The End – Accompanied by Magnificent Masonic Funeral Music

Andrew Murray died on 18 January 1917, four months before his 89th birthday. He was so deeply influenced by Johann Christoph Blumhardt’s “Möttlingen” revival that he included a portion of Friedrich Zündel’s biography of him at the end of “With Christ in the School of Prayer.”

Peter Goodwin Heltzel writes:

When Jürgen Moltmann’s Theology of Hope first appeared in 1965, it was seen as ushering in a new era of theological thinking.

Karl Barth, however, sharply criticised the work as too heavily dominated by a ‘principle of hope’ that he believed Moltmann had inherited from the Marxist philosopher, Ernst Bloch.

This interpretation has largely been taken as fact among interpreters of Moltmann’s theology of hope.

This has caused most interpreters to see his turn to panentheism and ecotheology in “God in Creation” (1983) as being less of a shift of emphasis than a total change of trajectory or even break.

Christoph, following his father, saw Jesus Christ as the primary location of the kingdom of God. In his victory, the healing of the body, the body politic and the world as the ‘body’ of God, was inaugurated: ‘The history of Jesus’ life is the history of God’s kingdom then and now.’

For Blumhardt, Jesus’ history is not limited to the once-and-for-all-ness witnessed to in the Synoptics, but included a dynamic and ongoing history of struggle against the ‘powers and principalities’.

This dynamism was rooted in the real struggle that Blumhardt saw his father engaged in while dealing with Gottlieben Dittus.

Though Christ’s victory on the cross was decisive, it must still work itself out in history and both Blumhardts believed that humanity was called to participate in this struggle.

Thus, both the struggle and triumph were mediated to the whole cosmos by the Holy Spirit and were not confined to any particular institution, especially the church.  (he was rather fond of Marx!).[1] (Emphasis added).

It may seem odd to make the statement that Murray, as a mystic, was a forerunner of the Emergent Church, but there is no doubt that he used the same jargon most emergent church leaders use today.

Can anyone reading this article convince me that Andrew Murray was completely oblivious to the fact that Blumhardt was a great fan of Karl Marx and that his theology was based on panentheism, as is that of Jürgen Moltmann? Before you lambast me, please remember this:

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, (2 Corinthians 6:14-17).

To be unequally yoked in the spiritual sense of the word means to present the unadulterated Gospel truth and simultaneously couple it with erroneous doctrines and teachings. The picture one gets is that of two cattle bound by a single yoke over both their necks. However, they fail to tread in perfect harmony because of certain incompatibilities.

In fact, this is precisely how Satan as an angel of light and his ministers of unrighteousness present their false teaching. They use the truth and mix it with lies so as to deceive so much the better. (2 Corinthians 11: 13-15).


I only recently heard, from a video Ferdie Mulder made in response to the lavish and callous grant of the Andrew Murray Prize to liberal South African academics, clergy, and lay persons, which he calls “Andrew Murray Hijacked,” that Masonic orchestral and choral music was played at Andrew Murray’s funeral. Mulder’s facial expressions in his video speak of an awe-struck adoration that eclipses that of the music itself.

Ferdie Mulder

The work is an excerpt from Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Requiem, “Lacrimosa Dei Illa” (“Mourning that Day”). A translation of this part of the libretto reads as follows:

Full of tears will be that day
When from the ashes shall arise
The guilty man to be judged;
Therefore spare him, O God,
Merciful Lord Jesus,
Grant them eternal rest. Amen.

A Requiem is an orchestral/Choral musical setting of a Mass for the repose of the souls of the dead in the Roman Catholic Church. Mozart indicated that —

I would like to have music that expresses the mystery of death and the fear that comes with it. For me, the ultimate requiem song is Lacrimosa Dies Illa: ‘Mourning That Day’.

This song is all about grieving, about not knowing what happens to us after we have died.

It expresses an awe regarding death.

This music goes straight to one’s heart, and it will help people to let it all go: their tears, their grief, and all the other emotions they may have.

I envision this being played when my body is being carried in. I admit: it might be a bit theatrical, but I like a bit of drama on that day.

Whether Mozart’s Lacrimosa from his Requiem in D minor was played at Murray’s funeral to produce a greater melodramatic theatrical style of burial, is impossible to maintain this side of the grave.

Be that as it may, the real question we should be asking is why the music of a Mason was played at one of South Africa’s “greatest men of God?” Wikipedia reports —

Mozart was admitted as an Apprentice to the Viennese Masonic lodge called “Zur Wohltätigkeit” (“Beneficence”) on 14 December 1784.

He was promoted to Fellow on 7 January 1785, and became a Master Mason “shortly thereafter”.

Mozart also attended the meetings of another lodge, called “Zur wahren Eintracht” (“True Concord”).

According to Otto Erich Deutsch, this lodge was “the largest and most aristocratic in Vienna. … Mozart, as the best of the musical ‘Brothers,’ was welcome in all the [Illuminati] lodges.”

It was headed by the naturalist Ignaz von Born.

