbing to Satan’s temptation to worship him in return for the kingdoms of the earth. This is no surprise because God’s Word clearly states that “evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13). The most dangerous deceivers are those who claim to be Christians but have no qualms in asserting that there are truths in religions other than the Christian faith. E-church and e-kerk, engineered by Stephan Joubert, Dries Lombaard, Dries Cronjé and others, have openly supported Rob Bell’s claim that there is truth in other religions such as Buddhism. Some of you may query my allegation that they are succumbing to the wiles of the devil and actually bowing to his whims to grant them the kingdoms of the earth if they but worshipped him. Paul clearly states in 1 Corinthians 10:20 “But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.” The worst form of fellowshipping with idolaters who sacrifice to devils is when you unashamedly allot truth to those religions while Jesus Himself said: “I AM the Truth.” He is the complete embodiment of truth and anything or anyone from whatever religious persuasion that rejects His claim as being the only truth are not in fellowship with the Triune God and neither are those “Christians” who avow that there is truth in other religions.

Are you the Gospel?

No you are NOT the Gospel. If you have the testimony of the Holy Spirit in your heart that you are a child of God, then you are merely a sheep of the Good Shepherd who has sent you out amongst ravenous wolves to preach the unadulterated Gospel of God (Matthew 10:16) so that others may be saved according to Scripture (remember Colossians 11:12-14).