Lo and behold, South Africa had scarcely lain her greatest son, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela to rest, after a ten days period of mourning, dignitaries who attended his funeral, politicians, important civil servants and people at grassroots level are again singing the same old song they had been singing in the rooms and corridors of the Union buildings, and in black and white townships since 1994. It is called “POVERTY THREATENS RECONCILIATION.” Well, if the song “KILL THE BOER, KILL THE FARMER” may no longer be sung in South Africa, a seemingly more reconciliatory song needs to be rehashed and sung again in a chorus of protests against poverty.
Please note that the report on “Kill the Boer, kill the farmer” appeared in Aljazeera on 12 September 2011. Less than a year later President Zuma, presumably unaware of judge Collin Lamont’s ruling on the infamous song or maybe in contempt of court, deliberately places him above the Constitutional Law of South Africa, sang the same song at the ANC Centenary Celebrations in Bloemfontein, South Africa in January 2012.
You may have noticed that the person (Thami [Thamsanga] Jantjie) who interpreted the infamous song at the ANC Centenary Conference in Bloemfontein on 8 January 2012, is the same person who interpreted the speeches of world leaders, among them Barak Obama, at Nelson Mandela’s memorial, held at the FNB stadium in Johannesburg on December 10, 2013. In the following video Jantjie says that he has interpreted on many ANC conferences including the presidential conference. Could it be that he has always been the ANC government’s official sign language interpreter and that he may even have interpreted some of Nelson Mandela/s speeches? To which presidential conference is he referring? Your guess is as good as mine, but that he has been interpreting for the ANC for a long time is no secret.
The question that needs to be answered is: Were the top echelons in the ANC Government aware that Jantjie was being treated for schizophrenia? If they had known, it was one of the dumbest things they could ever have done. Think of it, here’s a man diagnosed with schizophrenia being used as an interpreter at high level governmental conferences, meetings and funerals . . . I don’t even want to think what he could have done at those high level conferences. (Read here).
In the above video Jantjie says:
Why was it not an issue when I did the interpretation for ma Sisulu’s funeral (see video below) and many big events in South Africa?
Thami Jantjie asked a valid question. The only possible reason why no-one lodged a complaint is that Albertina Sisulu’s funeral was not as widely published and viewed in South Africa and the world. Or it may even be that very little or no deaf people in South Africa and the world were not that interested in her funeral. On the other hand, they may have noticed that he is a fake interpreter but refrained from exposing it in the media in fear of retaliation.
Wikipedia defines Schizophrenia as follows:
Schizophrenia has been associated with a higher rate of violent acts, although this is primarily due to higher rates of drug use. Rates of homicide linked to psychosis are similar to those linked to substance misuse, and parallel the overall rate in a region. What role schizophrenia has on violence independent of drug misuse is controversial, but certain aspects of individual histories or mental states may be factors.
Media coverage relating to violent acts by schizophrenic individuals reinforces public perception of an association between schizophrenia and violence. In a large, representative sample from a 1999 study, 12.8% of Americans believed that individuals with schizophrenia were “very likely” to do something violent against others, and 48.1% said that they were “somewhat likely” to. Over 74% said that people with schizophrenia were either “not very able” or “not able at all” to make decisions concerning their treatment, and 70.2% said the same of money management decisions. The perception of individuals with psychosis as violent has more than doubled in prevalence since the 1950s, according to one meta-analysis.
Let us get back to our main subject of this article.
“The high level of poverty and large wealth gap in South Africa pose a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and national reconciliation,” Former Chief Justice Pius Langa warned last night [30 May 2011] at a Colloquium on Law and Poverty hosted by Stellenbosch University’s (SU) Law Faculty. That was in May May 2011 but since Nelson Mandela’s demise several high profile dignitaries have taken over the relay stick and added their voices to the song “Poverty Threatens Reconciliation.”
Although NUMSA’s newly elected president, Andrew Chriwa, has asked for President Zuma’s immediate resignation in view the R200 million Nkandla scandal, which he rightly dubbed the “misuse and theft of public funds,” the great majority of blacks still believe that the financial disparities between blacks and whites are not caused by the ANC government and their supporters who still vote for them, but by the whites (the so-called “haves”).
Despite the ANC’s concerted efforts to curb corruption and to expose the corruption among high ranking government officials in the media, nothing seems to have been done to translate the benefits of these efforts into something good for the poorest of the poor. The media is replete with reports exposing the thugs who rob the country of the funds that could have been used to alleviate the plight of the poor. Here are a few examples you may find interesting to read: Alan Boesak (here), Carl Niehaus (here and here), High ranking officials in government (here, here, here, here and here) and the police (here).
To illustrate that blacks still see the whites as the oppressors and the main obstacle in the way to financial equity, I would like to review Bishop Ziwas’ sermon delivered at Nelson Mandela’s State funeral in Qunu, Eastern Cape, South Africa.
RECONCILIATION: BISHOP Z. ZIWA
Bishop Z. Ziwa, the presiding bishop of the Methodist Church in South Africa, had a wonderful opportunity to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ but instead delivered a liberation speech second to none. He warmly greeted the attendees in the Name of Jesus Christ to which they all said amen. At last, I thought, we are going to hear something of the Gospel (Good News) of Jesus Christ after a very lengthy parade of political speeches. Time was running out so that the Programme Directior, Baleka Mbete, also known as Baleka Mbete-Kgositsile, had to warn Bishop Ziwa to keep his sermon short so as not to interrupt a Xhosa custom relating to the burial of a body at noon. (For a brief description of Xhosa funeral customs read here. Bear in mind Deuteronomy 18:10-11). Wikipedia describes Liberation Theology as follows:
Liberation theology is a political movement in Roman Catholic theology which interprets the teachings of Jesus Christ in relation to a liberation from unjust economic, political, or social conditions. It has been described as “an interpretation of Christian faith through the poor’s suffering, their struggle and hope, and a critique of society and the Catholic faith and Christianity through the eyes of the poor”. Detractors have called it Christianized Marxism.
Although liberation theology has grown into an international and inter-denominational movement, it began as a movement within the Catholic Church in Latin America in the 1950s–1960s. Liberation theology arose principally as a moral reaction to the poverty caused by social injustice in that region. The term was coined in 1971 by the Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutiérrez, who wrote one of the movement’s most famous books, A Theology of Liberation. Other noted exponents are Leonardo Boff of Brazil, Jon Sobrino of Spain, Óscar Romero of El Salvador, and Juan Luis Segundo of Uruguay.
The influence of liberation theology diminished after proponents were accused of using “Marxist concepts” leading to admonishment by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in 1984 and 1986. The Vatican criticized certain strains of liberation theology for focusing on institutionalized or systemic sin, apparently to the exclusion of individual offenders and offences; and for identifying Catholic Church hierarchy in South America as members of the same privileged class that had long been oppressing indigenous populations since the arrival of Pizarro onward.
Liberation theology proposes to fight poverty by addressing its alleged source: sin. In so doing, it explores the relationship between Christian theology — especially Roman Catholic theology — and political activism, especially in relation to social justice, poverty, and human rights. The principal methodological innovation is seeing theology from the perspective of the poor and the oppressed. For example Jon Sobrino, S.J., argues that the poor are a privileged channel of God’s grace.
Some liberation theologians base their social action upon the Bible scriptures describing the mission of Jesus Christ, as bringing a sword (social unrest), e.g. Isaiah 61:1, Matthew 10:34, Luke 22:35–38 — and not as bringing peace (social order). This Biblical interpretation is a call to action against poverty, and the sin engendering it, to effect Jesus Christ’s mission of justice in this world.
Black liberation theology is a theological perspective found in some Christian churches in the United States which contextualizes Christianity in an attempt to help African-Americans overcome oppression. Black liberation theology seeks to liberate people of color from multiple forms of political, social, economic, and religious subjugation and views Christian theology as a theology of liberation- “a rational study of the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the essence of the Gospel, which is Jesus Christ,” writes James Hal Cone, one of the original advocates of the perspective.
As you can see, Liberation Theology is a far cry from the biblical Gospel of Jesus Christ and yet it is gaining a strong foothold in many churches, among others, the Dutch Reformed Church, the Lutheran Church, the Roman Catholic Church, the Emergent Church and, as Bishop Ziwa’s sermon proves, also the Methodist Church. Jurgen Moltmann, in particular has had a profound influence on the DRC, the Emerging Church and the Methodist Church while Moltmann in his turn was profoundly influenced by the Marxist Ernst Bloch. I don’t want to go into too much detail in regard to Liberation Theology but rather focus on Matthew 25 which seems to be a pet passage from Scripture of all Liberation theologians. They all intone the same reason for their love of Matthew 25 in the following way.
Just read the Gospels, Matthew 25, where Jesus tells his followers how God will separate the sheep from the goats on Judgment Day. “I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. … I needed clothes, and you clothed me.” When did we do all that, they asked? And, in response, these defining words: “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.”
According to liberation theology, in other words, Christianity is not about whether you believe in this doctrine or that. It’s whether you imitate Jesus in helping “liberate” the poor from social, economic, and political hardship. That’s not a perversion of the Gospel. It IS the Gospel.
Who are Jesus’ brethren. Well, let Him speak for Himself.
But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (Matthew 12:48-50)
It is NOT your poverty stricken life that earns you the privilege to be called his brother or sister. It is your obedience to Him and the doing of his Father’s will that qualifies you to be called his brethren. And, if you do not believe Him, you are following a false Christ because it is only false Christs and false apostles who twist the words of the genuine Jesus Christ.
Stephen Williams in his book “Jurgen Moltmann: A critical Introduction : writes on page 92:
. . . the presence of Christ in the Spirit cannot be confined to the church. Christ’s messianic mission on earth terminated in representative self-giving destined to herald a liberating lordship. In this the church participates by setting forth all kinds of liberation in sympathy and joy, thus living in the presence of Christ. But ‘Christ is confessed in the Holy Spirit and by him . . . where the power of the new creation is active. He is confessed where prisoners liberate themselves from oppression.‘ (1) The parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 is taken by Moltmann to teach the presence of Christ in the poor. (2) Christ is not present here in a Christian congregation, but his presence makes the poor fellow-members with the institutional church of the kingdom of God. (3) This is where eschatological Christology takes us in ecclesiology and missiology (understanding of mission).
What Moltmann is doing here is further exploring a theme, theologically prominent in our century, of the sacred and the secular, with a view to breaking down barriers in that realm that take the form of a church-world separation. Much of the inspiration for Moltmann’s and others’ way of thinking here came from Dietrich Bonhoeffer. (4) In the later stages of his short life Bonhoeffer referred to ‘religionless Christianity’, sometimes (but questionably) rendered ‘unchurchly Christianity’ to get its proper force. This was done in the service of a wider attempt to relate the presence of Christ to the world, not just to the church. Moltmann also wanted to relate ‘church’ to the substance of Christianity in a non-traditional fashion, even if there are dissimilarities with Bonhoeffer. The upshot, as far as Moltmann is concerned, is that ‘Christ’s presence in word and sacrament points beyond itself (by virtue of its indwelling logic of identification and his presence itself) to his identity in the world. (5)
Religious leaders like Stephan Joubert, Theo Geyser who believes that sangomas (witch doctors) are golden opportunities to meet Jesus (read here), Johan Geyser, Trevor Hudson and Nelus Niemandt (Moderator of the General Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church) have all been heavily influenceD by the panentheistic and liberation theology of Jurgen Moltmann.
Let us now continue with a short critique on Bishop Ziwa’s sermon which he delivered at Nelson Mandela’s funeral on 15 December 2013. His text was Matthew 25: 21 “His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.” (Matthew 25:21). The scope and purpose of his sermon may be summed up in his own words:
“Jesus tells the story in Matthew 25 and it is a story of three slaves, three people who are comrades in slavery, and as a follower of Jesus Christ I love the third one, and I side with the third one. He interests me. He had the guts to look at justice issues at great cost to himself through selflessness and sacrifice.”
His sermon was loaded with Liberation Theology jargon. Instead of the phrase “three servants” he used the words “three slaves.” The Greek word “doulos” refers to a bond servant who pledges and commits himself entirely to his master to oversee and render proper stewardship of his master’s property. Although the word “doulos” is also translated as “slave”, we cannot interpret it in terms of today’s meaning of the word, i.e. a person who is oppressed and deprived of any rights. The master who left into a far country did not force his servants into doing things under duress. They were at liberty to use their own discretion in the handling of his property.
The fact that the unprofitable or worthless servant buried his talent (a talent was of silver and weighed between 58 and 80 pounds) proves that the master never once oppressed his servants and never once forced them to do anything against their will. In fact, the worthless servant with the one talent had no faith in his master because he doubted whether he would return as he said he would. Consequently he thought, “Rather than investing my talent in a bank, I will bury it in the ground. If my Master returns I will give it back to him but if he does not return I have gained a talent of silver.”
Although the parable teaches God’s servants (his children; disciples; followers) how to manage the money He has so graciously given them and how to invest it to the advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ on earth (Matthew 6:19), the central message of this parable demonstrates that unbelief does not only separate people from Jesus Christ in this life but also in the afterlife. Hence his words in verse 30 “ . . . cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Bishop Z Ziwa who claims to be a follower of Jesus Christ turned the Gospel of Jesus Christ completely upside down by siding with the third person, whom Jesus Christ rejected and cast into hell, and by rebuking the first and second persons whom Jesus praised and richly rewarded. According to the Bishop (or shall I say, Liberation Theology) the first two comrade slaves who were given $5000 dollars and $2000 respectively were the real malefactors who robbed the first comrade slave of his $1000 dollars and cast him in prison. He suggests that the third comrade slave addressed his words “’Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed . .” to the first and second comrade slave and not to the master who left into a far country.
The biblical meaning of the parable is obvious. The master who left into a far country is Jesus Christ who ascended into heaven after his death, burial and resurrection. He entrusted the legacy He had left (his Gospel of salvation through faith in his finished work on the cross and his bodily resurrection), in the hands of his followers commanding them to go into all the world and to make disciples of the nations. This involves the correct stewardship of the resources he had given them (including money) to the advancement of his kingdom. Unlike the first two servants that third accused his master of harshness, To many men the requirements of religion are more prominent than its gifts, and God is thought of as demanding rather than as ‘the giving God.’ Such thoughts paralyse action. Fear is barren, love is fruitful.
The biblical interpretation of Matthew 25 is so obvious that even a child can understand it. What can be clearer than Jesus’ words of praise and commendation to the first and second persons who used their respective five and two talents to advance his kingdom and his displeasure with the unprofitable servant who did not believe that his master would return and hid his talent in the earth hoping that his master would placidly receive back the one talent he had given him without interest (fruitfulness in his service to his master). And yet Bishop Ziwa, contrary to what Jesus taught, lauds the unprofitable servant which, contrary to is claim that he is a follower of Jesus Christ, makes him an enemy of Jesus Christ and his Gospel. Ziwa proceeded to say:
My special comrade, let me take you to his action, the third slave. To start with, he is less resourced . . . than the other two slaves. . . He acts from a position of disadvantage but he makes the best use of it. He shows deep understanding of the economic paradigm and he had the courage to speak the truth and in this instance exposes the injustices in a brilliant courageous way, even very dangerous to himself. He acts in a way that gives him a platform to address and expose the unjust system. Did not Holihlahla Mandela do the same at the Rivonia trial?
(Thomas’ comment: When Paul of Tarsus was incarcerated for his faith, he never ventured to expose the injustices of the Roman Empire. His only aim was to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ and even once said to King Agrippa; “Whether short or long, I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am—except for these chains.” – Acts 26:29)
The third slave acted in a way that is contrary to the conventional way of corporation within an unjust system. He takes the money, the one talent, . . . . (From this point onward, the sermon seems to have been edited on YouTube).
The most disturbing thing about Ziwa’s sermon is that he interprets Jesus’ word “You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? . . . So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” as an injustice to the third slave. Note that Bishop Ziwa conveniently left out passages that are central to the message. He deliberately left out the words “You wicked and slothful servant” and distorts the meaning of “And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” to having been the incarceration of Nelson Mandela by the injustice Apartheid system.
The irony is that Nelson Mandela was released by FW de Klerk and the National Party Government after 27 years in jail while the worthless servant was cast into outer darkness (often used as a metaphor for hell) from which no one can or will ever escape.
RECONCILIATION: RABBI WARREN GOLDSTEIN AND HIS ARCH ENEMY, DESMOND TUTU
Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein voiced the same sentiment when he likened Nelson Mandela to Joseph in the Old Testament. “Joseph emerged from jail to become a leader and head of government of a mighty nation. He was reunited with his brothers and had the opportunity to exact vengeance and justice and yet Joseph transcended his personal pain and his need for retribution by forgiving his brothers so that his family won’t be torn apart and destroyed forever,” Goldstein said to a crowd of thousands.
Fact of the matter is that you cannot liken Joseph to anyone else than Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God. Many persons in the Old Testament were types of Jesus Christ. Moses, for instance typified Jesus as mediator between God and the people, Melchizedek typified Him as High Priest, King David typified Him as King who united the scattered 12 tribes of Israel (1 Chronicles 11; Isaiah 59:20-21; Romans 11). Joseph typified Him as the suffering Servant who came to save lost sinners for an eternity. The Jews, his own brethren, still hate their Messiah, Jesus Christ, in the very same way Joseph’s brothers hated him.
There is a vast difference between Joseph, the son of Jacob, and Mandela. Joseph was incarcerated because Potifar’s wife accused him of rape whilst she was the one who tried to seduce him to climb into bed with her and commit adultery (Genesis 39:7-20). The media and books written about Mandela openly reveal how he brazenly cheated on his first wife, Evelyn.
His family life suffered grievously from all this activity. So little time did Mandela spend at home during the 1950 protests that his son, Thembi, then five years old, asked his mother, ‘Where does Daddy live?’ A second son, Makgatho, was bam at this time. Mandel. managed to get to the hospital for the birth, but, as he later observed, ‘it was only a brief respite’. When the banning order was placed On Mandela’s political activities, Evelyn secretly welcomed it.
The marriage soon ran into serious difficulties. Because Evelyn’s earnings as a nurse were no longer essential to keep the family afloat, she decided in 1952 to enrol for a course on midwifery at King Ed ward V11 hospital in Durban. While she was away, the two children were cared for in Orlando by Mandela’s mother and sister. She returned at the end of 1953 to find Mandela in the thick of an affair with a secretary he employed at his office. To Evelyn’s fury, she made free use of the family home, even following Mandela into the bed room and the bathroom. When Evelyn objected to her presence, Mandela became enraged. Only when Evelyn threatened to throw boiling water over her did the visits to the house stop. But the affair continued. (6)
Joseph, on the other hand, who South Africa’s Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein likened to Mandela, remained faithful to his wife and two sons throughout his entire life. What some Jews won’t do to remain in the ANC’s good books is a mystery, especially when one takes into account what so-called “Christians” like Desmond Tutu has said about Israel and its leaders in the past. Frontpage Mag reported (December 24, 1010):
“Among the world’s most respected figures is South Africa’s Bishop Desmond. His recognizable face—with its ever present grin—has become a symbol of reconciliation and goodness. But it masks a long history of ugly hatred toward the Jewish people, the Jewish religion and the Jewish state. Bishop Desmond Tutu is no mere anti-Zionist (though Martin Luther King long ago recognized that anti- Zionism often serves as a cover for deeper anti-Jewish bigotry). He has minimized the suffering of those killed in the Holocaust. He has attacked the “Jewish”–not Israeli–”lobby” as too “powerful” and “scar[y].”
He has invoked classic anti-Semitic stereotypes and tropes about Jewish “arrogance”, “power” and money. He has characterized Jews a “peculiar people,” and has accused “the Jews” of causing many of the world’s problems. He once even accused the Jewish state of acting in an “unChristian” way.
Were he not a Nobel laureate, his long history of bigotry against the Jewish people would have landed him in the dustbin of history, along with a dishonor roll of otherwise successful people, whose reputations have been tainted by their anti-Semitism such as Henry Ford, Charles Lindberg, Patrick Buchanan and Mel Gibson. But his Nobel Prize should not shield him from accountability for his long history of anti-Jewish bigotry, any more than it should for Yasser Arafat, Jimmy Carter and Jose Saramago.”
Desmond Tutu is a veritable example of how to earn a Nobel Peace Prize – HATE THE JEWS and that’s it. Hating Jews qualifies you to receive the huge amount of 30 pieces of silver (sorry, that should be SED1,650,000 which, according to the exchange rates in 1984 was $250,189.54). The irony is that Alfred Nobel was of Jewish descent. It is no wonder that the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, snubbed the ANC Government and Nelson Mandela’s memorial service. (Read here). Lest the Jews who angrily blasted their own leader, their beloved country, Israel, and the entire Jewish nation, allow me to remind them what Desmond Tutu has said on numerous occasions since the ANC Government has come into power in 1994.
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will not be mocked. who said to Abraham:
“Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” (Genesis 12:1-3)
Tutu seems to be reaping the result of God’s curse on those who hate Jews. His house was burgled twice while he was telling his own unruly people at the FNB Stadium during the memorial for Mandela on 10 December 2013, “You will go to hell.” (Tutu’s blessing turned out to be a curse. May I remind him that only God can send people to hell).
Paul, a Jew, called people like Tutu false prophets and messengers of Satan who masquerade as messengers of God.
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15)
RECONCILIATION: INTERNATIONAL CRICKET AND RUGBY
I love to watch national and international cricket and rugby games whenever I have the time. The skill, tenacity and fighting spirit of all rounders like Jacques Kallis has always fascinated me. I was ecstatic when a Jew, Joel Stransky, kicked the winning drop goal in extra time at Ellis Park on June 24 1995 to win the final match in the Rugby World Cup between South Africa and New Zealand. It reminded me of what a good friend of mine, who played for the Blue Bulls in his hey-day, once told me. He said he heard it said on many occasions that there must be at least one Jew in a rugby squad to put the team on a winning streak. Whether this is standard procedure in rugby I don’t know but it sure as hell worked for Madiba and the country in 1995.
Never before in the history of Apartheid and in the democracy that followed was such a magical euphoria experienced in South Africa, so much so that Nelson Mandela could say -
“Sport has the power to change the world…it has the power to inspire. It has the power to unite people in a way that little else does. It speaks to youth in a language they understand. Sport can create hope where once there was only despair. It is more powerful than government in breaking down racial barriers.”
Sadly, Nelson Mandela’s words do not apply to Israel. The magical Stransky-drop-goal and the electrifying euphoria it created has taken a downward plunge when the respect and love for Jews dropped in South Africa since 1990. You only have to look and listen to the raving and ranting of a so-called Christian like Desmond Tutu to appreciate the ANC’s appreciation of the Jews. However it was the ANC’s Foreign Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane’s announcement in February 2013 that South African ministers are not visiting Israel out of solidarity with the Palestinians, that put the proverbial cherry on the anti-Semitic cake. Former Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Liberman hit back strongly against her announcement of a moratorium on government visits to Israel, accusing the country of hypocrisy and fostering anti-Semitism, and urging South African Jews to come to Israel. Like many young white South Africans, an unprecedented number of Jews have been leaving the country since 1990, the reason being the exceptionally high crime rate and corruption in high levels of government (Read here).
Why am I putting so much emphasis on the Jews, you may ask. I am doing so simply to prove that any country who makes itself guilty of anti-Semitism is vying for a grand front seat in God’s throne room of judgement. They are putting themselves on a collision course with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the sad thing is that those who call themselves Christians dare not speak out against it for fear of losing their positions in the national cricket and rugby teams. Richard Verreyne of the Evangelical Alliance of South Africa once voiced his concern about the crime rate and corruption in South Africa as follows.
If we in South Africa, with the Madiba factor, the world champion Bok team full of Christians and the celebrated Soweto Gospel Choir are still being burdened by a storm of corruption and crime, brutal violence and shocking sexual abuses, school pornography and teenage pregnancies, and a culture of dishonesty . . . ., we should ask ourselves what has gone wrong with our rainbow nation? Can we find reasons for the rising sewer waters?
Like Madiba, Richard Verreyne seems to think sport has the power to change the world. The only difference between Nelson Mandela and Richard Verreyne is that the latter wants to give a whole Bok rugby team, allegedly full of Christians, this exceptionally high honour. Really? What about Joel Stransky, a Jew, who kicked the winning drop goal? What Verreyne is saying is: “Stand aside Jesus, we don’t need you. We have a Bok team full of Christians and a celebrated Soweto Gospel Choir who can change the world.” Madiba’s and Verreyne’s world changing god(dess) of sport (presumably called Nike) doesn’t seem to be doing very well in South Africa. How do they expect this god with its holy rugby grail to change the world when it cannot even change South Africa? Not even Jesus Christ could or wanted to change the ancient Roman senate and its corrupt worldview. He came as the only God-Man, born of a virgin, to suffer and die on a cursed wooden cross so that He may translate those who believe in Him from this rotten world of which Satan is the god to his glorious Kingdom (Colossians 1:13). The cross of Christ is the power and wisdom of God and not the achievements of sports heroes, Richard Verreyne and the rest of the church clergy in South Africa don’t seem to know these things (John 3:10).
The only power sport has is to articulate and demarcate the difference between Christians and Jews. Someone asked “Is AB de Villiers a Muslim.” What a stupid question. The only thing they need to do to determine whether he is a Christian or not is to look at the cricket shirt he wears at cricket matches. Can you spot the difference in these photos?
Here’s the difference between a devout Muslim and the holy sipping saints.
Hashim Amla does not wear a Castle Lager logo on his cricket shirt, said that he did not pocket a cent from his match fee. Promoting beer & liquor is against the teaching of Islam and as such Amla became the first player to be the exception who was granted permission by South African Breweries and Cricket South Africa not to wear the Castle logos on his clothing. He scored 250 runs (not out) in the recent test match against India.
INTERVIEW WITH HASHIM AMLA
You religion is clearly important to you but just how much?
The importance of my religion has increased as I have got older. I couldn’t put a time frame on it but I have found that following the Islamic way of life has a lot of beauty to it. Although I was born into a Muslim family I wasn’t always practicing. The more I have understood the differences in the various faiths I have adopted as much of Islam as possible. I’m certainly no saint but the discipline of the Islamic way of life has helped my cricket without a doubt. I don’t drink and I pray five times a day, which gives stability to my daily routine.
It is SAID that Islam is on the brink of taking over the entire world. Imagine an entire South African team comprising Muslims . . . . I really feel sorry for CASTLE LAGER. To my mind Hashim Amla is doing more to change the world, and especially South Africa, from a beer drinking society to a sober minded one. Think of it: One Muslim managed to be granted permission by Castle Breweries and the South African Cricket Board’s not to display the Castle logo on his shirt whilst a bunch of “slapgat” (luke warm) Christians merrily display it on their shirts. To further clarify the vast difference between Islam and Christianity, it is reasonable to say that Muslims are more consistent in the practice of their religion than Christians. Their worship in their mosques are consistent with their daily life in society. For instance, they won’t display the Castle Lager logo on their robes in their mosques and neither do they display it on their clothes in the secular world. Christians, on the other hand are more tolerant (to use the ecumenical swear-word). They won’t display the Castle Lager logo on their snazzy suits in church but, oh my, they do it in public
RECONCILIATION: THE RELIGIOUS FRATERNITY IN SOUTH AFRICA
Several leaders of some of the mainline churches and religious institutions in South Africa paid tribute to Nelson Mandela on “Radio Sonder Grense” (“Radio Without Borders”) on 15 December 2013. Before I review some of their eulogies, I want to make it abundantly clear that I believe with all my heart that God who is sovereign removes and sets up kings and queens, presidents and leaders as he wishes (Daniel 2:21). He is Almighty God, the only true God who said of Himself:
“Remember this and stand firm, recall it to mind, you transgressors, remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,” (Isaiah 46:8-9).
God never does anything indiscriminately. His dealings with individuals and nations always have a specific purpose. To better understand how God deals with nations, we need to briefly look at his dealings with his own people, the Jews. Paul wrote:
For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.” We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. (1 Corinthians 10:1-11)
When Israel obeyed and followed God He blessed them and when they refused to listen to Him and followed idols He judged and punished them accordingly. (Deuteronomy 11:26-28). When leaders of a country in particular turn their backs on God to do and live as they please, God’s wrath burns hot against the entire nation. As we’ve seen from the above quote from First Corinthians God’s anger burned hot against Israel because of her sexual immorality and vices. (Ezekiel 24:21). South Africa’s divorce rate is sky-high and shows no sign of diminishing. News24 reports that “The Justice Department’s 2012-13 annual report has put South Africa on the map in terms of matrimonial woes as new figures show that the divorce rate has rocketed by 28% from 39 573 to 50 517 cases.”
Infidelity seems to be commonplace among South African politicians, black and white. It is no secret that WF de Klerk and his wife were divorced in 1998 following the discovery of his affair with Elita Georgiades, then the wife of Tony Georgiades, a Greek shipping tycoon who had allegedly given de Klerk and the NP financial support. Tokyo Sexwale,one of the richest men in the country and the Human Settlements Minister in Jacob Zuma’s cabinet is the newest addition to the high rate of divorce in South Africa. (Read here and here). Men of the cloth seem to outdo political leaders in the game of putting their wives away whilst having an affair with younger women. These women, having an adulterous affair with these men, are usually very demanding and don’t like their lovers to remain married to their wives and urge them to divorce them, chanting the ever so effective “if you love me” mantra of persuasion. Allan Boesak, the well-known clergyman and ANC activist, divorced his wife, Dorothy, in 1990 while he was having a smashing extramarital affair with a white Afrikaner woman, Elna Botha, who was an executive TV producer at the SABC. The marriage of Allan and Elna seemed to have gone a bit sour no less than two years later when Elna sued him for divorce in 1992 but subsequently withdrew her application. (Read here). I suppose high ranking officials in government and within the ranks of the church (read here and here) may think it is all right to hanky panky in the dark but the Word of God explicitly says that divorce and remarriage is adultery.
Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. (Luke 16:18)
Why should we be so concerned about our politicians’ hanky -panky lifestyles when they’ve done so much to engender a spirit of reconciliation, love, peace, joy, justice and goodwill in our country? Well, apart from the “pristine” example they’ve set for their own kids and the youth of the country, by striking an harmonious chord of reconciliation with their first wives (just kidding), they have given us the wonderful gift of religious freedom. Interfaith binges are commonplace in our schools (after the late Minister Kadar Asmal introduced the outcome based model into the education system. It has since been scrapped but the interfaith part thereof remains firmly in place in churches, and at conferences, political rallies and funerals.
Interfaith is/was not only high on the agenda of high ranking politicians (Read here, here and here) but many so-called men of God are doing their level best to promote interfaith ecumenism in South Africa. An example that springs to mind is a programme I viewed recently with Jan de Wet interviewing the President of the Apostolic faith Mission of South Africa, Dr. Isak Burger. Jan de Wet who hosts the programme “Maskers Af” (“Masks Off”) on Kruiskyk, likened Nelson Mandela to Cyrus King of Persia.
In his attempt to illustrate that Mandela was God’s anointed servant he literally placed him in King Cyrus’ shoes to whom God allegedly said: “You are my anointed.” God never said to King Cyrus, “You are my anointed.” The Bible simply says that God stirred up the spirit of King Cyrus, much in the same way that he raised up Pharaoh to show his power and that his holy Name should be declared throughout the earth (2 Chronicles 36:22; Exodus 9:16), so that the word of the LORD spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled.
God’s stirring up of King Cyrus’ spirit simply means that He opened his eyes and made him acutely aware of his will for his people whom He had allowed to be taken into exile to Babylon for a period of seventy years by King Nebuchadnezzar. The anointing of Kings, priests, and prophets in the Old Testament was something completely different from the stirring up of King Cyrus’ heart. Only those who believed in Him and followed his commandments were anointed and empowered by the Holy Spirit who came upon them (not in them) to accomplish his will.
Jan de Wet was correct in saying that King Cyrus was a heathen (unbeliever) whom God used to do his bidding. In fact, God can use whomsoever He wishes without the person knowing and acknowledging it. He even uses Satan in some ways to accomplish his sovereign will (2 Corinthians 12:7). There is nothing special in God’s use of men and women to accomplish his will. As the almighty and sovereign Lord of the universe He may even use a man who reiterated what the English poet William Ernest Henley wrote in his poem “Invictus” that “I am the master of my fate” and I am the captain of my soul,” and brazenly withstood God to his face by promoting and advocating interfaith gatherings in South Africa.
Interfaith and ecumenism was so near to Nelson Mandela’s heart that interfaith prayers graced the preliminary proceedings of the memorial service held in his honour at the FNB Stadium, Johannesburg on 10 December. And why shouldn’t they have honoured him in this way when Jesus of Nazareth regularly prayed with worshipers of the entire pantheon of gods, Jupiter, Juno, Neptune, Pluto, Apollo, Diana, Mars, Venus, Cupid, Mercury, Minerva, Ceres, Prosperine, Vulcan, Bacchus, Saturn, Vesta, Janos, Uranus, Gaia, Maia, Flora and Plutus at interfaith meetings in Jerusalem?
And that, my dear friends, is the new way to follow Jesus of Nazareth, as our dear “fellow-Christians” in the Emergent Church would say and even back up their claim by announcing with real Christian boldness and zeal in the media and public forums “Maybe a sangoma can be an opportunity to meet Jesus” (broadcast on SABC2 on April 24 2011). Since then, I have never once heard or seen any clergy, including Isak Burger and Richard Verreyne, who so warmly and appreciatively eulogized Nelson Mandela on Radio RSG, wipe off the spit from Jesus Christ’s face – never once.
It is said that “Nelson Mandela was apparently a man of great faith, who kept his Christian beliefs discreet in favour of his great life work of reconciliation. That is the picture emerging from a number of ministers who regularly met to pray with Mandela in prison as well as throughout the latter part of his life.” This alone proves that his political career and his mission to establish a society of democracy, peace and reconciliation was not inspired or, as some would say, anointed by God. Had he truly been empowered by Jesus Christ to accomplish the task of reconciliation in South Africa he would at least have acknowledged in public that not he but Jesus Christ was the One who motivated and empowered him to achieve what he had accomplished in South Africa.
The notion that he was very discreet about his Christian beliefs in favour of his great life work of reconciliation is perhaps the most amazing dichotomy between thought and action this century. How can you give your life to bring about reconciliation and leave the Prince of Peace out of the picture? Jesus Christ is the epitome of reconciliation, not only in a horizontal manner between man and man but also between man and God. That is precisely why He became flesh and blood, died on a cross, was buried, was raised from the dead and ascended into Heaven. And yet, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela preferred to keep “his Christian beliefs discreet in favour of his great life work of reconciliation?” Really? “When he confirmed his own faith as a Christian, he always said he was careful not to say that too loudly because of his commitment to an interfaith experience in South Africa,” Mpumlwana said. “He did not want to be misunderstood to be partisan.” Jesus Christ, on the other had warned:
“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” (Mark 8:36-38)
Imagine apostles like Paul, Peter, John James and the rest keeping their Christian faith discreet because they feared it would hamper reconciliation and the groundwork to establish an interfaith community in Jerusalem and elsewhere. Had they done so we would never have had the New Testament but merely a lot of gibberish about an interfaith religion with, as I said earlier, a plethora of and the entire pantheon of Roman gods. Could Mandela and anyone else have expressed their Christian faith, albeit in a discreet way, if the apostles and Jesus were interfaith champions? Perish the thought. They boldly proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul said:
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.” (Romans 1:16-19).
Isn’t the notion to keep your Christian faith discreet in favour of an interfaith experience akin to holding the truth in unrighteousness? No wonder John, the apostle of love, once wrote: “ . . . they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” (John 12:43). I suppose one shouldn’t be too surprised or too harsh about Mandela’ interfaith dreams when some, or even the most, Christian clergy who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ are tirelessly working toward the refining of Mandela’s legacy of an interfaith society. Please bear in mind,
I am not pleading for a society in which people of other faiths should not be allowed to practice their particular religions. What I do plead for is that Christians should not be ashamed of Jesus Christ and his Gospel of salvation and boldly proclaim it so that others may be saved and attain eternal life. (John 14:6). Our problem is not an absence of reconciliation between man and man or diverse groups in our country; our problem lies in our abysmal lack of reconciliation with God through his Son Jesus Christ. NO! saith Isak Burger, millions of people are being reconciled to God by means of the phenomenon called “speaking in tongues.”
It is no longer necessary for sinners to repent (change their minds for the better with an abhorrence of their past sins) and turn to Jesus Christ for their salvation. What they do need is to speak in tongues as the evidence that they’ve been filled with the Holy Spirit. That’s it! This is what Isak Burger, President of the Apostolic faith Mission of South Africa, said in an interview Jan de Wet had with him on Kuiskyk, an Afrikaans Christian TV channel.
Another very important thing is the emergence of the Pentecostal Charismatic movement. There is today, according to Peter Barrett, one of the most important statisticians, 630 million people in the world who can testify that they are filled with the Holy Spirit and also speak in tongues, of which 120 million – and this I heard from the head of an Order in the Roman Catholic Church – affirm that they are filled with the Spirit.
So, this is the two main accents, the fruitful soil for the Gospel in the Third World and the emergence of, let us say, the Spirit driven or Spirit led churches. Of course, today it is no longer limited to the traditional Pentecostal Church. To me it is so wonderful to see, when I travel throughout South Africa, and you (Jan de Wet) have experienced it many times. You know, in one of our traditional churches where I preached, some of the elders who sat in the back of thew consistory who prayed for me, I heard some of them pray in tongues. Now, where would you have come across something like this in the earlier days in a Calvinistic church.
So the Holy Spirit is busy filling the earth in a most wonderful way.
Toward the end of the interview Jan de Wet asked Isak Burger about his gym, hunting, fishing and biking ventures. He would have done the Gospel of Jesus Christ a great service had he rather focused on his secular excursions and not made those inappropriate statements about the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, Jesus said, will only remind us about the things He Himself taught (John 16:13). What did Jesus teach through the mouth of Paul?
Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? (1 Co 12:29-30)
The obvious answer is: No everyone does not speak in tongues. Of an estimated world population of 7 billion plus, approximately 9% (630 million) speak in tongues and hence can testify that they are filled with the Holy Spirit. Will the Holy Spirit testify with Calvinists who speak in tongues that Jesus Christ loves only the elect and died only for them and that God predestined most people to everlasting damnation in hell because it pleases Him?
John R Rice, in his book “The Charismatic Movement” proves that the phenomenon of speaking in tongues is not necessarily Christian and is widespread among heathen religions. On pages 163-165 he says:
That tongues can be and are counterfeited by demon spirits is evidenced by the fact that spiritist mediums. Muslim dervishes, and Indian fakirs speak in tongues. It must be remembered by those who try to make tongues a badge of spirituality or a status symbol of saints who have attained the height of spiritual experience, that speaking in tongues and their interpretation are not peculiar to the Christian church but are common in ancient pagan religions and in spiritism both ancient and modern.
The very phrase “to speak with tongues” (Greek “glosais lalein,” Acts 2:4; 10:46; 19-6; 1st Cor. 12-14; cf. Mark 16:17) was not invented by New Testament writers, but borrowed from the ordinary speech of pagans. Plato’s attitude toward the enthusiastic ecstasies of the ancient soothsayer (mantis, diviner,) recalls the Apostle Paul’s attitude toward glossolalia among the Corinthian believers.
Virgil graphically describes the ancient pagan prophetess “speaking with tongues.” He depicts her dishevelled hair, her panting breast, her change of color, and her apparent increase in stature at the god (demon) came upon her and filled her with this supernatural afflatus. Then her voice loses its mortal ring as the god (demon) speaks through her, as in ancient and modern necromancy (spiritism).
Phenomena of this type are common among savages and pagan peoples . . .. Ecstatic utterances interpreted by a person in a sane state of mind have been verified, In the Sandwich Islands, for example, the god Oro gave his oracles through a priest who “ceased to act or speak as a voluntary agent, but with his limbs convulsed, his features distorted and terrific, his eyes wild and strained, would roll on the ground foaming at the moth, and reveal the will of the god in shrill cries and sounds violent and indistinct, which the attending priests duly interpreted to the people.”
Consider the following very carefully. If Mormons speak in tongues while their false religion contradicts the biblical Gospel of salvation, dare we say that their speaking in tongues is the gift of the Holy Spirit? Dare we say that an unsaved Catholic who prays to Mary, confesses his sins to a priest, hopes to escape purgatory if enough people pay for masses to be held in his behalf, believes that a priest magically turns the communion bread and wine into the literal body and blood of Jesus, does not sin too badly and prays in tongues that his tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit? Does Isak Burger really believe that the HOLY Spirit involves Himself in the unholy practices and beliefs of false religions? Let me remind him what the prophet Isaiah said:
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20)
Richard Verreyne of the Evangelical Alliance of South Africa was equally adept in his promotion of ecumenism and interfaith in South Africa. He said on Radio RSG:
We thank the Lord for the life and testimony of Nelson Mandela who as leader served among us and showed us the values of subservience, neighbourly love and justice. The politics that Nelson Mandela practiced was one of hope, human dignity and faith. From childhood he deeply embedded the roots of his faith in the testimonials and faith actions of the evangelical stream and despite his life’s journey of conflict and resistance, he never abandoned this foundation.
With vision and a sense of purpose, he set his life on a course to oppose injustice and corruption and to seek liberty (deliverance). At the end of his blessed life of 95 years he not only helped to bring liberty to the black people of the country but indeed for all South Africans, yes, and even more than this, for people throughout the world. May his life and death also motivate us in South Africa to make a choice for reconciliation and unity, peace and justice.
Let us remind ourselves of what Nelson Mandela’s testimony of faith was, lest we judge Richard Verreyne unjustly. Bishop Malusi Mpumlwana, a minister in the Methodist Church said:
“When he confirmed his own faith as a Christian, he always said he was careful not to say that too loudly because of his commitment to an interfaith experience in South Africa,” Read here).
And yet, Richard Verreyne declares in public on a national radio station that Nelson Mandela embedded the roots of his faith in the testimonials and faith actions of the evangelical stream from his childhood days. May I remind him that the word “evangelical comes from the Greek word “euangelion” and means “gospel” or good news,” and relates to the sharing of the good news of the salvation that is available through Jesus Christ.
An evangelical, then, is a person dedicated to promoting the good news about Jesus Christ. Combined, the description “evangelical Christian” is intended to indicate a believer in Jesus Christ who is faithful in sharing and promoting the good news. How does this gel with Nelson Mandela who set aside his witness as an alleged man of great faith in favour of interfaith ecumenism? Does he really think Jesus Christ is happy and satisfied with such a testimony when He distinctly said: “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”
Some Christians seemed to have the same doubt about the CCC in 2011 when he was invited by Richard Verreyne to a meeting of the Consultation of Christian Churches. Here are his own words:
Another word from Scripture came to the fore in the last quarter of 2006. We felt challenged to throw the net ‘to the other side’. But what would this imply? When Ds. Richard Verreyne, pastor of the Soter Christelike Gereformeerde Kerk in Parow, invited me to a meeting of the Consultation of Christian Churches (CCC) in February 2007, to prepare a big event where Floyd McClung was to be one of the speakers, I was in two minds. Through their networking with the Western Cape affiliate of the South African Council of Churches (SACC), the impression had been quite wide-spread that the CCC was also propagating inter-faith notions and supporting the law allowing same sex marriages that took effect on 1 December 2006. I was not prepared to be a party to this set-up. On both scores we were re-assured that – at least what the Western Cape sector of the CCC was concerned – its leadership structure and membership was clearly evangelical. We agreed to participate in the proposed CCC event on 20/21 March, 2007.
We wanted to make sure however that the CCC folk would also hear about present efforts to reach the continent with the Gospel. To achieve this purpose, I roped in Bruce van Eeden from Ten Forty Outreach and Raymond Lombard from Wheels for God’s Word.
At the end of January 2007 it was clearly confirmed that our ministry days in WEC International (South Africa) were finally over and we duly resigned. (Our hearts were aching however, as we still experienced affinity to the ethos of the mission agency.) (Emphasis added)
Having heard how Richard Verreyne links the evangelical stream to Mandela’s roots of faith, the foundation which he never abandoned, whilst he openly set aside his alleged Christian testimonial to accommodate an interfaith religious model in South Africa, one can understand why the person had his doubts despite the CCC’s assurances that they were not affiliated with the South African Council of Churches. Furthermore, Richard Verreyne used a few classic Messianic words to describe Nelson Mandela. For instance, he said: “The politics that Nelson Mandela practiced was one of hope.”
If the legalization of abortion, pornography, gambling and prostitution, the killing of a multitude of farmers in the wake of the infamous song “Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer,” the holding aloft of the Holy Grail of Rugby at the 1995 World Cup final, the lies, deceit, fraud and corruption in high levels of government, the exponential increase in the rape of babies, the interfaith gatherings, etc. etc. etc. are the building bricks of hope, then I too say “Gofer it boys, let us carry the banner of Mandela’s legacy to its maximum potential. Truth of the matter is that the Bible says there is no hope for those who are without Christ (1 Peter 1:21). If your faith and hope is not in God but in something or someone else, you have no hope. In fact, you are downright hopeless.
Another Messianic word Verreyne used for Mandela is “liberty.” Once again I must say: If the legalization of abortion, pornography, gambling and prostitution, the killing of a multitude of farmers in the wake of the infamous song “Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer,” the holding aloft of the Holy Grail of Rugby at the 1995 World Cup final, the lies, deceit, fraud and corruption in high levels of government, the exponential increase in the rape of babies, the interfaith gatherings, etc. etc. etc. spell liberty, then I too say “Gofer it boys, let us carry the banner of Mandela’s legacy to its maximum potential.
Truth of the matter is that Jesus alone can set individuals and nations free from their bondage to sin, like the sin of Apartheid and the oppression of one group over another. God commanded the Israelites to treat the strangers in their country with love and dignity because they themselves had been strangers in Egypt for more than 400 years before they were liberated (not by themselves, terrorism, boycotts, toi-toing, mass actions and the likes but) by GOD – Deuteronomy 10:19).
Pastor Isak Burger, whom I had already mentioned earlier had something similar to say about Nelson Mandela.
After the past week or ten days one can almost ask the question: What more can be said about Mr Mandela? The fact is that an almost unprecedented euphoria, admiration, and appreciation arose around him, something so unique that it would probably never again occur in our lifetime. While all these special things are said about him, one realizes that when you come to someone’s death then you often tend to forget the negative things and to remember the best things [about him]. But for me personally, I think, what made him so special is that he himself, at least, remained mindful of his own humanness, imperfections and mortality.
There’s a biblical truth that clearly says he who exalts himself shall be abased and he who humbles himself shall be exalted. And I think, the fact that Mr Mandela was so exalted, was so honoured at the end of his life, has a lot to do with the fact that he was a paragon of humility, his association with common people – in other words, he did not exalt himself and this is a principle of the Kingdom of God that such a person will be exalted if he humbled himself.
He really exuded much of the principles of the Gospel, despite his own defects and shortcomings. I am especially thinking of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount there in Matthew 5, 6 and 7. He lived out those principles of not revenging yourself, to love those who hate you; he lived out a whole lot of those principles so exceptionally well in a practical way that many people were touched by it without them having had any knowledge of the Bible.
So I think what Mr Mandela had done that was so special as a statesman and as a human being, we must above all give honour God who has given gifts, also these gifts to us as mankind. With regard to Mr Mandela my last plea is: Let us acknowledge with gratitude the role Madiba fulfilled as statesman and as a human being in out lifetime.
To exalt yourself does not only mean to lift yourself above others to be revered, esteemed and even worshiped; its particular meaning in the Bible has to do with exaltation over and above God’s will. Decide for yourself whether Mandela exalted him above God’s will when you read the next paragraph on Mandela and Israel. Furthermore, no one can exude the principles of the Gospel without knowing and acknowledging that one is completely dependent on Jesus Christ. (John 15:5). Mandela doesn’t seem to have acknowledged anything of the kind in his entire lifetime. In fact, since his incarceration on Robben Island he openly declared that he is the captain of his soul and the master of his destination. Such an attitude is a far crime from true humility. Humility is a godly attribute and can only be given to those who truly follow Jesus Christ. “ Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:29-30).
Isak Burger seems to have forgotten that all those wonderful things he said about Mandela does not necessarily relate to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Elizabeth Clare Prophet wrote the following illustrious words of praise in honour of Maitreya, a false Christ in her book ”Maitreya, kindness, love, Goodwill”, page 31
The name Maitreya is taken from the Sanskrit word maitri (Pali, metta), meaning “kindness,” “love,” “benevolence,” “friendship,” “friendliness” or “goodwill.” Thus Maitreya has been referred to as the “Loving One” or the “Friendly One,” the embodiment of all-encompassing love. In the Gandavyuha Sutra, which has been described as the “Pilgrim’s Progress” of Buddhism, the young pilgrim Sudhana characterizes Maitreya as “the venerable compas sionate Maitreya endowed with a great loving heart and undefiled knowledge and intent on benefiting the world.” Maitri is one of the principal Buddhist virtues. The Metta Sutta describes this quality of “loving-kindness.”
On SHARE International, one of Maitreya’s official internet sites the following message appears:
Nelson Mandela (1918-2013)
Share International would like to add its voice to the universal celebration of Nelson Mandela, who died on 5 December, aged 95, after a long illness. He is now acclaimed by all the world as a statesman of outstanding qualities. After 27 years’ ncarceration as a political prisoner, he emerged speaking only of forgiveness and reconciliation. The world loves him for this humility and grace.
But how and why was Mandela released? In September 1988 Share International published Maitreya’s prediction that “Nelson Mandela will be released soon”. Benjamin Creme has spoken of the extraordinary part played in his release by Maitreya the World Teacher.
We will remind readers of this unique revelation in the next issue of Share International magazine (January/February 2014). (Emphasis added)
I’m pretty sure Isak Burger wouldn’t want to attribute Maitreya’s nice personality to many principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Or maybe he would, considering that he says the speaking in tongues is the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit (salvation et al).
RECONCILIATION: NELSON MANDELA AND ISRAEL
Israel is and has always has been God’s people despite their rejection of Jesus Christ as their Messiah (Romans 11:28). He, the only true God, is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and they (Israel) gave the world its Saviour (John 4:22). Jesus was a Jew and anyone who hates and seeks to destroy Israel is not fighting against Israel but against God Himself. Guess who is going to win the battle? You cannot say you are a follower of Jesus Christ and in the same breath hatred on the Jews. Those who hate the Jews of whom Jesus said salvation has come, is in effect hating and rejecting the very salvation (Christ Jesus) that came from them. That’s precisely why God said that he would bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel (Genesis 12:1-3).
The singular most important aim every Christian should have, is to make the Jews jealous (Romans 11:8-11) so that they may repent of their sins and return to Jesus Christ as their only hope and Saviour. One of the main reasons why the Jews hate Christianity and reject their Messiah is because so-called Christians are forever venting their hatred of them, and because crackpots like Adolf Hitler who claimed to be a Christian (He remained Roman Catholic until his death) massacred 6 million during WW2. By the way, I was wondering what the Jews would say of Isak Burger’s claim that 120 million Roman Catholics worldwide are real Christians because they speak in tongues and are therefore baptized with the Holy Ghost. Popish history proves that the Roman Catholic Church seething hatred the Jews.
Many popes believed that the Jews are cursed for murdering Jesus, cursed to be traitors like Judas, cursed to be unscrupulous moneygrubbers, like Judas, cursed to be outcasts like Cain, segregated from the rest of the society within which they live, cursed to be distinguished from everyone else by an identifying mark, like Cain, cursed to be outcasts, periodically ejected from the nations amongst whom they live, like Cain, cursed to be slaves like Esau, No wonder Hitler said that what the church started he was going to bring to fruition – exterminate the Jews.
Many ask the question whether Adolf Hitler spoke in tongues. Here is a short anecdote in the life of Hitler that seems to suggest it. Anyone who dares to conclude that Hitler was baptized by the Holy Spirit just because he spoke in tongues will have to explain the holocaust differently from what we’ve learnt from history.
Europe: In 1889 Dr. Andrew D. White reported a case that occurred in a French village on the boarder of Switzerland in 1953. In the report he says: “The afflicted were said . . . to have shown superhuman strength, and to have experienced the gift of tongues, speaking in German and Latin, and even Arabic.” (Demon Possession, Dr. John L. Nevius, 1894, pg. 191) A well documented case from Germany concerns Rev. John C. Blumherdt (1805-1880), and Miss Gottliebin Dittus who was demon possessed. Part of the account says: “Blumhardt held conversations with several of the demons [there were supposedly 1,067 in Dittus]. These demons spoke in all the different European languages, and in some which Blumhardt and others present did not recognize.” (Demon Possession, Dr. John L. Nevius, 1894, pg. 115)
Europe: In 1889 Dr. Andrew D. White reported a case that occurred in a French village on the boarder of Switzerland in 1953. In the report he says: “The afflicted were said . . . to have shown superhuman strength, and to have experienced the gift of tongues, speaking in German and Latin, and even Arabic.” (Demon Possession, Dr. John L. Nevius, 1894, pg. 191) A well documented case from Germany concerns Rev. John C. Blumherdt (1805-1880), and Miss Gottliebin Dittus who was demon possessed. Part of the account says: “Blumhardt held conversations with several of the demons [there were supposedly 1,067 in Dittus].. These demons spoke in all the different European languages, and in some which Blumhardt and others present did not recognize.” (Demon Possession, Dr. John L. Nevius, 1894, pg. 115) A demon, perhaps Satan himself, spoke through Adolf Hitler: As a teenager, Hitler had a young friend named Gustl Kubizek.
“According to Kubizek’s account…[one night Hitler seemed to be]… ‘propelled by an invisible force…[and Hitler] looked almost sinister.’ . . . [Then he] launched into a pyrogenic speech such as Gustl had never heard before and never heard again. Hitler’s voice…was hoarse and raucous . . . [Gustl] continues: ‘I was struck by something strange…even when he talked to me in moments of greatest excitement. It was if another being spoke out of his body…and moved him as much as it did me . . . [H]e himself listened with astonishment and emotion to what burst forth from him with elementary force.’ What happened . . . was for Hitler a state of ‘complete ecstasy and emotion to what burst forth from him with elementary force.’ What happened . . . was for Hitler a state of ‘complete ecstasy and rapture…’ [Hitler] spoke of a ‘mandate which, one day, he would receive, . . . special mission which would, one day, be entrusted to him.’” (The Twisted Cross, Joseph J. Carr, 1985, pg. 74, 75) Adolf Hitler’s occult connections with Tibetan Buddhist monks, astrology, yoga, and “gift” of foresight are well established.
“Hitler was supposedly in tune with some mystical ‘Cosmic Consciousness,’ and…was able to communicate with secret ‘Ascended Masters.’” (The Twisted Cross, Joseph J. Carr, 1985, pg. 78) Did he communicate with Ascended Masters or fallen angels? In 1918 Hitler was in a military hospital after having been gassed during the Battle of Ypres. There “Hitler learned of his ‘mission,’ the task which had been promised him [as a teenager]: he heard voices that told him that he was selected by providence to rid Germany of the hated Jews” (The Twisted Cross, Joseph J. Carr, 1985, pg. 68). “[Hitler had] an immense gift of oratory…[His audiences] seemed to be under a hypnotic spell when listening to their Fuehrer speak. Germans were blindly obedient to Hitler’s will…[An estimated] 97 percent of the German public supported Hitler in 1938…[He] began each speech in the same low-key, stumbling manner…But soon after he started the speech, something would ‘stiffen him like a fire hose,’ and he would take off in the flaming oratory for which he was so famous. Rather than being drained by his speeches, Hitler seemed to be charged by them…[T]he emotional and physical intensity of Hitler’s speeches…should exhaust a man any man. Yet Hitler was able to recover with only a few sips of tea!” (The Twisted Cross, Joseph J. Carr, 1985, pg. 82, 83) Most certainly Adolf Hitler had a satanic “gift of speech.”
Like many other Christian churches in South Africa Isak Burger and his church members regularly take trips to the Holy Land. Has he ever been to Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Oman? I doubt it because they would certainly have been arrested for carrying a bible into those countries.
Christians (so-called) who side with the world and hatefully seek the Jews’ downfall or annihilation are not Christians. They are false Christians who follow a false Christ and proclaim a false gospel. How on earth can you say you are a follower of Jesus (a Jew) when you hate the Jews of whom He said salvation has come to the entire world? (Romans 11:15-18).
I have already mentioned the very irreverent Desmond Tutu’s seething hatred of the Jews. But what did Nelson Mandela think of Israel? One of the most revealing documents of Mandela’s thoughts on the Jews is a memo he had written to Thomas L Friedman in 2001, the American journalist who writes a twice-weekly column for the New York Times and has been awarded the Pulitzer Prize three times. Mandela clearly vents his anger with Israel. Here are some of the things he wrote. Please note that, like Tutu, he looks at Israel through the anti-Apartheid spectacles he wore at his Rivonia trial .
“Today the world, black and white, recognize that Apartheid has no future. In South Africa it has been ended by our own decisive mass action in order to build peace and security. That mass campaign of defiance and other actions could only culminate in the establishment of Democracy.
Perhaps it is strange for you to observe the situation in Palestine or more specifically, the structure of political and cultural relationships between Palestinians and Israelis, as an Apartheid system. This is because you incorrectly think that the problem of Palestine began in 1967. This was demonstrated in your recent column “Bush’s First Memo” in the New York Times on March 27, 2001.
You seem to be surprised to hear that there are still problems of 1948 to be solved, the most important component of which is the right to return of Palestinian refugees. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not just an issue of military occupation and Israel is not a country that was established “normally” and happened to occupy another country in 1967. Palestinians are not struggling for a “state” but for freedom, liberation and equality, just like we were struggling for freedom in South Africa.” (Read the entire memo here).
Mandela was correct to refer Thomas Friedman back to 1948 but failed to interpret the history of the Middle East at the time in its right perspective. In fact, the hard historical facts attest to the fact that -
“Every piece of land that Israel has taken has been for strategic reasons in self-defense against an enemy that has sworn its total extermination. If the Palestinians had been content with the 82% of Palestine they were given by the United Nations in its partition of that land in November 1947, they would have been living peacefully in their “Palestinian state” for the last 48 years. Instead, as soon as Israel declared its independence in May 1948, the regular armies of five Arab nations attacked the Jewish settlers with overwhelming force to take over the 18% of Palestine that the UN had allotted to them.
The Arab High Command told all Arabs to “get out” because they were going to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean, after which the Arabs could return to their own lands and take over that of the Jews as well. Please consider that the entire land of Israel (before they started giving land back) was 1/6 of 1% of the land the Arabs own. The Arabs have the oil, the wealth; why must they insist upon taking over this tiny, postage-stamp piece of land, too, and leaving nothing for the Jews? That is their goal! (Read the entire article here).
Mandela continued to write to Thomas Thomas Friedman,
“Thomas, if you follow the polls in Israel for the last 30 or 40 years, you clearly find a vulgar racism that includes a third of the population who openly declare themselves to be racist. This racism is of the nature of “I hate Arabs” and “I wish Arabs would be dead”.
If you also follow the judicial system in Israel you will see there is discrimination against Palestinians, and if you further consider the 1967 Occupied Territories you will find there are already two judicial systems in operation that represent two different approaches to human life: one for Palestinian life and the other for Jewish life. Additionally there are two different approaches to property and to land. Palestinian property is not recognized as private property because it can be confiscated.
As to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, there is an additional factor. The so-called “Palestinian autonomous areas” are Bantustans. These are restricted entities within the power structure of the Israeli Apartheid system.”
Mandela must have been misinformed because Israel is the only democracy in the region. The Arab world is governed by Sharia law and it is usually the women in particular who suffer under it. I find it extraordinary puzzling that Mandela who claimed to be a follower of Christ never once protested against the harsh laws in Arab countries forbidding anyone to own a Bible. There are hardly any Christian churches in the Arab world and those that were there are either burnt or bulldozed to ground level. The world is not round; it is crooked and the politicians and clergy aren’t any better. They prefer to seek the honour of men rather than that of God.
This video is but a very small part of the vast injustices in Iran and the rest of the Arab world and contradicts completely what Mandela suggested in his memo, i.e. that their is no democracy in Israel whilst Iranians have proved that the very opposite is true. Indeed, Iranians are fighting for a democracy in their own country.
Mandela continued to lambast Israel in his memo to Thomas Friedman in the following vein.
The Palestinian state cannot be the by-product of the Jewish state, just in order to keep the Jewish purity of Israel. Israel’s racial discrimination is daily life of most Palestinians. Since Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Jews are able to accrue special rights which non-Jews cannot do. Palestinian Arabs have no place in a “Jewish” state.
Apartheid is a crime against humanity. Israel has deprived millions of Palestinians of their liberty and property. It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality. It has systematically incarcerated and tortured thousands of Palestinians, contrary to the rules of international law. It has, in particular, waged a war against a civilian population, in particular children.
The responses made by South Africa to human rights abuses emanating from the removal policies and Apartheid policies respectively, shed light on what Israeli society must necessarily go through before one can speak of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and an end to its Apartheid policies.
Thomas, I’m not abandoning Mideast diplomacy. But I’m not going to indulge you the way your supporters do. If you want peace and democracy, I will support you. If you want formal Apartheid, we will not support you. If you want to support racial discrimination and ethnic cleansing, we will oppose you.
When you figure out what you’re about, give me a call.
Here are the facts. Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was clearly misinformed.
RECONCILIATION: MANDELA’S BUDDIES
Mandela received the late Yasir Arafat, former Chairman of the PLO, like a hero in February 1990, just two weeks after his release from prison. Who was Arafat? Perhaps we should start with what he thought of Jesus Christ. At a United Press Conference in 1983 he said: “[Jesus was] the first Palestinian fedayeen who carried his sword.” Could it be that Mandela embedded the roots of his faith in the testimonial and faith actions of Yasir Arafat in the same way he embedded the roots of his faith in the testimonials and faith actions of the evangelical stream in South Africa? (aka Richard Verreyne).
Surely, Mandela must have known about Arafat’s blasphemous remark and as a follower of Jesus must have deemed it necessary to correct him. Perish the thought. Both of them were brothers in arms and as such the idea of Jesus being the first “fedayeen” who carried his sword suited them perfectly. Sorry Jesus, your question “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” has prompted many thousands of people to answer you as they perceive you and not in the way you revealed yourself to them.
Arafat was one of the most dangerous terrorists the world has ever produced. The Intafada has no scruples whatsoever when it comes to the use of children as suicide bombers and Mandela had the audacity to say “Israel] in particular, waged war against a civilian population, in particular children”. The Berean Call reports:
A report and comment on religious trends and events being covered by the media. This week’s item is from World Net Daily , January 14, 2003 , with a headline: “Palestinian Child Terrorists.” In two separate incidents this month, armed Palestinian youths have infiltrated Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip. On Saturday, 14-year old Ahmad Hamis Ismail Alhanagra and his 17-year-old brother Muhammad Hamis Ismail Alhanagra were apprehended by Israeli Defense Forces after entering the community of Netzarim in the northern Gaza Strip armed with knives.
The IDF said that the brothers, who live in the village of Wadi Az were lightly injured during a confrontation, treated and sent to a hospital. On January 1, three youths armed with knives tried to infiltrate the community of Elei Sinai the IDF said. Jihad Gana Abed, 15, Muhammad Atia Douas, 15, and Tarik Ziyad Douas, 16, all from Jubalya refugee camp were killed by Israeli forces near the community. The IDF said the youths had been sent by the “Popular Resistance Committees,” one of the biggest umbrella organizations for terrorists in the Gaza Strip. Senior Israeli security sources said this type of incident has been widely practiced since the beginning of the Intifada, illustrating the “cynical usage of naive children and adolescents by Palestinian terrorist organizations.”
Shortly after the Intifada began in September 2000, the Mufti of Jerusalem, the city’s highest Muslim religious authority spoke of his admiration for child “martyrs.” “There is no doubt that a child [martyr] suggests that the new generation will carry on the mission with determination,” Sheik ‘Ikrima Sabri told the Egyptian weekly Al-Ahram Al-Arabi. “The younger the martyr, the greater and the more I respect him,” said the mufti who was appointed by Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat. An Israeli video documentary in 1998 showed how Palestinian children are taught to hate Jews, to glorify jihad, violence, death, and child martyrdom.
A “Sesame Street” like children’s program called the “Children’s Club,” showed very young children singing songs about wanting to become “suicide warriors” and to take up a machine gun to direct “violence, anger, anger, anger” against Israelis. During the show, which features children ages 4-10, one young boy sang, “When I wander into Jerusalem , I will become a suicide bomber.” Afterward, other children stand to call for “Jihad! Holy war to the end against the Zionist enemy.” (Read here)
This is how Mandela’s friend, Yasir Arafat and the PLO treat their children.
The following video demonstrates that Nelson Mandela did not know the will of God for Israel and HIS land (Yes, that is what I said, God’s land [Joel 3:2]).
“For behold, in those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. And I will enter into judgment with them there, on behalf of my people and my heritage Israel, because they have scattered them among the nations and have divided up my land.
If Mr. Mandela had known his Bible (as a follower of Jesus Christ) he would have seen the God of Abraham, Isaac ands Jacob calls the land of Israel MY LAND and also realized that he and Yassir Arafat were not waging a war against the Jews but God Himself. There has never been a Palestine or even a Palestinian people in the entire history of mankind.
Because the world loves to follow lies, especially against Jews and against Israel. We have a controversy in the Middle East right now. The basis of the controversy is there are two people who have a claim to this land. On the one hand are the Jews, the Israelis, and their claim goes back 4,000 years. They have a title deed from God, they trace themselves through Abraham. All three, Muslims, Christians and Jews agree that God gave this land to Abraham, and to his heirs. So, the question is, who are the heirs? We have a conflict over there.
Christians are not claiming the land, but there is a group of Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, and they claim that they are descended from the original Palestinians, going back thousands of years, through Ishmael. Ishmael was Abraham’s first son, and ordinarily the first son would inherit, but he was the son of Abraham through, not his wife Sarah, but through Sarah’s maid Hagar.
Then we have the Jews, who claim—well, sadly Tom, most of them don’t even claim it as they legitimately should. They don’t believe in God, they don’t believe in the promises, and so forth. But they have a right to claim it, being the descendents of Isaac and Jacob. Twelve times God has called the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; two hundred and three times He is called the God of Israel.
Well, who are the Palestinians? Well, first of all you go to Genesis chapter 12, and it’s very clear. There was no such place as Palestine, there were no such people as Palestinians, they were Canaanites, this was a land of Canaan. It says: Into the land of Canaan Abraham came, and the Canaanite was in the land, this is already settled.
Now, who were the parents of Ishmael that the Arabs claim they are descended from, and he must have been an original Palestinian if they are descended from the original Palestinians. His mother was an Egyptian, Hagar the Egyptian. His father was Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees, and when Abraham and his entourage arrived in Canaan that land had already been settled with Canaanites, Hittites, Jebusites, you name them, a number of different groups, but they were all called Canaanites.
Well then, how can the Arabs be descended from the original Palestinians? There were no original Palestinians. That land was called Canaan. Because of the wickedness of these people, God gave it to the Jews and He told them to wipe out all of these people and they are pretty much extinct to this day, you couldn’t trace yourself back to any of them. Now we have descendants of a man whose mother was Egyptian, his father was a Chaldean, and when they arrived in Canaan it was already settled and they called themselves descendants from the original Palestinians.
Now, that land became Israel, when Israel conquered it, it became Israel. It was called Israel for more than a thousand years. How did it become Palestine? In 130 AD, the Romans, who had destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD, they began to re-build it as a pagan city dedicated to Jupiter and they started to erect a temple to Jupiter on Temple Mount. That upset the Jews, obviously, with good cause and they rebelled. There was an uprising, at first it was quite successful, until the Romans brought in more legions and they eventually destroyed more than a thousand Jewish villages.
This land was inhabited by Jews, not by Arabs, and certainly not by Muslims! Islam didn’t even exist at that point. So, they destroyed more than a thousand villages. They killed more than 500,000 Jews, thousands were sold into slavery, and they scattered, they fled, another Diaspora. And in anger the Romans renamed Israel, Provincia Syria-Palestina, after the Philistines, the chief enemy of the Jews. It was just an angry nickname they gave to it. From then on, everyone living there was called a Palestinian. Well, who lived there? The Jews, there were no Arabs there.
. . . they say, This is our land, God gave it to us. So Jews were called Palestinians. There weren’t even any Arabs there. Well, in World War II, bringing it more up to date, in World War II, the British had a volunteer brigade in their army helping them against the Nazis. It was called the Palestinian Brigade, who were they? All Jews—not one Arab among them, the Arabs were fighting on Hitler’s side. In fact, a general that gave us a wonderful endorsement for this book, Shimon Erem, was one of the members of that Palestinian Brigade and he’s told me about the Palestinian Brigade. There was the Palestinian Symphony Orchestra, a Jewish orchestra, there’s the Palestinian Post, a Jewish newspaper. The Arabs were not called Palestinians. In fact, I quote in the book, a number of Arab leaders who say, “We’re not Palestinians, if anybody is a Palestinian the Jews are Palestinians, in fact, some of them said there never was such a place called Palestine. Now one of the men that I quote is Ahmed Shukairy. This is 1956, he is testifying before the United Nations: ““It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.” Eight years later, in 1964, Shukairy became the founding chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization and coined the infamous slogan, “We’ll drive the Jews into the sea.” (Source)
View the full video here.
What Mr Mandela never realized when he said “One of the mistakes which some of the political analysts make, is to think that their enemies should be our enemies” was that he candidly admitted that he and his ANC Government stood and still stand firmly on the side of the entire world against the tiny state of Israel, more or less in the same way Pastor Z Ziwa stands on the side of the unprofitable servant (the third comrade slave) in the parable in Matthew 25. The astonishing thing about Mandela’s raucously applauded statement was that he inadvertently was enacting a most amazing prophecy in the Bible, as we’ve seen from Joel 3:2. Dave Hunt wrote:
The United Nations has consistently taken the side of the Arabs against Israel, making the creation of the State of Israel by the UN in 1947—something the UN would not do today—all the more miraculous in fulfillment of Bible prophecy. The UN is adamantly opposed to Israel and everything she does—and is thus defiant of the God of Israel and His pledge to restore His people fully to the land He gave them “from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.”
From 1967 through 1989, out of 865 resolutions in the Security Council and General Assembly of the UN, 526 were against Israel. The last anti-Arab vote was fifty-eight years ago, in 1947. Not once has the UN reprimanded those who have without provocation, beginning in 1948, waged five wars against Israel with the openly declared intention of annihilating her. Nor have the terrorists ever been condemned by the UN. In November 2003, Israel introduced its first request for a resolution since 1976, asking for a prohibition against Arab terrorists who deliberately target Israeli women and children. Its request was rejected and the UN instead adopted a resolution demanding protection of Palestinian children from Israel. (7)
The great Mr Mandela must have known about these UN resolutions but defiantly ignored them and blamed Israel for the killing of innocent Palestinian children. The man who stood for justice, reconciliation and peace was the same man who unjustly accused Israel of murdering Palestinian children, while the UN deliberately refused to accept a resolution by the Israeli Government demanding protection against Arab terrorists who deliberately target innocent Israeli women and children. Clergy like Richard Verreyne and Isak Burger together with many other pastors and church clergy seem to have a blind spot and are vying for an honoured position in the annals of South African history when they exalted Mandela to a position so high that sainthood could be the next item on their respective church agendas. May I remind them that Mr Mandela himself said ““I am not a saint, unless you think of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying.” If Mr Mandela was a Christian and a follower of Jesus Christ, as he claimed he was, then he must have known that is was a saint because the Bible clearly calls all believers “saints.” But this “saint” had no qualms to side with Arafat in killing innocent Israeli women and children.
Let’s face it, the whole world is against Israel and God’s own land. Nonetheless, God has already begun to judge the nations by allowing Europe, the USA, England and other parts of the world to be annexed by Islam. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not mocked. He said:
The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. (Psalm 9:17)
“One of the mistakes which some of the political analysts make, is to think that their (Israel’s) enemies should be our enemies” 
South Africa is no exception. Like all the other countries she too has forgotten God. Oh yea, there is a lot of spirituality going around in the United States of South Africa but very little genuine Christianity. Contrary to the Word of God she is exponentially adopting the mystical spirituality and doctrines of the Emergent Church and brazenly promoting the teachings of godless men and women.
RECONCILIATION: BLAME IT ON THE BOSSA NOVA (SORRY, IT SHOULD BE POVERTY)
In the very first paragraph of my article I mentioned that the old song “Poverty Threatens Reconciliation” is being rehashed and sung with new fervour in South Africa. The fact is that South Africa is doing a lot better than most of the sub-Saharan countries who attended Mr Mandela’s funeral. According to the World Bank Data the latest indicators of the POVERTY HEADCOUNT AT $1.25 AND $2 A DAY in the Sub-Saharan region South Africa is just doing fine in comparison to the rest of the countries.
Only three countries, South Africa, Gabon and Cameroon, are in the 19 and 30 per cent region while the rest varies from 40 to 90 per cent.
RECONCILIATION: GOD’S WAY
Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God said “Without me you can do nothing” which also means that everything we do or try to do without Him means nothing. There cannot be reconciliation between man and man unless there is first reconciliation between God and man. God has already provided the perfect way for mankind to be reconciled to Him and one to another in and through his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, who died on a cursed cross more than 2000 years ago, was buried and rose again from among the dead. He said ”Come unto me and I will give you rest.” Sadly the majority of men have chosen to be the captains of their souls and the masters of their destination. God who is a gentleman and never forces anyone to follow his path of reconciliation, leaves those who refuse to turn to Jesus Christ for their salvation to their own resources and, although it is not his will that anyone should perish, allows them to follow their own paths to destruction.
May God have mercy on our beautiful country and reconcile all races to himself and to one another so that we may be a beacon of light to the entire world and show them that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the only true God who so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son so that whosoever believes on Him should not perish but have eternal life.
God commands his children to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6). He did not command world leaders to divide his land and pretend to seek peace
1) Moltmann, An Ecumenical Confession of Faith, p. 18.
2) See, too, The Open Church, pp. 125 ff. The Open Church is a good general introduction to the themes of The Church in the Power of the Spirit and Tripole, ‘A Church for the Poor and the World: at Issue with Moltmann’s Ecclesiology’, who offers an alternative exegesis.
3) See Hope for the Church, p. 25.
52 See Moltmann’s Two Studies In the Theology of Bonhoeffer, where his sympathy is often indirectly shown, and G. C. Chapman, ‘Hope and the ethics of formation: Moltmann as an interpreter of Bonhoeffer’, Studies in Religion 12
(1983), pp. 449-460. 52
5) The Church in the Power of the Spirit, p. 132.
6) Martin Meredith, “Mandela: A Biography,” pp. 103-104
7) Dave Hunt, “Judgment Day, Islam, Israel and the Nations.” The Berean Call, p. 16
(8) Nelson Mandela, at the 1990 town hall meeting, held in New York City and chaired by Ted Koppel of ABC Networks