As a born-again Christian, I would rather have thought that the song “There is Power in the Blood of the Lamb” written by Lewis Edgar Jones in 1865 would have been more appropriate and more reverential to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob than a monumental Roman Catholic inspired composition honoring Baphomet.

It may be somewhat of a heroic venture to expose liberal theologians who’d been granted the Andrew Murray Prize for some of their heretical books, but fail to acknowledge that liberalism has many tentacles, some of which are more dangerous than others.

Am I suggesting that Andrew Murray secretly honored Baphomet just because a Masonic composition written by a Master Mason who frequented an Illuminati Lodge in Vienna, was played at his funeral?

Perish the thought. Nevertheless, the major influences of the Masons in the Cape Province during his lifetime on the DRC cannot be denied.

The design of the first kerkplaats was probably owed to Willem Hertzog, Deputy Surveyor General of the Cape, who was also prominent in the Craft of Freemasonry, and there are strong indications that his plan was based upon an idealized reconstruction of the Temple of Solomon, also used by Freemasons in their planning of Masonic lodges.

It appears likely, therefore, that throughout the 19th century the Masonic movement exerted a powerful influence in the affairs of the Dutch Reformed Church that was only broken off for political reasons in 1962.[2]



In a very emotional plea toward the end of his video, Ferdie Mulder quotes from Andrew Murray’s book on the Heidelberg Catechism, Sunday 11, p.154 (Reformed Theology; Calvinism).

Reader, do you know Jesus Christ? Do you know Him as Saviour from sin? As the eternal Redeemer by whom, without anything in yourself, you have everything forever? Reader, do you know the Lord Jesus by experience? Can you say amen to everything the Catechism says of Him?

Whatever Murray meant by do you know the Lord Jesus by experience?” is anyone’s guess. What kind of experience do you need to know Jesus Christ as your Saviour?

Yes, there are several experiences that allegedly attest to one’s salvation, for example, speaking in unknown languages, being slain in the Spirit, baptism by emersion in lots of water, and laughing your head off (Rodney Howard-Brown). None of these were evident in Andrew Murray’s evangelistic outreaches.

Surely, faith and faith alone in Jesus Christ is the biblical requirement for salvation. The word “experience” appears only four times in Scripture and never in tandem with salvation.

By contrast, the word “faith” appears 247 times in Scripture, without the word “experience” appearing next to it within the scope of a million miles.

Having seen that Murray was a mystic and having observed that mysticism is an experiential phenomenon that excludes rational thinking, in order to experience an esoteric oneness with God, (remember, Murray admitted that mysticism is a doctrineless system), it is rather obvious what Murray referred to – mysticism per se.

Listen, folks, the one thing Christians should guard against in their entire lives is to read into the Word of God things that are not there. It boils down to what Revelation 22:18-19 warns us about adding and taking away from the Word of God.

And you may argue with me until the cows come home, but Murray’s adding of “experience” to faith” is tantamount to adding to God’s Word. BEWARE!

Moreover, please note that Murray did not write “Can you say amen to everything the Bible says of Him” but what the Heidelberg Catechism says of Him?

You can only say what the Catechism says of Him when it harmonizes with everything that the Bible says of Him. Does it?

The Catechism defines the beliefs of the Reformed (Calvinist) tradition, which is based on the acronym TULIP and is embodied in the Westminster Confession. Both are extremely incompatible with God’s Word.

Ferdie Mulder’s plea aimed at all the various denominations in South Africa is to repent of their sin and to return to the God of Murray, the God of Calvin, and the God of Luther. As far as I know, God identifies Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in his Word, and not the three gentlemen Mulder mentions.

He is not known as the God of Luther who was a Jew-hater; (Genesis 12:3). He is not known as the God of Calvin who murdered Servetus and ruled his own kingdom with an iron fist in Geneva; and He is not known as the God of Andrew Murray who mixed sound doctrine (truth; good) with mysticism that is wholly doctrineless (lies, evil).

He is, always has been, and always will be known as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. If anyone does not know him as such, they should earnestly search their heart to make sure they really know God and are redeemed.

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John 17:3).

Here are a few recommended articles that further highlights Andrew Murray’s mysticism.

MASONIC ARTICLES AND ESSAYS Mysticism The Illus... Bro... Annie Besant 33o Date Published: 5/23/2022

WARNING: Ignore the part that says Paul and John were Christ mystics. They were never involved in any shape or form of mysticism. They merely preached the unadulterated Gospel of God and exposed false teachers.


[1] Article in Scottish Journal of Theology · February 2009. Peter Goodwin Heltzel, “Before Bloch there was Blumhardt”: a thesis on the origins of the theology of hope. Abstract, p. 30

[2] Franco Frescura, “Symbolic Dimensions of 19th Century Dutch Colonial Settlement at the Cape of Good Hope.

Please share:

Tom Lessing (Discerning the World)

Tom Lessing is the author of the above article. Discerning the World is an internet Christian Ministry based in Johannesburg South Africa. Tom Lessing and Deborah Ellish both own Discerning the World. For more information see the About this Website page below the comments section.

2 Responses

  1. Robert says:

    Hello, Tom.

    It’s Robert. Thank you very much for taking the time to write all these articles exposing mysticism. For several months, I felt some regret about criticizing Andrew Murray because I found his book on Humility to be helpful. I had not checked your website for a while, so I was surprised when I found that you wrote several posts answering my questions. Thanks to your articles, I am now fully aware of the dangers of Andrew Murray’s teachings on the “higher life” and the mysticism that permeates his books. Murray’s books should be avoided by everyone, but especially by new Christians who are unaware of the risks of introspection and the dangers of becoming “too spiritual,” which can result in demon possession, mental breakdowns, pride, and the sin of seeking spiritual knowledge beyond the boundaries of God’s word.

    In his Introduction to “Wholly for God,” Murray seems to suggest that the Apostle John was a mystic. But this is clearly wrong. Anything that might superficially appear to encourage mysticism in the Apostle John’s writings is grounded in objective truth, not subjective experience. For example, the famous “abide in me” teaching of Jesus is not an encouragement to seek an inner light and inner life with Jesus, but simply an admonition to keep His commandments and love one another. These are objective teachings. Jesus gives eternal life to anybody who believes in Him (via a child-like faith) and abides with anybody who keeps His commandments and loves His brother. It’s just that simple and does not require any mystical relationship, meditation, contemplation, or inner life introspection.

    Thanks again.

  2. Robert wrote,

    “For several months, I felt some regret about criticizing Andrew Murray because I found his book on Humility to be helpful.”

    This is perhaps the most dangerous aspect of Murray’s books. To illustrate my point, I would like to refer you to Jude.

    Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Jude 1:3-4).

    The word for “crept in unawares” is “pareisdunō” which appears only here in the New Testament and means “to settle in alongside” or “lodge stealthily” without being noticed for the poison that it is. It is so subtle, so inconspicuous, so discreet, that it settles (puts down its roots so deeply) alongside the truth that everyone begins to absorb it as gospel truth.

    It reminds one of Jesus’ warnings in Matthew chapter 23.

    Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.” (Matthew 23:1-3).

    He didn’t cast any doubts on the purity of their doctrines but scolded them for their opposing lifestyle that did not add up to their doctrinal teachings. Mysticism of any shape or form is the very opposite of God’s doctrines. Murray boldly admitted this dichotomy when he wrote,

    “Mysticism has been defined as belief in an immediate and continuous communication [interaction] between God and the soul, which may be established by means of certain peculiar religious exercises; as belief in an inner light, which may almost dispense with the written revelation.

    This definition identifies mysticism too closely with its extravagances, its unsound developments, and overlooks that there is a mystical element in all true religion, both objectively in the revelation and subjectively in the faith.

    According to common acceptation, mysticism is simply a one-sided development of that element.”

    It is evident from what has just been said that it is not easy to define what mysticism is. It is not a system of doctrine.

    It is found in all religious systems, in heathenism and pantheism, as well as in Christianity.

    With the Church of Christ, it is not a sect or party; every Church has its representatives. In every complete Christian character, there is an element of mysticism. It is the outgrowth of a certain disposition or temperament, which ever seeks for the deepest ground or root of spiritual things. (Andrew Murray, “Introduction,” in Andrew Murray, ed., Wholly for God. The True Christian life. A Series of Extracts from The Writings of William Law (New York: Anson D.F. Randolph, 1893), xxi.).

    What he in effect said, is:

    Mysticism that seeks to enhance the immediate and continuous communication (interaction) with God by means of certain peculiar spiritual practices, is not entirely at variance with the written revelation (God’s doctrines).

    When stripped of its extravaganzas, its unsound developments, and its unwarranted ignorance that there is an element of mysticism in all true religion (doctrinal purity), it becomes clear that mysticism is not a one-sided element of the abovementioned phenomena (heathenism and pantheism) but also has an honorable place in Christianity (together with its doctrinal statements).

    And then like a lightning bolt from heaven Murray with unflinching vociferousness announces that mysticism is not a system of doctrines. It is in this doctrineless system of spirituality that the mystic “seeks for the deepest ground or root of spiritual things.

    When last I chequed the Bible, it still says that Jesus Christ is the deepest ground of root of spiritual things. (John 14:6). He is the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last and not a Murrayunited mixture of doctrine and no doctrine. This is Pharisee ism at its very best as we find it in Matthew 23:1-3.

    The quote from Jude 1:3-4 in connection with Andrew Murray seems to be rather harsh. How could anyone possibly associate him with sins such as “turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.?”

    Lasciviousness has many tentacles ranging from raw corrupt carnality (of which, I am sure Andrew Murray cannot be accused of) to several kinds of man-made religious practices that allegedly grant them entrance into the presence of God, one of which is mysticism and, as Murray admitted, is common in all pagan and pantheistic religions. In fact, as he wrote, it is not a system of doctrine. If this is not a denial of the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, I don’t know what is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *