A Goldmine of another Sort

A Goldmine of another Sort - Southern Africa as a base for Missionary Recruitment Content Introduction 1. Jesus, the Pray-er: our Model for a close Walk with the Father…. ………………………………………5 2. Jesus, the Word of God: the Logos and the Rhema………………………………………………… …..15 3. Jesus, the paramount Encourager: He uplifts and consoles ……………………………………… ….. ..25 4. Jesus, God’s true Son: the ultimate Example of Obedience...................……………………..………. . 32 5. Jesus, the Son of poor Parents: An answer to economic Disparity ….………………………………......42 6. Jesus, the Servant Leader: An object lesson in servitude ………. ………………..……………….…... 40 7. Jesus, the special Warrior: a fighter for real Peace………………………………………………….…..47 8. Jesus, a Man of Sorrows: An example of preparedness to suffer persecution……………………..…..... 55 9. Jesus delivered People from all forms of Bondage …….………………………………………………… 10. Jesus, the great missionary Strategist 11. Jesus’ View of Unity as a Priority ..... ... ......... ………………………………………….………......86 12. Jesus, the Homeless: a Refugee as a Baby and a Vagabond as an Adult …………………………….102 13. Jesus disregarded societal Status: A nudge towards imaginative Initiatives! …………………….......108 14. Jesus taught ‘Enemy Love’: The Power of Reconciliation ……….……………………………............119 15. Jesus, an Example of proper Stewardship and a pioneer of good Ecology ……………………..…... .126 16. Jesus, a Man for the Individual: Fellowship as a Priority ……………………………..…………… . 132 . 17. Jesus, the Risk-taker par excellence: a Call for special Solidarity..………………………………. …132 18. Jesus, a Master in Conflict Management … ……………………………. …………. ………… ..... 138 19. Jesus, the Non-conformist: Questioning doubtful Norms ...…………………………………… ........... 145 ‘South Africa is not only rich in gold dug from the mines but in faith that has been tested and tried... and proven to be more valuable than fine gold’ (Eileen Vincent, I will heal their land, Basingstroke (UK), 1986) Introduction The best known bishops of the oldest Protestant Church, the Unity of the Brethren, better known as the Moravian Church, are the Czech educator and theologian Jan Amos Komensky (generally known as Amos Comenius) and Count Nicolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf, the founder of the renewed Unitats Fratrum. The life work of Jesus could be summed up as that of a missionary. This theme we attempt to expound in this treatise. Jesus evidently understood himself as such because more than once he noted that he was sent by the Father (for example John 5:30). If we look more closely at the life of Jesus, we can easily detect bibli­cal prin­ciples and criteria for the recruitment of missionaries and evan­gelists. Zinzendorf in particular has been using the Bible as a cue to develop a missionary strategy. He inspired the congregation of Herrnhut that was founded in June, 1722 as an asylum for persecuted believers from Moravia and Bohemia. Those 18th century Herrnhut Moravians demonstrated that the ‘New Testament’1 principles and practices can be fruitfully adapted and implemented for our time. The far-sighted Comenius had the vision of spread­ing the light of the Gospel from England. This happened two hundred years later, starting with the modern missionary movement, which received its main inspiration from William Carey’s book An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to use Means for the Conversion of the Heathen. I propose that not only the theological thinking, but also the Church universal could be revitalized, perhaps even revolutionized if the Great Commission2 gets its rightful place again. I could envisage a similar role for South Africa at this point in time. The Moravians of Herrnhut after 1727, under the bril­liant leadership of Count Zinzendorf, have proved that the mission­ary guidelines of the Bible are not mere theory. Georg Schmidt, one of these first generation Moravian missionaries, was instrumental in starting lively Christian groups at the Cape. This would influence the religious life decisively.here for the decades thereafter. It is no co-incidence that both the well-known Dr Andrew Murray3 and William Carey were deeply influenced by the example of the Moravians. An inter­est­ing possibil­ity is that Carey might indirect­ly have been influ­enced from the Cape. The correspon­dence between Van Lier and evangelical contemporaries in Holland and England contrib­uted to the establishment of the Rotterdam and London Mission Societies. It is interesting to note the influence of the Moravians on Van Lier and vice versa. Quite soon after his arrival, Georg Schmidt’s legacy worked through into Van Lier’s life when he was present at the death bed of one of the missionary pioneer’s converts. The young dominee saw how the Khoi believer died ‘in complete rest and peace and in trust in the Lord.’ 4 The Moravian Bishop Reichel, coming from Ceylon (today called Sri Lanka) en route to Germany, was cordially welcomed by Dr van Lier and the Cape prayer group. As a result, a few years later - in 1792 - a team of three new Moravian missionaries came to Genadendal. On the other side of the ocean the missionary physician Johannes van der Kemp was decisively influenced by the Moravians in Zeist (Holland). There Van der Kemp received the vision for world mission which he used for creating mission awareness in the Netherlands at large. After receiving his medical training in Britain, Van der Kemp was immensely used by God in the establishment of the Dutch Missionary Society. Worldwide he was one of the first to see the potential of converted and manumitted slaves as divine instruments to minister into their countries of origin. Dr Andrew Murray was influenced deeply during his study stint in Europe. The Moravian settlement Zeist was only 10 kilometers from Utrecht where he and his brother John studied for two years from 1845. It is highly probable that there were some links.5 In a letter of 14 November 1845 to his father from Utrecht, he wrote: ‘I have been led to surrender myself wholly to Christ’ (Du Plessis, 1919:57). Other groups who are the advance guard to-day in getting to the unreached, like Youth with a Mission, have been inspired by the prayerful Moravian missionary example of the first two centuries after 1727: Zinzendorf and Comenius were both men of God who took their inspiration from the unadulter­ated Word of God. They tried to apply the Word to the time in which they lived, albeit that both were visionaries, way ahead of their time. If the life and testimony of Zinzen­dorf especially is highlighted in this treatise, it must be stressed that it would be completely against the spirit of his teaching if the Count is even remotely hero-worshipped. Zinzendorf wanted to point everybody to Jesus instead. I have been greatly encouraged through my private studies and through my experience that others had similar thoughts with regard to the potential of South Africans as missionaries. When a slave from Mozambique named Maart responded so well to five years of Christian teaching that he was considered to become a missionary to his own people in Mozambique. Dr van der Kemp definitely had that vision in the early 19th century which was regarded as revolutionary. At the end of the 19th century Dean Lightfoot, an Anglican priest, had similar ideas. He pioneered in the parish of St. Paul’s, just outside the present-day Bo-Kaap in Cape Town. Lightfoot saw potential missionaries in people of colour who could serve among other things as guides and interpreters. In 1911 G.B.A. Gerdener, a missionary among the Muslims at the Cape at the beginning of the previous century and later Dutch Reformed professor of theology at Stellenbosch, wrote: ‘South Africans ought to be the leading missionary specialists in the world. They grow up in this atmosphere, and have the field of research at their door ...’ (Gerdener, 1911:207). Many years later, Gerdener tried to get the message over in other wording, declaring that missionary work is ‘something that belongs to the being of the church, the fundamental function of the church’. However, the message hardly penetrated, not even in his denomination. My repeated reference to the example of the Moravians in this book is also intended as a tribute to the wonderful heritage of which I deem myself a part. With the increase of Bible teaching in local fellowships and the proliferation of house churches, I see the Herrnhut fellowship after 1727 as a model which could be adapted to our times. For that generation of Moravians, being a Christian meant to be involved with a mission to the whole world. At the same time, I am also sad that examples like these have by and large become obsolete, also in other denominations which had anointed beginnings. I do hope and pray that the dissemination of this information might (re)kindle interest in the life and teaching of Count Zinzendorf, an exceptional Christian. Further­more, I attempt to highlight the ‘key’ to world missions, which was given to the church universal by the worldwide acknowledged evangelical preacher, Dr Andrew Murray. At the time when The Key to the missionary Problem was first published, it literally exploded on the Christian scene and was used by God to stimulate missionary zeal and action in many coun­tries.6 The key was only used effectively again in this way at the end of the 20th century with a similar result, starting with the crashing of the communist ‘iron curtain’ after November 1989. (This time Open Doors and the AD 2000 and Beyond movement were the prime divine instruments.) Encouraged by this dramatic turn of events, Open Doors repeated the request when extremist Islam substituted Communism as a threatening ideology, albeit under the cloak of religion. Ten year of prayer resulted in thousands of Muslims coming to faith in Jesus in the new millennium. Dr van der Kemp, Dean Lightfoot, Dr Andrew Murray and Professor G.B.A. Gerdener all thus had the vision to use missionaries from Africa for the Black continent. ‘... and through these (talented men) the whole of Africa may be influ­enced’ (Gerdener, 1911:208). Hans van Staden, an Afrikaner missionary, established the Dorothea Mission mainly through the intensive use of Black evangelists, notably Shadrach Maloka, who still evangelized in the 1990s. Van Staden was also the initiator of Patrick Johnstone’s Operation World, the book which has arguably influenced world missions more than any other work.7 David Bosch, the leading South African missiologist at the time of his tragic death in 1993, had already influenced missiological thinking worldwide with his last work8 to such an extent that things can never be the same again. South Africa has thus already influenced the world missionary movement decisive­ly. Yet, very few African precedents are known. An exceptional movement in the history of Christianity in Africa is the one associated with ‘Prophet Harris’. The simple message of the Black Episcopal Christian from Liberia, who began to work in Côte I’voire about 1914, was much more readily accepted by the Africans than that of European missionaries in spite of his radicalism. Stephen Neill, a prominent missiologist, wrote: ‘An encouraging feature of ... rapid growth in Africa is that so much of it is the work not of the mission­ary, but of the Africans them­selves’ (Neill, 1965:492). Harris preached not only the belief in one God, but also the abandonment and destruction of fe­tishes. This truth, expressed in 1965, is even more valid today. Another unheralded heroine was Eliza Davis George from Texas, who as a Black and a woman, had a lot of prejudice stacked against her. She was touched at a prayer meeting of the Student Volunteer Movement, inspired to go and minister among those from where her ancestors had come (Tucker, 2004:360). As one of the first Blacks to depart as a missionary from the Western world, Eliza Davis broke many a missionary record until her death in her 99th year in 1980. But long before her, indigenous believers were used in pioneering work, without getting due recognition for it. Some of this has been filtering through in recent years more prominently, such as the role of Wilhelmina Stompjes in the Eastern Cape and four Xhosa evangelists in Malawi after 1876.9 Patrick Johnstone sums the situation up aptly: ‘... much of the pioneering missionary work in Africa has actually been done by humble dedicated African missionaries who have crossed cultural and national boundaries’ to evangelize people who are not from their own group or tribe’ (Johnstone, 1993:39). By and large however, we unfortunately have to state that a timely warning of Gerdener had not been heeded: ‘To disre­gard the future of the natives is to hang a weight round one’s own neck’ (Gerdener, 1911:208). Dr Andrew Murray warned early in the century against the danger of nationalism. Also this was not taken seriously. In fact, the warnings turned out to be prophetic, first through the racial prejudice, and even racial obsession of apartheid theologians; and later through the reaction to racialism, when many up and coming theologians of colour became obsessed by their opposition to apartheid. (I was among those, almost losing my way spiritually in the emerging Black Theology of the early 1970s.) We may not let the chance slip again for the new South Africa to take a leading role in world missions. The run-up to the Lausanne Committee event in the Convention Centre of Cape Town – exactly a century after the big conference in Edinburgh in 1910 – presented us with a golden opportunity to make a good start. Thankfully, things are gradually changing for the bet­ter. ‘Coloured’10 and missionaries from South Africa with Indian ancestry are slowly coming into their own. In a few international mission agencies ‘non-White’ missionaries from Southern Africa already outnumber their White counterparts. From the Black population however - the vast majority population-wise - the momentum still has to take off for obvious reasons: economic disparity, a sad legacy of the past and a still prevalent perception (deception?) that a missionary has to be a White and/or foreign. The questions at the end of each chapter are first and fore­most intended as stimulation for further thought. I am quite aware that some of them might sound arrogant and haughty. Even as I wrote them, I was only too aware that I myself fall so much short of these lofty ideals. But I believe that these biblical standards should not be watered down only because they do not suit us. Instead, we should rather let ourselves be chal­lenged by them. There is perhaps no country in the world at this point in time which lends itself better to demonstrate the dynamics of the Gospel than the Republic of South Africa because of its diverse resource of people groups, its evangelical heritage and its economic disparity. Let us make a virtue out of a sad legacy. If the old Voortrekker adage ‘Eendrag maak mag’,11 comes into its own, South Africa could soon become one of the leading countries in the ‘export’ of missionaries to all parts of the world. Yet, quite a lot of homework will have to be done in the churches. It is my prayer that the present book might be used as a provocation12 to this end - challenging the South African churches to become the advance guard of the worldwide missionary army. For a start, I suggest that we take another look at the lessons taught by Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith. I am not apologizing that there is some repetition, which seemed feasible. Thus I have used the classic example of the Samaritan woman (John 4) a few times in different chapters. (In a separate study, A revolutionary Conversation, I examined the lessons one can learn from the Master Teacher.) For the rest, I do not regard myself an academic. This book is first and foremost the result of many years of pondering on biblical principles, supplemented by private studies and research. I originally intended this as an aid for church Bible Schools and home churches, hoping that it may be divinely used even wider. Although I am quite aware that a culture of reading must still develop in South Africa, I pray that the gist of this treatise might filter through to many compatrioots and others around the world at this time. Cape Town, May 2016 1. Jesus, the Pray-er: our Model for a close Walk with the Father Our Lord demonstrated by his example the priority of prayer and the necessity of being in God’s presence in real worship. We read that Jesus Christ communicated with His Father constantly. Every great crisis in His life was preceded by special prayer. He spent a whole night in prayer – the only place recorded – before He gathered His disciples around Him. D.L. Moody, the great American evangelist at the end of the 19th century highlighted the fact that ‘four times the answer came right down from heaven while the Saviour prayed’ (Prevailing Prayer, p.12).13 On more than one occasion he left the masses standing, to be alone with His Father (for example Mark 6:46). Jesus modeled solitude as an important and strategic component. At five points of crisis in his life he spent time alone with the Father – before the start of his earthly ministry, in the desert (Matthew 14:13); before choosing his disciples (Luke 6: 12f); when he received the news of the death of John the Baptist; after the miraculous feeding of the five thousand (Matthew 14:23). He literally overturned the tables of those who would dare to defile the temple; it had to be used as a house of prayer (Matthew 21:12, 13). He praised Mary for sitting in His presence, rebuking the zealous, diligent Martha, who surely meant to do her service ‘for Him’ (Luke 10:39-42). He encouraged his disciples, and us, to learn from Him and take His yoke upon us. As an example of prayer that is heard by God, the contrite publican is cited as an example, in contrast to the self-righteous Pharisee (Luke 18:9-14). In the teaching of the Master, for example in the Sermon on the Mount, various aspects of prayer are highlighted. In fact, prayer takes a central role in this series of teachings. Even in one of the most crucial aspects of prayer, namely that of our petitions not being answered, the Lord’s struggle, yes, his agonizing in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:38ff) serves as an example to us to seek God’s will in everything. Prayer unites A point to note in the Lord’s teaching is the corporate emphasis. In the lesson which got the name ‘The Lord’s Prayer’, we would search in vain for words like I, me, mine. Thus we read: ‘Our Father...´. ‘Your name...’, ‘Your Kingdom, ‘Your will’; ‘give us… our daily bread´ ... etc. Prayer itself unites, more than anything else. It cannot be emphasized enough that it should be our priority to counter Christian disunity with all our might, last not least through our prayers, thus following the example of our Mas­ter (John 17:21-23). There the master prayed ‘that they may be brought to complete unity.’ The first half of the Decalogue, the so-called Ten Commandments, refers to our relationship to the Almighty and the second half to our relationship with fellow human beings. D.L. Moody notes interestingly that ‘the Lord’s prayer, more properly, is the one in the seventeenth chapter of John’ (Prevailing Prayer, p.13). He went on to observe not only that ‘this is the longest prayer on record that Jesus made’ but also that ‘our Master’s prayers were short when offered in public ... Long prayer in public are too often not prayers at all’. Quite interesting is Moody’s conclusion that ‘… prayers that brought immediate answers were generally brief.’ When one prays regularly for someone of whom one is critical, one’s attitude to such a person is apt to change as well, apart from the fact that prayer will change that person too. Visser ‘t Hooft has put it so aptly: ‘...our participation is, in the first place, by opening ourselves through prayer... The vertical dimension is the fundamental one and determines and conditions the other dimension’ (Visser ‘t Hooft, 1959:81). Nehemiah as a Model of compassionate Intercession Nehemiah qualified for leadership through his com­passion and concern for the city of Jerusalem when he heard of its deso­late state. ‘When I heard these words I sat down and wept and mourned for days; and I continued fasting and praying before the God of heaven’ (Nehemiah 1:4). We read how Nehemiah prayed day and night for 4 months before asking the king’s permission to rebuild the wall around Jerusalem. (Significantly, the wall was built in only 52 days!) We are indebted to Brother Andrew who highlighted – perhaps even exaggerating a bit – the value of searching and piercing questions by Nehemiah in his book Building in a broken World. The Dutch founder of Open Doors showed how by asking the right questions we can be led to prayerful action. Intensive listening creates the basis for getting involved in a meaningful way. Nehemiah displayed in his life the balance between faith and action, to be prayerfully active in the Lord\s service without becoming activist. Every step was important, from listening, waiting, prayer, repentance, organization and planning. Nehemiah did not rush into action. He allowed the message to sink in. We can only really minister into needs when we experience something of the depth of the misery in our own hearts. But Nehemiah also demonstrated how spiritual life invariable leads to battle, to spiritual warfare of the highest order when prayer and action goes hand in hand. He did not rely on second-hand information. He went to go and explore for himself, discovering how the condition of the wall of Jerusalem was symptomatic of the spiritual state of the nation. Nehemiah was very much aware of his own inadequacy. Two prayers of confession are recorded (Nehemiah 1: 5-11 and 9:6-39) in which he includes his own sin and that of his family. In chapter 6 verse 9 he prays in view of the opposition of enemies who opposed the building of the wall: ‘but now, o God, strengthen my hands’. Jesus in the Mould ancient Prayer Warriors As a man of prayer, Jesus very much displayed his Jewish background. He will surely have known about Nehemiah’s intercession. He may have been reminded of the prayerful Nehemiah when he might even have broken down in tears as he pondered over the special city and its religious leaders. After his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the establishment leadership was bent on silencing him, by force if need be. Instead, he shut up them by convincingly answering all their questions (Matthew 21:23 - 22:45). In a (com)passionate discourse the Lord lashed out at a part of the religious establishment with the sevenfold woe: ‘Woe you teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites’…: Possibly the Master would have to speak to the leaders of His Body in a similar way. Jesus ended his discourse with the compassionate divinely inspired words: ‘Jerusalem, Jerusalem…, how often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing …’ (Matthew 23:37). Our Lord Jesus rose very early in the morning to pray. In Luke 6:12 it is reported how he had prayed all night. His agonizing prayer in the garden of Gethsemane on the eve of His crucifixion, where it is reported that his sweat were like blood drops (Luke 22:44), has precedents in the Hebrew Scriptures.14 Throughout the ‘Old Testament’ we see how God inter­vened after intercessory prayer. Abraham interceded for Lot and his family (Genesis 18:23ff). Moses was a type of Christ in that he was prepared to sacrifice his own life: ‘...forgive their sin - and if not, then blot me out of the book you have written’ (Exodus 32:32). The fervent prayer and cries of agony to God are mentioned as the fore-runners of the deliverance of Israel from the yoke of Pharaoh (Exodus 2:23). This is also the case at the birth of arch fathers and other biblical men of God, after their mothers had been barren (Genesis 30:6; 1 Samuel 1:11). When Hezekiah called on God in desperation on his death-bed, he was given another lease of life, fifteen years extra (2 Kings 20:3, 6). David called himself a man of prayer (Psalm 109:4). Moving confessions of Nehemiah (Chapter 1) and Daniel (Chapter 9) showed the way how intercession for the sins of one’s people could be done. Paul was likewise clearly someone who prayed a lot, often interced­ing for fellow Chris­tians, especially those who were going through difficult patches. In Colossians 4:12 Epaphras is mentioned as one who wrestled in prayer, literally agonizing in prayer for fellow believers. James (5:17) makes a point to stress that Elijah was prayerful. Yet, the apostle specifically stressed that Elijah was a man just like us. The Lord as the Teacher Count Zinzendorf and Andrew Murray could respectively be described as the giants of the 18th and 19th century. Murray is known to have been deeply impacted by Zinzendorf and the Moravians. Both Zinzendorf and Andrew Murray were men of prayer. The Dictionary of South African Bibliography (Vol. 1, p.578) wrote about Dr Andrew Murray the following: ‘The golden ray of prayer illumined all he did. Like Luther, he believed that nothing that was amiss and demanded correction could not be corrected or endured by prayer.’15 The extent to which Andrew Murray was influenced by Zinzendorf during his study stint in Europe is not known, but with Zeist being only 10 kilometers away from Utrecht where he and his brother John studied for two years from 1845, it is highly probable that there were some links.16 In a letter of 14 November 1845 to his father from Utrecht, he wrote: ‘I have been led to surrender myself wholly to Christ’ (Du Plessis, 1919:57). In Utrecht the brothers associated themselves with the movement Sechor Dabar (Remember the Word), which had been founded by Isaac da Costa. The Jewish-background believer God had used mightily in the Dutch revival when the Church there was spiritually almost dead. The Murray brothers were instrumental in starting a missionary circle called Eltheto. Its extension was a monthly journal, which would contain extracts on the work of God throughout the world. Andrew Murray founded the Bible and Prayer Union in 1883. The main object of this venture was to encourage members of his church in Wellington to read the Scriptures daily and to pray regularly for specific causes. One of the first books of Andrew Murray had the title - translated into English as With Christ in the School of Prayer.17 In 1904 he founded another prayer union, which was open to believers who had pledged themselves to devote at least a quarter of an hour daily to praying for others and also for the furtherance of the Kingdom. Significantly, the Bible verses he referred to in this booklet were taken from the Gospels. Following in the footsteps of the disciples, every chapter closes with a prayer preceded with the words ‘Lord, teach us to pray’. A whole chapter is devoted to what has been dubbed ‘The Lords Prayer’, and which Murray calls the model prayer. He stresses the Fatherhood of God in this prayer, proceeding to write a full chapter on ‘The infinite fatherliness of God’. (In modern times Floyd McClung highlighted this aspect with his well-known booklet The Father Heart of God). Andrew Murray changed the course of the Church in the twentieth century with two booklets in 1901 and 1911 after discerning the lack of an emphasis on prayer at two world conferences respectively in New York (1900) and Edinburgh (1910). Prayer for Workers into the Harvest The Lord exhorted the disciples and by implication also us, to pray for workers to enter the ripe harvest field (Matthew 9:38). This petition is to-day possibly more actual than ever before. Through the increased prayer for the 10/40 window, the unchristianized geographical area of Africa and Eurasia between 10 and 40 degrees north of the equator, it can be expected that many areas of the world where no or little mission work has been done up to now, may soon open up for Gospel missionary outreach. Many workers will be needed. We should take note however, that Jesus raised this clarion call of prayer for workers after He had been moved by compassion, when He saw that the multitude were like sheep without a shepherd (Matthew 9:36). The need is great for missionaries who have holistic compas­sion for people, concerned about their spiritual as well as their temporal needs. However, our prayer for the workers is very much determined by our harvest vision. If our sight is blurred by cultural, denominational, sectarian or any other prejudice, we might not even see the harvest on our door-step. In John 4 it is recorded how the disciples were so preoccupied with the temporal need for bread, that they over-looked the harvest of Samaritans. Perhaps our prayer for workers should also include the request for healing of our ‘eye defects’, our shortsightedness or even our spiritual blindness, so that we may see what the Lord has on his heart. United Prayer The Hebrew Scriptures highlight individual prayer giants like Moses, David, Elijah, Nehemiah and Daniel. A special case is mentioned in Scripture when the exiles returned to Jerusalem. There they had to discover to their dismay that those who had remained in the city had joined the detestable practices of the pagan neighbouring tribes (Ezra 9:2) and that the religious leaders had in fact led the way in the unfaithfulness to Yahweh, evident through massive intermarriage. Led by the visible prostration and the audible passionate confession with the weeping of the scribe Ezra on behalf of the nation, the assembled congregation was moved deeply. An atmosphere of remorse ensued. We need to add Jesus and Paul to the list of individual prayer giants. The ‘New Testament’ attaches a special significance to united prayer. The Bible book of The Acts of the Apostles adds the dimension of corporate prayer. Jesus himself taught both tenets. He encouraged prayer that is not visible – the closet variation to be alone with the Father – but he also said ‘where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst of them’ (Matthew 18:20). The presence of Jesus in the fellowship of his praying disciples gives united prayer its power. Corporate prayer should ideally be ‘of one mind’. Andrew Murray (With Christ in the School of Prayer) highlighted this aspect of prayer. In that classic he notes that the object prayed for should be some special thing, a matter of distinct united desire. Down the years revivals were preceded by prayer, often because believers took the cue from the pre-Pentecost believers being together in this way (Acts 1:13). It is interesting to note that the same author - Luke - reported in his Gospel how a dispute arose among the disciples when Jesus was still with them (Luke 22:24). We also discover how the element of crisis is used by God to spawn urgent prayer. With the first church this not only occurred during the days preceding Pentecost, but also when they were persecuted (Acts 4:23). God answered their united prayer miraculously in the case of Peter (12:12). Prior to this James, the apostle, had been killed. Thus, even combined prayer is not always answered according to our expectations and hopes. God is sovereign. Due to corporate prayer, incredible political changes have occurred in many parts of the world. Release of Chris­tians who had been imprisoned for their faith has been affected through it, but some of the persecuted were also killed, their churches and houses burned down. Waiting on the Lord Nehemiah prayed, wept and fasted for days before he shared the burden of his heart with the King. He prayed all in all for 120 days before getting into the action of building the wall. Dr Andrew Murray put in practice what he had taught about ‘waiting on the Lord’ when he was invited to be a speaker at the World Missions Conference in New York, 1900 - billed at that time as the biggest ever to be held. (At that moment in time the effect of the Enlightenment and rationalism had significantly diminished belief in unseen forces like the Holy Spirit.) Andrew Murray had no inner peace about going to New York, not even after the organizers tried to use his famous friend Dwight Moody to entice him. Moody invited Murray to join him in outreaches in the USA after the World Missions Conference, but Murray was not to be swayed. He felt morally bound to stay with his people because of the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902). We may safely surmise that Murray was sensitive to the Holy Spirit, only wanting to take instructions from the Lord. Murray’s subsequent absence at the conference ironically became the biggest cause of missions in the 20th century. After he had received the papers and discussions at the conference, Murray wrote down what he thought was lacking at the event in a booklet that he called The Key to the Missionary Problem. In the booklet Murray referred prominently to the 24-hour prayer watch of the Moravians. It called seriously for new devotion and intensive prayer for missions. Murray powerfully stated that missionary work is the primary task of the church, and that the pastor should have that as the main goal of his preaching. These sentiments were repeated in a small booklet he called Foreign Missions and the week of Prayer, January 5-12, 1902 - formulating that ‘missions are the supreme end of the church’. He furthermore suggested: ‘to join in united prayer for God’s Spirit to work in home churches a true interest in, and devotion to missions (is) our first and our most pressing need.’ Murray proposed that the subjects for the week of prayer, issued by the Council of the Evangelical Alliance for January, 1902, should deal exclusively with the relationship of the Church to the Great Commission. His proposal was however only adopted and carried out in South Africa. No Sacrifice too great Dr Andrew Murray picked the dictum of Paul, the apostle, with regard to sacrifice, something which C.T. Studd would expand into the motto of the mission agency WEC International. Andrew Murray wrote: ‘The urgency of the case is extreme. No sacrifice can be too great if we can only get the Church, or the more earnest part of it, to take time and wait unitedly before the throne of God, to review her position, to confess her shortcoming, to claim God’s promise of power, and to concentrate her all to His service.’ Dr Alexander Maclaren, a contemporary British church leader, dared to suggest that the The Key to the Missionary Problem had ‘the key to most of our problems, and points to the only cure for all our weaknesses’ (Du Plessis, 1917:391). The well known Bible teacher Dr F.B. Meyer forecast after reading the booklet: ‘If it were read universally throughout our churches… I believe it would lead to one of the greatest revivals of missionary enthusiasm that the world has ever known.’ It is surely no mere co-incidence that revivals broke out in different parts of the world in the years hereafter - in such divergent countries as Wales, Norway, India and Chile.18 (The effect of the Welsh revival on Korea has been highlighted by Patrick Johnstone. That country was fast becoming the biggest missionary sending nation of the world, only to be overtaken soon by China with its vibrant home churches.) In South Africa the influence of Murray’s books was profound. In the course of 1902 the Boer War ended. Many soldiers came to the Lord. 150 young men - many returning from various military camps where they had been prisoners of war - declared themselves ready to go forth, after the necessary preparation o ‘labour for the conversion of the heather of Africa’ (Du Plessis, 1917:392). A Boer missionary institute was started at Worcester, which could be regarded as ‘an indirect result of the concert of prayer to which the Dutch Reformed Church was roused’ through the influence of The Key to the Missionary Problem (Du Plessis, 1917:392). God is a God of Missions One of the classic statements of the early 20th century was that ‘God is a God of missions.’ Andrew Murray wrote powerfully about the influence of prayer on missionary enterprise in his booklet The Kingdom of God in South Africa (1906), ending with the words: ‘Prayer is the life of missions. Continual, believing prayer is the secret of vitality and fruitfulness in missionary work. The God of missions is the God of prayer. The work of missions is above everything a work of prayer. He furthermore emphasized that mission work is not only the foremost object of the church, but that every believer should participate in it. Possessing the gift of an orator, and speaking furthermore at the right season, the right and just word, Andrew Murray succeeded in ‘opening up the larger view and kindling the nobler emotions’ (Du Plessis, 1917:470). Dr Murray was used in this way by God to get missionary endeavour as a worldwide priority, an important spur to the conference at Edinburgh in 1910. In turn, this conference can be regarded as a forerunner of the World Council of Churches. (An interesting fact is that William Carey had proposed a hundred years earlier for a missions’ conference to be held at the Cape of Good Hope.) A close Walk with the Lord A common element with all great Church reformers has been their close relationship with the Lord. Referring to Psalm 27:4 which expresses the wish of the Psalmist as the one thing he desires, to be in God's presence forever but possibly also highlighting the choice of Mary - compared to that of her sister Martha (Luke 10:38-42) - Comenius wrote a booklet Unum Necessarium (the one necessary thing). Mary chose to sit at the feet of Jesus. The world must be changed and renewed. Restoration and renewal of man and humanity can take place via the one necessary thing, sitting at the feet of Jesus Christ, the restorer of His Church. Count Zinzendorf, born in 1700, was prayerful already from his childhood days. In an autobiographical report he said how he would speak to the Lord for hours while he was still a toddler. ‘In conversation with him, I was very happy and thankful for what he has done for me through his incarnation’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:2). Already before he was three years old, he not only loved to hear about the Lord, but he started chatting to him, a practice he continued throughout his life. At this time he also started ‘preaching’. Spangenberg reports how criminally intruding Swedes were deeply challenged at heart in 1706 when the small preacher simply continued his sermon to the unusual audience (referred to in Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:6). In his late teens he already had a long prayer list. Erich Beyreuther, a German theologian and expert on Zinzendorf, refers to one of these lists, which the Count changed in Paris when he was 19 years old. It consisted of five pages (Beyreuther, 1957:187). On any day when he had too many other commitments to complete these lists of petitions, he would use the late nights to compensate for it. An intimate Relationship with the Lord Like the biblical men of prayer, Count Zin­zen­dorf had an infectious intimate relationship with his Lord. He knew that prayer means communication with God. ‘Umgang mit dem Heiland’ (communication with the Lord or better still, intimate communion with the Lord) became almost an over-used phrase in the East German village of Herrnhut that came into being through the compassion of the count. Zinzendorf practised this sweet relationship right to the end of his life. He regarded 1754 (six years before his death) as a silent liturgical year, a year of special communica­tion with the Lord (Spangenberg, 1971:1976). At about the same time he told the children at Herrnhut: ‘I have enjoyed this close personal interaction with Jesus for fifty years and I feel the happiness’ (Lewis, 1962:23). Zinzendorf’s 'communion with the Lamb' enabled him to speak so freely, intimately and wisely with everyone on these mat­ters. An indica­tion of his commitment to prayer and his broad vision comes out very clearly in a diary entry: ‘A very blessed night in which in deep humility before his pres­ence, I prayed for everyone in Herrnhut by name’ (Cited in Weinlick, 1956:90). Significant is also that the image of ‘front soldiers’ that included the yearning for martyrdom went into the background in the 1740s with Zinzendorf and his close companions, in favour of resting in the work done by Christ. Not so much their activism but their being at the feet of the Lord and their communion with him became increasingly important. Brother Andrew (1981:115) actualized this position in our days in the light of religious pluralism: ‘Christianity is not a religion. Christianity is a way of life. It is walking with Jesus. I can do that in any country. I can do that under any political regime.’ It belongs to general Church history that the Lord used a Moravians, notably Peter Böhler and Bishop August Spangenberg, to change the direction of John Wesley’s life. A major result occurred when he interacted with August Spangenberg while Wesley travelled to Georgia to propagate the Gospel. Spangenberg challenged him about a close relationship to the Lord. The Anglican missionary to the ‘New World’ realized that it was not enough to see people saved, the new believers had to be discipled. God led Wesley to develop a ‘method’ by which new converts could be taught to live a spiritually fruitful life. In this way the Moravians had a significant influence on the religious awakening in Great Britain as well. ‘Indeed, they were midwives to the evangelical revival and to the great Methodist movement’ (Lewis, 1962:23). Ripples becoming Waves of Prayer The Herrnhut Moravians exported an emphasis on prayer, causing some remarkable ‘waves’. They linked up with Theodore Frelinghuysen, who had gone to North America as a reformed minister in 1720. The Dutch national Frelinghuysen was a man of fervent prayer. He selected lay leaders and taught them to conduct prayer meetings and Bible Study in their homes. This infuriated some church leaders but their attacks on Frelinghuysen were counter-productive. Those attacks inspired Jonathan Edwards, who became the brain and inspiration of the great awakening in the New World. Even more spectacular is that two and a half centuries later the waves of prayer were rekindled by the visit to Herrnhut in East Germany of a group of 19 intercessors in February 1993 (Goll, 2001:17). This was followed by the movement of prayer watches across the globe, including 24-hour watches across South Africa of a week apiece that started on 9 May 2004 in the Moravian Church of District Six, Cape Town. That building survived the apartheid demolition of churches in the former slum area merely because it had been declared a historical monument. Every week a different city or town prayed around the clock 24 hours a day for a full year. On Friday 13 August 2004 a few hundred schools all over South Africa participated in a day of prayer. Thousands of students knelt down, submitted themselves to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and praying for people to see and experience the Father’s love for them. The prayer movement was greatly blessed when this culminated in the first Global Day of Prayer on Pentecost Sunday, May 15, 2005. Confession as a Revival Instrument The Bible has no problem to narrate King David’s moral failures, and his penitence is highlighted. The beautiful Psalm 51 has become the example of a contrite heart ‘. Wash away all my iniquity… Against you … have I sinned…’ (verse 2-4). The ‘New Testament’ speaks the same language, namely that God forgives generously if we confess our sins. He is ever ready to purify us (1 John 1:9). Confession is an important element of prayer as a tool towards revival. The rebirth of the Jewish nation after the exile was prepared by the intercessory prayers of Nehemiah (1:6-9), Ezra (9:6-13) and Daniel (9:9-19). All three of them concentrated on the spiritual condition of the people and confession of sins. In revivals through the ages, prayer was the basis. In these cases prayer brought about a con­sciousness of sin, which invariably led to confession and restitution. Andrew Murray stated: ‘an essential element in a true missionary revival will be a broken heart and a contrite spirit in view of past neglect and sin’ (Murray, 1901[1979]:150). In the arguably most well known recent major revival in South Africa, in Kwa Siza Bantu (Kwazulu Natal), Erlo Stegen, the leader, had been going through an extended period of prayer, but the Holy Spirit could only break through when he confessed his racial pride, idolatry, lacking neigh­bourly love and other sin. Through-out his book The Key to the missionary Problem Andrew Murray men­tions prayer as the major single factor with the potential to change the world. If Andrew Murray states over and over again that the problem is a personal one, he also states clearly that personally we have this key in our hands: ‘We feel that our only hope is to apply ourselves to prayer. Prayer, more prayer, much prayer, very special prayer should first of all be made for the work to be done in our home churches on behalf of foreign missions’ (Murray, 1901[1979]:147). With regard to the latter, the Herrnhut church of the 18th century was exemplary. As the missionaries faithfully sent reports of their work on the various mission fields, the church prayed for them concrete­ly. About the priority of the work of the Holy Spirit and the power of prayer, Murray continues a few pages further: ‘And yet, it is only when they have first place and everything else is made subordinate to them, that the Christian life will be truly healthy’ (Murray, 1901[1979]:150). But he knew that he had an uphill task, conceding: ‘This preaching of contrition on account of our lack of obedience to Christ’s great command will be no easy thing’ (Murray, 1901[1979]:155). Strategic Prayer In all ventures, strategic prayer should take an all-important role. Our strategic prayers should definitely include the prophetic wish that Israel and the Jews might recognize whom they had pierced (Zechariah 12:10). In different quarters a conviction has grown that a mighty roar of evangelis­tic and missionary activity will come to pass once this hap­pens. In this regard it surely remains an exciting prospect to consider the grand job the Jews did in the first century, bringing the Gospel to remote places such as India and North West China by 61 CE. Perhaps the removal of the veil from the eyes of Judaism may even become the forerun­ner of the opening of many Muslim eyes that Jesus had died on the Cross of Calvary. Or must the Muslims come to the Lord first in a significant way? Generally, it has been over­looked that the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 60:6+7 extends to the Muslims. All Kedar’s flock will be gathered to you, the rams of Nebaioth will serve you; they will be accepted as offerings on my altar, and I will adorn my glorious temple (Isaiah 60:7). Kedar and Nebaioth, who are mentioned in Isaiah 60:7, are the two eldest sons of Ishmael (Genesis 25:13). This prophetic word could include the possibility that the religious clerics and leaders of Islam may receive special revelation of who Jesus is. Let us pray that they might discover how the message of the Cross has been consistently omitted in the Qur’an. May Jews and Muslims study the Bible and discover the mystery of Christ that has been hidden for generations from their respective communities. The prophecy of Isaiah 19:24+25 might even be an eschatological pointer towards a combination of Israel, Egypt and Assyria (Iraq) becoming a blessing to the nations. At any rate, the prayer ministry of Christians around the globe will be a determining factor within God’s sovereign will, because ‘God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son so that no one should perish...’ Reverend Ken Joseph, an Assyrian believer who was born and bred in Japan, pointed out that the bulk of Christians in Iraq are Assyrians. According to him, Christian nations have a debt towards the Assyrians. There definitely is some substance to this assertion. Not only for the present mission­aries ‘on the field’ is it absolutely indispensable that believers back home cover them in prayer. Strategic prayer for the opening up of new fields should also be practiced, for example prayer for the end of visa restrictions in certain countries. ‘Bible tourism’ should clearly be seen as a very limited solution to bring God’s Word to China’s masses as against complete freedom of religion. Chris­tians could be taught about ‘chain reac­tions’ of prayer, for example for visa restrictions in Indonesia to be lifted so that Chi­nese-speaking Indonesians could be reached. Such believers could be used in turn to evan­gelize in China, the most popu­lous country of the world. ‘Spiritual warfare’ for the masses of the Far East should be on our prayer agenda as a matter of prior­ity. North Korea remains a prayer challenge although changes for family contacts are encouraging. Dramatic Results of Confession The Stuttgart confession in Germany after World War II and the Rustenburg confession of 1990 in our country can be noted as two examples in 20th century history where this important element of prayer spawned a turn around of the respective coun­tries.19 The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of the late 1990s – originally suggested by Professor Kader Asmal, a Muslim academic, surely was a special instrument to help heal many apart-inflicted wounds. In South Africa - and in the West at large - another confession would nevertheless be appropriate: confession of and repentance because of a system of economic oppression and exploitation of the poor. This is still as sinful as in the days of King Solomon. The prophet Amos discovered the terrible oppression of the poor behind the facade of affluence and great economic growth. He saw that the extravagant lifestyle of the rich was based on exploita­tion of the poor (Amos 6:1-7). The archaeological excavations of that era, which have shown the disparate housing, smacks very much of South Africa: beautiful big houses clearly separated from the densely built smaller houses of the poor.20 Unless we confess and repent from these wicked sinful ways corporately, the present violence and criminal­ity might turn out to be child’s play compared to what we could expect. The apocalyptic future which the South African Prime Minister foresaw in the sixties has become a scary possibility: too ghastly to contem­plate.21 We must realize that the racist pass laws of the past extremely disrupted family life in the Black communities. The Group Areas Act was the main culprit in uprooting stable ‘Coloured’ communities. This caused the slide towards anarchy and lawlessness, towards massive violence and crime. Biblical­ly sound confession could and should become the start of the checking of violence. Andrew Murray pointed out: ‘Contrition comes before restoration and renewal’ (Murray, 1901, [1979]:154). If the church repents by corporately confessing the sins of the fathers we may be sure that God is ready to forgive and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9) - I believe God also wants to forgive collectively. That belongs to the nature of God if we confess our sins. It is definitely no over-statement that the big changes in recent years in many parts of the world are a direct result of prayer. Open Doors’ called for seven years of prayer for the former Soviet Union from 1984.22 That was prepared by many years of prayerful Bible smuggling to the Communist world. Thus it was not so surprising that we saw the disintegration of the vast USSR in 1991! But we should not stop utilizing new opportunities for the Gospel. How an imminent bloodbath was averted in South Africa should never be forgotten. This was achieved through countrywide prayer that was supported by Christians from other countries in an unprecedented way - a concerted effort. Joint prayer would be crucial for tapping the resources effec­tively towards recruiting a new stream of missionaries from South African soil. Confession for the Expansion of Islam Confession for the reasons behind the establishment and expansion of Islam globally and nationally has hardly been addressed as yet. The establishment and spread of Islam can really be termed the ‘unpaid debt of the church.’23 At the origins of the religion Muhammad was misled, not only in believing that he was a special prophet to the Arabs, but also via heretical techings.24 A promising start was made with the recon­cili­ation walk in the Middle East in commemoration of the start of the first crusade 900 years ago in 1996, but it was not followed up. In fact, an attempt to this end from within the ranks of CCM (Christian Concern for Muslims) was resisted. The rejection of slaves by the church in the colonial days gave rise to the establishment of Islam. On the other hand, Dr John Philip, a missionary of the London Missionary Society, who had been maligned because of his book Researches in South Africa, influenced the evangelical parliamentarian William Wilberforce decisively on his return to Britain. It is general knowledge that Wilberforce was the driving power behind the formal abolition of slavery. Dr Philip did little to endear himself to the colonists at the Cape. However, he ‘was single-minded and relentless, but his concern was not personal pride but the future of missions and that of the indigenous people of South Africa.’25 Erection of Signs The expression ‘the erection of signs of the coming kingdom of peace’, which appears to have been coined by the Moravian Bishop Comenius a few centuries ago, has received a new actuality. Christians all over the world are challenged to seek God’s face for inven­tive means to usher in the return of our King. We in South Africa could even set the pace through our special blend of peoples. World evangelization remains the sign par excellence to be erected, something which Jesus himself used as a sign of the end times (Matthew 24:14). Chris­tians are challenged to emulate Jesus in their prayer life, so that the crime and violence may be stopped; that the situation might be turned around to one where benevolence and mutual sharing become the order of the day. I surmise that the arch-enemy is trying to use the ongoing violence to cripple the economy, so that missionaries cannot be sent out on a major scale. A major turn-around happened in South Africa through the St James Church (Kenilworth, Cape Town) massacre of 25 July 1993, after which many people came into the kingdom of Jesus. The stark reality and sheer brutality of civil war were indeed too ghastly to contemplate! Nevertheless, our fear that township violence could spill over into more affluent residential areas may never be the main motivation for prayer. The Lord’s exhortation to pray to the Lord of the harvest... is a much better spur. I dare say that a biblical widespread revival, which will thrust out new workers into the worldwide harvest, is apt to take care of the ongoing (gangster) violence and crime. The precedent in this regard is the revival in England when anarchic conditions were turned around, predominantly because of the spiritual renewal of the society as the result of the preaching of George Whitefield and John Wesley. Count Zinzendorf regarded it the privilege of the Pilgrim Church – after they had been exiled from Saxony to be salt and to anoint, to bless other churches. Let us pray that new vigour might erupt from the churches so that the remaining closed countries may be unlocked for the penetration of the Gospel, so that ‘Bible tourism’ might become superfluous and missionaries can be sent to these countries in stead. The commitment to prayer of the Koreans is definitely an example to Christians all over the world. Some congregations in the Western Cape are already reaping fruit as here and there individual Muslims have come to accept Jesus as Lord. United prayer could result in many ex-Muslims to be sent from Southern Africa to Islamic countries of West and North Africa, some of them originating from there. In turn, this may spiral off some Arab-speaking new believers going as missionaries to the Middle East. In fact, the mere factual situ­ation that some Christians from mission-minded congregations have been seriously praying for the Muslims might still result in some of them being called to serve the Lord in an Islamic country. A new situation has arisen in recent months with scores of Arabic-speaking Muslims from Sudan and Chad arriving in Cape Town. It would be completely in character for God to see some of these sojourners impacted and returning to North Africa and the Middle East. Is not that what happened at Pentecost? The church universal would do well to take heed of Patrick Johnstone’s advice: ‘Courses on prayer to be incorpor­ated into required curricula of Christian seminaries, colleges and schools’ (Johnstone, 1993:620). Rarely-found prayer courses are generally still only an elective. On the other hand, an over-emphasis on academic degrees and accreditation has been detrimental, retarding spiritual prowess. A change here could deeply affect the Church and the progress of world evangelization for the better. God has given Capetonian Christians a special chance to impact the most populous country of the world. Not only has there been a massive influx of Chinese to South Africa (especially to Cape Town), but some of them have also been attending churches to get in contact with local people and to improve their English. Food for thought: When I have difficulty with my prayer life - it’s no shame to concede it - what do I do about it? How concrete and structured have I been praying? What part has confession played in my prayers? And some ideas How about attempting to get a prayer partner or more than one? Why not start organising regular prayer meetings with Christians from other churches for your town/city, or for a mis­sionary/missionaries from your residential area or region? Make a list of prayer items and check also whether they have (already) been answered. Do not neglect thanksgiving and praise for answered prayers! 3. Jesus as the Word of God: the Logos and the Rhema Generally Christians speak of the Bible as the Word of God. It should thus hardly be surprising that the Gospel of John calls Jesus the Logos, ‘the Word of God’. When one considers that God was communicating already from the creation by speaking, that He spoke to Moses from the burning bush and the Israelites via Moses on Mount Horeb/ Mount Sinai, it is only natural that His Son is called the Word of God. The writer of the fourth Gospel evidently saw it in that light, starting off with the same verse as Genesis 1: ‘In the beginning...’ The best summary of the speaking God through his Son in creation is probably Hebrews 1:1+2 ‘In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son... It is furthermore good to keep in mind that the word is the basis of communication. He created Eve as a helper, as one with whom Adam could communicate, one who could talk back. Similarly, He wants to communicate with us. Count Zinzendorf exemplified the Umgang mit dem Heiland, the sweet communion with the Lord. To be a follower of Jesus means to be ‘in touch’ with him on a daily basis, as Henry Blackaby made it so practical in recent decades, calling it experiencing God. The ‘Word of God’ There is a universal element about the concept of Jesus as the ‘Word of God’, which is hidden from the superficial Western mind. That there is more to it than meets the eye comes to the fore when we consider that Muslims are especially challenged by this concept. In the testimony of Hamran Ambrie,26 an Indonesian Muslim background believer, this term caused a major turning point in his search for truth. The logical extension of the speaking God at Creation, is the breathing God. The breath proceeds from the same mouth. In the ancient cultures breath and spirit become almost synonymous. In some Semitic languages the same word is used for breath and spirit. This obviously goes against the grain of the rationalist Western mind-set. No wonder that so many theologians jumped on the bandwagon attempting to ‘demythologize’ the miracles in the Bible. Words of Life and Death The authority with which Jesus spoke, is evidence that He was indeed the personification of the Word of God. The big catch of fish in Luke 5 was only made possible after Peter and his fisherman colleagues were prepared to lay aside their rational thinking and experience. When Peter was prepared to obey on the Word of the Master, the foundation for networking was laid. The big catch could have been lost - perhaps even with net and all - if they had not joined forces! After Jesus had quietened the storm, the disciples called out in utter amazement: "What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves they obey him!" (Matthew 8:27) In a portion from the sermon of the Mount (Matthew 5:21-30) a few examples are given how Jesus stamped his authority by correcting the distortion of the Torah through tradition. In Mark 7:13 the Master actually chided the Pharisees and some of the scribes for ‘invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down’. Then there was obviously his sovereign "AMEN, AMEN" which has usually been translated with "verily, verily" in the older translations, followed by ‘... I say unto you’). That Jesus occasionally said ‘but I say…’ might have angered many to whom it may have appeared that he minimized the value of Moses’ Torah - for instance when he invited his audience to love their enemies. (In this particular case there had actually been distortion of the Law because Moses never passed on a commandment to hate the enemies. The ‘eye to eye, tooth for tooth’ (5:41) version came from the Laws of Hammurabi, which in due course were ascribed to Moses via the oral tradition. Jesus made it clear that he did not come to nullify the Law but to fulfil it. There was clearly no element of uncertainty or doubt in Jesus’ pronouncements. On a par – actually even greater - is the Johannine "I am’s" ("I am the door; ...the good Shepherd; ...the light of the world; ... the resurrection and the life; ... the way, the truth and the life". And then there is the special verse which sounds so strange in our ears: "You are from below, I am from above. Before Abraham was, I am.") Furthermore, we can read expressions like: ‘I and the Father are one’ (John 10:30). On the island of Patmos Jesus reveals himself as "I am the First and the Last. I am the living one..." (Revelations 1:17). The allusion to Yahweh (I am, Exodus 3:14) is clear: Jesus is God. Islamic scholars have been highlighting the speaking of Allâh to create life, but that He merely said ‘Be’ for Adam to be there (Surah 3:59). This special divine quality comes to the fore in the life of Jesus when he raised Lazarus (John 11: , the daughter of Jairus (e.g. Mark 5:21-43) and the son of the widow of Nain (Luke 7:12). By contrast, the big accuser spoke words of confusion and death. In the Garden of Eden the serpent - true to his demonic nature - questioned what God had instructed (Genesis 3:3). In Jesus’ desert temptations the ‘New Testament’ equivalent of the serpent twice challenged our Lord to prove this fact. In the same context he invited Jesus to commit suicide by jumping from a dizzy height. It is no surprise that so many satanists commit suicide. On the same page, the native language of the arch enemy is the lie (John 8:44), even able to bring a different gospel (Galatians 1:8), a subtly distorted one. The enemy accordingly uses man’s words destructively, which can be murderous in character assassination. The prophet Jeremiah (9:7) referred to the use of words by evil people: Their tongue is a deadly arrow; it speaks deceit. The same tongue that can bless and uplift, is also ‘a fire, the very world of iniquity’ (James 3:6). In the context this apostle appropriately points to the source of destructive words, the pit of hell. The Deity of Jesus The deity of Jesus is revealed through what God says of Him and what He says about Himself. The divine voice from heaven twice confirmed Jesus as the beloved Son of God. God intervened supernaturally at our Lord’s baptism, saying ‘This is My Son, whom I love...’ (Matthew 3:17). It is not surprising that the tempter immediately sets in with ‘If you are the Son of God...’ (Matthew 4:3). Jesus knew full well that the Jews would have great difficulty with this fact. He referred to himself as the Son of man (for example Matthew 8:20; 9:6; Mark 8:31), but every Jew who knew the prophecies would have been aware that the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days of the prophet Daniel was none less than the promised Messiah. To the Samaritan woman the Lord conceded that he is the Messiah. When Jesus said to the Samaritan woman ‘The hour is coming and now is’ (John 4:23), she probably got the message. This was Messianic! This was not only prophetic language any more. Since the Samaritans shared in the hope of Israel, the woman knew that Jesus was speaking of the Messiah. The reply of Jesus ‘I am He’ may sound like merely an ordinary affirmative to Westerners, but it must have been the confirmation in her heart that this was indeed the great ‘I am’, an allusion to Yahweh. To the oriental this sounded very much like how Martin Buber, a Jewish Christian, translated the ineffable name of the Almighty into German: ‘Ich bin der ich sein werde’ (I am who I shall be). Jesus was implying that he is the representative of the Almighty - (part) fulfilment of the prophecy: They shall know... that I am he that does speak; behold, it is I (Isaiah 52:6). The latter prophetic sentence occurs in the context of the messenger whose wonderful tiding resounds on the mountains, the one who brings good news and announces peace. The Samaritans of Sychar subsequently deduced that He is ‘the Saviour of the world’ (John 4:42). Elsewhere the Lord stated clearly that He is greater than Jonah and Solomon (for example Matthew 12:41f), more than merely a prophet. Everyone who has difficulties with His status as the Son of God is basically in the same category as those people who ‘did not understand what he was saying to them’, when the twelve year-old Jesus asked them in the temple: ‘Didn’t you know I had to be in ‘my Father’s house’ (Luke 2:49, 50). When Jesus refused to deny that He is the Son of God, it eventually led to His crucifixion (John 19:7). It is significant that his being the Son of God is so clearly depicted at the crucifixion. He addressed the Almighty as Father when he beseeched Him for forgiveness on behalf of the perpetrators and Jesus committed His spirit to the Father (Luke 23:34, 46). The Roman officer and other soldiers exclaimed after the evident supernatural intervention: ‘Truly, this was the Son of God’ (Matthew 27:54, Mark 15:39). Whilst Psalm 22 is generally known as the Psalm of the Cross, it contains a wonderful and significant progression whereby the heart-wrenching cry of pain and suffering culminates in a song of victory. The Psalm of the Cross is also a Psalm of the Kingdom! ‘All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord and all the families of the nations will bow down before him’ (Psalm 22:27). And this is guaranteed: ‘. .. for he has done it’ (verse 31). In the ‘New Testament’ this is echoed with the words of the Master; ‘It is finished’ (John 19:30). The Gospel according to John (e.g. the Logos (Word as Creator – the Word was God, (John 1:1ff) and The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. ( John 1:14) and Paul, the apostle, both confirmed the deity of Christ. In the letter to the Colossians (2:9) we read: For in Christ the fullness of the city lives in bodily form. The Scriptures as the Word of God It is quite clear that ‘the law and the prophets’ were regarded as God’s revealed Word at a time when only very few people could read. In His Providence God deemed it fit not only to save Moses from the brutal killing of small babies, but he also ‘organized’ things in such a way that Moses received the best secular education of that age at the court of the Pharaoh. Here he was taught the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts 7:22). Miriam was on hand to take him as a baby to the gifted Jochebed, his relatively unknown real mother. With her husband Amram, she was also responsible for raising Aaron and their sister Miriam. These parents were probably also the supplier of spiritual nourishment and teaching in the formative stage of their lives. Moses exhorted the Israelites more than once to pass the great deeds of God on from generation to generation by word of mouth (Exodus 10:2; Deuteronomy 4:9; 31:13). Yes, they were enjoined to imprint on their children the Word of God. David not only frequently referred to the Law as God’s Word, but he also saw the necessity of having the Word in his heart. He really took the biblical injunctions seriously. Thus he sees the righteous man as someone who ‘meditates on God’s word by day and by night’ (Psalm 1:2). Jesus was clearly raised in this tradition. Already as a 12-year old He was so well versed in the Scriptures that the teachers in the temple were amazed at His questions and His replies (Luke 2:46,47). The Gospel according to Matthew records how Jesus refuted the enemy with the Word. Satan quoted Scripture out of context, but Jesus was equipped to correct him accordingly. The majority of the disciples were raw fishermen, who were probably more or less illiterate. One gains the impression from the Gospel reports that initially they had hardly been reading the Scriptures. Of course, they were orally taught by the Master himself. Their relationship to the Scriptures changed after the ascension of Jesus. Matthew for one, as a tax collector obviously had to be literate. He evidently studied the Scriptures diligently as he endeavoured to convince his Jewish compatriots that Jesus was the promised Messiah. But also the fisherman Peter seems to have used the period of active waiting on the Comforter profitably to dive deeply into the Scriptures. The two references he quoted in Acts 1:20 must be regarded as only vague references, which could only have been discovered by prayerful study of the Word and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. The Purpose of the Scriptures The prophets knew that God’s Word was the vehicle to bring His rebellious and backslidden people back to Him. Repeatedly the promise is connected to obedience to the Word and its teachings on the one hand and punishment for disobedience on the other. Down the ages the preached Word was divinely used to call back-sliding Christians back to God and His ways. At this point the purpose of the Scriptures should be emphasized: guidance and correction. David exclaimed: "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path" (Psalm 119:105) and Paul advised Timothy: "Every Scripture is ... useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). Paul emphasized that the Word should dwell richly in us (Colossians 3:16). Of course, this does not mean that we have to imitate Ezekiel who literally seems to have eaten the scrolls (3:3). It does mean however that we may be radical. In fact, Paul encouraged us in a similar way that Christ should dwell in us and from there we must be rooted27 and established in love (Ephesians 3:17). The Word in us has the quality of purification. Therefore John can say that whosoever remains in Christ, sins not (1 John 3:6). There is of course always the occasion of lapses, when one leaves the close communication with Christ. This is the time when the enemy loves to strike, when we are overcome by sin (Galatians 6:1). In this regard there is a definite difference between willful sinning and accidental sinning. However, confession and the conscious refraining of sinful behaviour (Proverbs 28:13) opens a clean slate to the road of victori­ous living in the footsteps of the resurrected Son of God (1 John 1:9 ‘if we confess our sin … ‘ He … will purify us from all unrighteousness’ ). An important snippet of advice from Paul, which he passed on through his letters, is not to indulge in fruitless theological discussion which too often merely divides the body (for example 2 Timothy 2:14ff; 2 Timothy 6:3-6). In the first letter to the Corinthians he wrote about the wisdom of the world, which they should definitely not strive after. In the same context (1 Corinthians 1:18-21) Paul quotes Isaiah 29:14 to note how futile philosophy is and that God will ultimately baffle and destroy the useless learning and wisdom of the Greeks. The early church fathers latched onto this advice. Tertullian, a jurist who joined the Christians of North Africa in 207 AD, saw philosophy as a major culprit: ‘heresies are themselves prompted by philosophy ... After Christ Jesus we desire no subtle theories, no acute enquiries after the Gospel...’28 Count Zinzendorf likewise detested philosophy. If the Church through the ages had heeded this advice, a lot of tragedy could have been avoided. Here I refer not only to the many splits which account for the multitude of denominations, but especially also to the doctrinal and petty bickering of Church leaders have been confusing Christians down the centuries. The possibly well-intended notion – to emphasize the deity of Jesus – at the Council at Ephesus in 431 CE to describe the mother of Jesus as theotokos, the God-bearer, merely led to her later being venerated and regarded as the 'Mother of God.' This confusion is reflected in the Qur’an and was clearly used by the arch enemy to mislead Muhammad, the gifted leader of the Arabian Peninsula and founder of Islam. Through him millions have been led astray up to this day, millions who now worship him as their prophet.29 The call ‘back to basics’ which resounded throughout South Africa during the early 1990s is still valid. Perhaps we should say ‘Back to the unadulterated Word of God’. The Word as Dynamite The Church of the Middle Ages stayed in the darkness because the Word was not only obscured, but also hidden from the masses on purpose. Only priests were allowed to read the Bible. By way of contrast, in recent years we have seen how the mere translation of (parts of) the Word into the spoken language of previously unreached people groups - be it on paper or through tape cassettes and CDs - have changed the lives of thousands dramatically. It belongs to well-known Church History that it was the rediscovery of the Word through people like Wycliffe and Luther which caused a major wave of spiritual renewal in Europe. The special contribution of Luther to the Reformation was that he made the Word accessible to the rank and file German Christian. The role of the invention of printing is of course paramount in the disseminating of the Word. In this regard it is good to be reminded that exactly this was the motivation of Johan Gutenberg, when he saw that the Christian truths were kept imprisoned in a few manu­s­cripts. He wanted to give wings to the truth. Only in the 1960s the second Vatican Council permitted ordinary church members to read the Bible for themselves. In the 1980s we saw a mighty turning to Christ in the Roman Catholic Church in South America when the rank and file church members were encouraged to read the Bible. A similar movement occurred in the Middle East in recent years as every Muslim who has access to Internet can now read the Bible in their own language (preceded by ten years of prayer for the Muslim world). The smuggling of Scriptures to Communist countries during the cold war was a major source of power, dynamite that eventually caused the demise of the Communist ideology. The gift of one million Bibles to the Orthodox Church at the occasion of their one thousandth year celebration – next to the seven years of prayer for the Soviet Union from 1984 - caused the dismantling of the ‘iron curtain’. The translation of Scripture into indigenous languages not only opened many primitive tribes to modern civilization, but it also gave them dignity. A noteworthy occurrence in recent Church History was achieved by an anonymous ex-Muslim, who achieved a breakthrough in a North African country after he had pushed aside all his intellectual knowledge from theological seminary and concentrated on communicating the Word to Islamic countrymen. Using the Muslim custom of learning the Qur’an by heart, he used a verse from Scripture repeatedly every time he visited his Muslim compatriots. The Word is still sharper than a double-edged sword, which can penetrate the strongest resistance; it also judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart (Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17). Pastor Youssef Ourahmane, a former Muslim, narrated how over the last 30 years there has been a revival in that country. Before 1980 the number of born-again followers in Algeria could be counted. There are now over 100, 000 believers in the country. He has personally seen Imams, Islamic scholars and terrorists come to Christ. In 2006 the Algerian government brought in a law that stated no evangelism of any kind would be allowed and ordered several churches to close down. The churches refused to obey the government and said “You had better build more prisons because we are not going to do what you are ordering.” Since 2006, because of the persecution of Christians, the church has grown faster than before and the Algerian government has come to understand that they will never be able to stamp out the church. In a similar way, the conversion – and rejection by his family – of Abdul, a Muslim-background believer of South Asia – spiralled into hundreds of thousands becoming Isahi Muslims, followers of Jesus. (The abbreviated version can be found in The Camel, as narrated by Kevin Greeson (2006:23-30). On the other hand, we must be realistic enough to know that God’s Word will not always be welcomed with open arms. This is nothing new. In fact, the tearing up or burning of Bibles has a Hebrew Scriptural precedent. In Jeremiah 36 it is reported how the king’s secretary and other officials were alarmed by the prophecy of Jeremiah to the extent that they thought the king himself should also hear it. But in callous contempt he cut off the parts from the scroll which had been read and threw it into the fire. The message of the scroll almost sent Jeremiah to prison. Martin Luther, on the other hand, might have fared even better if he had taken the Pauline advice more seriously to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). His courageous bold stand is laudable, but we should not forget that it spawned the rift which caused great damage to the unity of Christianity. Luther was not even prepared to work together with the Swiss reformed believers.30 (Compare Luther’s attitude with the clear stand of people like Francis of Assisi and women in the Middle Ages. Even popes went to them for counsel.31) This should not be construed however as support for scripturally indefensible doctrines like papal infallibility ex cathedra (from the papal chair) or worship of Mary as the ‘mother of God’. The Challenge of Scripture Obedience is honoured by God, but compromise is seen as disobedience, as sin which incurs the wrath and punishment of the Almighty. It was basically the disobedience of Adam and Eve to His word which led to their fall and expulsion from the Garden of Eden. The disobedience of Saul was linked to impatience when he could not wait on Samuel.. This caused the divine rejection as King of Israel. Even sacrifice is rejected by God if it is mixed with sinful behaviour, if it is not accompanied by remorse and repentance (1 Samuel 13:12ff). Such forms of animal sacrifice and all ancestry worship are regarded as watering down the Word of God, whereas the appropriate reaction should be respect for God’s Word (Isaiah 66:2,3). Jesus actually told the Pharisees that they nullify the power of the Word through their traditions (Mark 7:13). On the contrary, obedience to God's Word is sometimes required where it does not make sense. Faith, trust in God and obedience are closely linked to each other. When Abraham chose to oppose the idolatry in their home and even to leave his home region, his father Terah would have been very unhappy. Because he believed – we could say against all odds in the unseen God – it was divinely honoured, reckoned unto righteousness (Genesis 15:6). At a later major crossroad of his life, Abraham left early in the morning to sacrifice his unique, the one and only son of the divine promise (Genesis 22:3). Was this pre-meditated to prevent being influenced again by his wife or was it radical obedience after the early compromises? He might even have been confused somewhat by the divine command, which would have brought him back to the level of his pagan compatriots who offered children to the idol Molog in the fire. It is reported how Zinzendorf was getting challenged in his faith in the Holy Scriptures from a very early age. He became deeply involved with questions around the authority of God's Word from the age of seven (Beyreuther, 1962:84). He discovered that whoso­ever is prepared to face uncomfortable questions and then take a step of faith, can only grow through it spiritually. Zinzendorf had the courage to speak bluntly of tran­scription errors, of geographical and chrono­logical mis­takes in Scripture. He saw it as no major tragedy that the apostles erred in their immi­nent expectation of the second coming of the Lord. He even proceeded to say: ‘Misunderstood prophecies can and should not be defended, but they should rather be pre-empted and acknowledged’ (Cited in Beyreuther, 1962:89). Some evangelicals have difficulty with the fact that Count Zinzendorf apparently had no problem with critical studies of the Bible. The Count believed that God can fend for Himself if any honest seeker has doubts and questions about the Word. But where­as Zinzendorf never encouraged his congregation to evade the uncom­fort­able ques­tions of biblical and historical criti­cism, he also showed them how to handle these issues. He discerned the sovereign way in which the Scriptures do not try to hide imperfec­tions. This was to him a proof of their histori­cal credibility. On the other hand, the believers had to ask the Holy Spirit to illuminate difficult issues. Zinzendorf neverthe­less reckoned that there would be ‘verderbte’ (spoilt) texts which could not be explained. Those dark passages one should leave as they are rather than explain them incorrect­ly. He steered the church members carefully through seri­ous Bible Study, without getting academic. Dealing with Higher Criticism Evangelicals often make a special point of the inerrancy of the Word. It is however important to remember that the various biblical authors were humans who were not infallible. It is unwise to try and defend God’s Word to the hilt in the face of opposition. Playing around with the words inerrancy and infallibility could then develop into unfruitful semantics. In 1896 Andrew Murray responded to an article in the British Weekly about the dearth of conversions (Du Plessis, 1917:471). His diagnosis of the evil went beyond superficial symptoms; he suggested that the main cause was not the influence of the Higher Criticism, nor the lack of evangelical sermons, but the lack of the Holy Spirit. In this way he was reaching for ultimate causes, teaching us a lesson or two in dealing with the so-called Higher Criticism. There are inconsistencies in the Bible which cannot be explained away easily. If any seeker is really keen to get to the truth, we may trust that God is fully capable to meet such a seeker on his own terms. George Verwer, the founder of Operation Mobilization, put succinctly what has been the experience of believers down the ages: ‘I do believe that the Bible is God’s inerrant word, but I cannot say that I’ve arrived at that belief without a struggle, or without many, many questions and doubts over passages in both the Old and New Testaments’ (Verwer, 1993:57). One of the best examples of the power of the Word happened in the ministry of Dr Billy Graham. He was seriously challenged in 1949 as a young evangelist with Youth for Christ to delve deeper into academic biblical studies. He had started to doubt the authority of Scripture. On the other hand, he noted how the quoting of Scripture in sermons and at other occasions so often evidently had an effect beyond human arguments. The turmoil in his spirit led to deep soul searching. ‘In a spirit of absolute surrender before God, he cried out, “Oh God, I cannot prove certain things. I cannot answer some of the questions... but I accept this Book by faith as the Word of God.”32 This was the divine intervention in his life, leading to the famous Los Angeles Campaign a few days later, an event that effectively stopped the rot toward theological liberalism not only in the USA, but in different countries of the Western world. Dr Graham would be God’s special instrument again in the run-up to major conferences in the cities of Berlin (1966), Lausanne (1974) and Amsterdam (1983 and 1986), events that can be regarded to be the effective catalyst for the slowing down of the worldwide march of atheist Socialism and Marxism, and ultimately for the smashing of the ‘iron curtain’ in 1989. The Abuse of Scripture A typical example of modern-day abuse of Scripture could be doctrinal differences around the meaning of the Greek words logos and rhema. What purpose does it serve to go to some length to explain for example that logos is supposed to refer to the written word and rhema to the spoken word? A closer study would show that they are used interchangeably in Scripture.33 But again, what would be the purpose of such a study? Through academic ‘stone throwing’ about nothing, much energy is lost that could rather be used to spread the Gospel. It should suffice to know that Jesus is God’s Word, which must be passed on as the good news, a power of God unto salvation for those who believe in Him­ (Romans 1:16). What a sad indictment that many have not heard the preached Word because Christians were entangled in theological and doctrinal wrangling (Compare Romans 10:15 ‘How can they hear without someone preaching to them?’) In fact, the sharp edge of the Word is blunted in this way. It is sad that the length and mode of the exposition of Scripture has been a reason for controversy. Sometimes we continue debating when the examples and teaching in the Word are clear enough. Unfortunately it seems as if the tradition that developed through the ages that one person comes up with a more or less prepared lengthy monologue became the accepted practice within a set liturgy. From the example of Jesus we can easily derive that he did not live up to that sort of expectation in this regard. (After his reputation had gone ahead of him, he must have disappointed his Nazareth audience thoroughly when he not only abrogated the prescribed reading from Isaiah, but he merely said that the prophecy had been fulfilled that day, Luke 4:16ff.) In this case, when the Lord discerned the surprised reaction, he more or less entered into dialogue with the audience. In many other cases, for example when he used parables, we should rather speak of dialogue than monologue. Also we can deduce from Paul’s teaching that some prior preparation by fellowship members is completely in place, but then by everybody, and not by only one preach­er. Whenever believers come together, everyone should be ready to contribute, be it with a revelation, an instruction, a hymn, a psalm or song (1 Corinthians 14:26; Ephesians 5:19). The monologue-type sermon received a monopoly as a way of communication in church services. Mutual fellowship suffered when it became habitual to leave immediately after the church service. We compare this to how constant dialogue was present even at a mass meeting with thousands present, as we can read in John 6. Jesus didn’t make a fuss either when hundreds of those who were offended, walked away. In fact, he gave the faithful twelve the option to follow the example of the masses (6:67). Yet, in most churches monologues, without any active participation of congregants, is not only standard practice, but it seems also completely unchallenged. In this regard Zinzendorf was quite radical. He believed that the Holy Spirit can empower anybody to interpret the Word for himself according to his own capacity and circumstances. Not only the professional teacher had the right to expound Scripture, because the paraclete ‘will teach you everything’ (John 14:16). In the beginnings of Herrnhut Pastor Johann Rothe practised a revolutionary mode of worship which turned out to be a great attraction. The preaching was followed by a general conversation between the pastor and his hearers (Langton, 1956:68). Semantics around Dialogue? A scripture that has been abused to justify long monogue-type sermons is the context of Acts 20:7ff. We read there that Paul was speaking until midnight because he would leave the next day. But to translate Acts 20:9 as the Living Bible did - ‘Paul was speaking on and on’ – is rather deceptive. The verb in Greek – dialegomai – just refers to speaking, perhaps even dialogue-ing with the others, due to the special circumstance of his eminent departure. Another debate has been raging in evangelical circles around dialogue. Especially the talking and discussions with people from other religions have been maligned. This attitude definitely has justification because so many councils, conferences and synods are full of hours of discussion without anything substantial coming out of them. Yet, we should keep in mind that there is a definite case to made out for missionary dialogue. The biblical paradigm could be Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman (John 4) or Paul’s dialogue with the debating club on the Aeropagus. A condition for missionary dialogue seems to be an openness to listen to the other point of view without a rigid stance, but it does not imply an absence of a principled stand. Flexibility to listen to the other point of view does not expect quick fixes but this does not mean an absence of a goal. The ‘New Testament’ follower of Jesus does not believe that one can come to the Father in any way, but he/she does not expect people from other faiths to start following the Lord through our convincing arguments. We do have the privilege though to expect the Holy Spirit to open up biblical truths to anyone, but in such dialogue our own attitude to adherents is apt to change as well. A positive example of missionary dialogue occurred when ‘Mr Pentecost’, Dr David du Plessis engaged in intensive talks with representatives of the Vatican in the early 1960s. This resulted among other things in the decision of the second Vatican Council permitting ordinary Roman Catholic Church members to read the Bible for themselves. Another example occurred when Brother Andrew was a member of the official Dutch delegation at a conference in the 1980s on human rights. At this event in the conference centre De Burcht in the Dutch village of Heemstede, he offered to donate one million Bibles to the Orthodox Church on behalf of Open Doors for their coming millennial celebration. Apart from the seven years of prayer for the Soviet Union from 1984, the dismantling of the ‘iron curtain’ can be attributed to the acceptance of the gift. Dialogue to be refused? The Bible contains an example where dialogue – just for the sake of it - has to be refused. If it is clear that the opposing conversational partners just want to talk, we would do well to emulate Nehemiah when he refused to talk to the likes of Tobia and Sanballat. It sounds so nice when someone invites: ‘Come let us meet together in one of the villages on the plain of Ono’ (Nehemiah 5:2). Translated into modern idiom this could sound like the following. ‘Come let us have inter-faith dialogue at a neutral venue!’ The good leader will discern whether the opponents are genuine in this dialogue or whether the invitation for dialogue is not just a ploy to hold up God’s work. Nehemiah replied: ‘I cannot come down.’ He saw through the enemies’ strategy, that they wanted to take away the leader so that all the followers would stop working. They wanted to talk and talk until no time was left for working. All too often it is forgotten that the real enemy of God’s work is not outside the realms of religion. Sanballat was an Ammonite and Tobia was an Arab - so to speak inter-faith candidates. A valid application for our time is to look for the enemy in the own camp. How many pastors and mission leaders’ time is swallowed up with endless meetings and discussions which are in essence demonic. How often people phone the pastor just to complain over matters which do not even warrant a proper hearing. How valuable it is that we have the Holy Spirit at our disposal to guide us, enabling us to distinguish between genuine seekers after truth and those who merely love to hear their own voice or those who want to trip one up like the Scribes and Pharisees who came to Jesus with all sorts of questions. False Alternatives Contextualization and confrontation as opposites in outreach would be a case where false alternatives have been projected. If all issues were as straightforward as the logos/rhema debate, it would not be such a problem. How­ever, there are instances where the heart of the Gospel is at stake. One such issue is the so-called contradiction of contextualization and confrontation. The ‘New Testament’ is quite clear that both have its rightful place; in fact, proper contextualisation inevitably leads to confrontation. The nature of the Gospel is that the message of the cross ‘offends’, it is foolishness to those who do not believe (1 Corinthians 1:18). Improper contextualisation occurs when the adaptation to the culture goes so far that no confrontation comes about. The message of the Cross is always ‘folly’ to those who get lost (1 Corinthians 1:18). On the other hand, it does not mean that the carrier of the good news must set off on confrontation course every time he/she shares the Gospel. Jesus taught that his followers should be ‘shrewd as serpents and as innocent as the doves’ (Matthew 10:16). Paul became a Jew to the Jews and a Greek to the Greeks. (1 Corinthians 9:20ff). Neverthe­less, this did not eliminate the necessity of confron­tation with the Romans, the Greeks or Jews. In fact, the mere fact of his contextualisation, going into the synagogues, sharing the Gospel from the Scriptures, more than once led to a threat to his life. Abusing contextualisation to avoid confronta­tion is unbiblical. Senseless dialogue which becomes an end in itself is biblically untenable. This does not take away the necessity of sharing the Word in a way that is appropriate to the culture. Ideally, sharing the Gospel respects the hearer in every way. It is sensitive to his/her special needs. Bad adaptation could even creep into Bible translations to accommodate our comfort zones and water down the sharp edges of the Word. The American ‘Inclusive Version’ translates away terms like God as Father and Jesus as Son. Also in other languages ‘offensive’ terms have been scrapped. The question is whether all this is not a case of getting what itching ears want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3). In chapter 5 we show how ideology has influenced the effort of an Afrikaans Bible translation in this country. In Holland the new Willibrord translation of 1995 stirred up emotions because the commentary to the text clearly reflects accommodation to modernist New Age thinking. Unprofitable bickering Being the good strategist he was, Jesus did not allow himself to be trapped in fruitless discussion over trivial matters, like to whom tax should be paid (Matthew 22:17f) or even religious ones, for instance where one should worship (John 4:20). Jesus encouraged the disciples to get rid of the dust on their feet if the message of the Kingdom is rejected (Matthew 10:14). Intellectualism not only often leads to unprofitable bickering (2 Timothy 6:20; 2 Timothy 6:3,4) but it also sup­plies an opening for the demonic, just like the arts and the sensual (see Genesis 3:6: The fruit of the forbidden tree were luscious, they were a feast for the eyes and able to impart wisdom). Many a theo­logical student lost biblical truth when the quest after worldly academic learning got a grip on his mind. Paul echoed this wisdom in 1 Corin­thians 1: 27-29: ‘God has delib­erately chosen to use ideas the world considers foolish and of little worth in order to shame those people considered by the world as wise and great... In fact, we may even be satisfied with it in a certain sense: ‘We are glad that...in all our dealings we have (depended) ...not on our own skills (2 Corin­thians 1:12). Serious Bible Study An example of a much better use of Scripture than the false alternatives, which are sometimes derived from it is seen in the life of Count Zinzendorf and the Moravians after 1727. From a very early age the Count was searching the Scriptures, later becoming the spearhead and driving force of the Order of the Mus­tard Seed when he was at secondary school. Here it was already clear that a missionary spirit was evolving. The choice of the name of their order has of course the biblical parable as its origin when Jesus referred to the small seed which grew into a mighty plant (Matthew 13:31f). In the congregation at Herrnhut the Bible study was thorough and deep. Those brothers, who had a gift of Scriptural exposition, received full freedom. Spiritual leadership was charis­matic rather than based on formal academic training (Weinlick, 1956:87). The Herrnhut Moravians were not apologetic about it at all. When someone suggested that the group was shallow and superficial, Zinzendorf retorted in passing how eager the congregation listened to the splendid scriptural exposition of Leonhard Dober, who used the Hebrew text for this purpose although he was no academic, only a potter. Another potter with the same surname, Martin Dober, often found distinguished and learned people in his audience. How they appreciated his teaching is proved that they even went to sit next to the potter’s wheel to listen to his teaching. ‘... he might be visited by a count, a nobleman or a professor, who found him barefoot in his shop.’34 Martin Dober was also the most popular preacher at the morning devotions at 5 a.m. (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:34). Count Zinzendorf himself set the good example to use Scripture to unite rather than divide. Thus he would use Bible verses to reconcile parties who were at loggerheads. Yet, he was humble enough to acknowledge his own limitations, by avoiding diffi­cult or controversial portions from Scripture (Weinlick, 1956:91). The Herrnhut congregation of his day took the Pauline exhortation at face value that the Word should dwell richly in us. The Watch Word, which started in 1728, was primarily a verse from Scripture which was passed on and memorized. They cannot be faulted that later generations of Moravians used these verses out of context or that the Watch Word became a substitute for the reading of the Bible itself, abusing it as a sort of oracle. How seriously they treasured the Word, is evidenced by the fact that Spangenberg (1971:1033) quoted various Bible verses when the com­mun­ity deviated from traditional practice, such as ordaining missionaries by letter. It does seem however that the private study of the Bible - contrasted by communal reading and studying - was not encouraged in Herrnhut extensively. This eventually led to a practice where in later years only the daily texts - thus only verses out of their context - were read. Similarly we cannot generally applaud the practice of using a Bible verse at random, but I am only too aware that a scrip­tural word out of the blue - sometimes given by a stranger - has often been a special word of encouragement. It was clearly the leading of the Holy Spirit when Zinzendorf used a Bible verse at random for an impromptu sermon which saved the Herrnhut church from a rift in 1728 (Weinlick, 1956:81). Reaction to the Word James, the apostle, has been challenging the Church down the ages to be doers of the Word rather than being mere readers and listeners, comparing us with looking in a mirror without doing anything to improve stains or other inadequacies. Stubborn insensitive people are often associated in the Bible with being stiff-necked. The letter to the Hebrews (3:8) points to the cure: ‘Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.’ From Physiology we learn that hardening of the artery walls restrict the flow of blood to the heart. This hardening comes for example from a build-up of fatty material on the artery walls. Just as hardened tissue can cause a serious physical paralysis like a heart attack, a hardened heart can bring great harm to our spiritual lives. Rebellion, pride, independence, anger, resentment and bitterness can cause the heart to harden. The cure is repentance and/or a renewed commitment of our lives into God’s hands. He promised in this regard: I will give them an undivided heart and a new spirit in them: I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 11:19). It seems useful to remind ourselves that the Bible still has to be translated in quite a few languages, and that more modern variations of (parts) of Scripture like the Jesus Film (on video/DVD) have found their way into many a home and into many a heart. The biblical promise that God’s Word will not return void (Isaiah 55:11), should really excite us for great things to happen. But it should also inspire us to spread the Word by all means at our dis­posal. Food for thought: A quote from Dr Oswald Smith: ‘Is it right that we should hear the Gospel for the umpteenth time if others have not heard it for the first time?’ ‘What place has Scriptural teaching in (y)our youth work?.’ What role does Bible Study play in our church, in my life? (not merely the reading of a Bible calen­dar, or even devo­tionals written by others.) And some ideas How about bringing ‘old-fashioned’ Bible memorization into our church services, also on Sundays? Are church members being encouraged to share recent blessings, which they have had from their private Bible Study? 4. Jesus, the paramount Encourager: He uplifts and consoles If Jesus had only given the Great Commission as a last command which we had to obey and fulfill without any ado - as a compulsory testament, something which we had to comply with strictly out of respect for our Master, it would have become a legalistic burden. All three the synoptic Gospels mention how the promise of help and comfort is used in conjunction with the exhorta­tion to spread the Gospel to the end of the world. In fact, the Gospel of Matthew (28:20) ends with a reminder: ‘And surely I will be with you always, to the very end of the age.’ Mark (16:17+18) speaks of divine assistance and Luke (24:49 and Acts 1:4) actually recalled that Jesus had instructed them to wait on the promise of the Father. According to the fourth Gospel, this promised assistance from God is called the paraclete,35 the Holy Spirit (for example John 14:1; 14:16; 16:7). The Greek word has been translated respectively as comforter, advocate and substitute. Thus a part of the nature of the triune God is given in a nutshell, viz comfort and encouragement. God uplifts and undergirds Also in the Hebrew Scriptures Yahweh is the one who helps the downtrodden and the afflicted, the one who will never leave nor forsake those who put their trust in Him. He is the God who carries his children on eagle’s wings, especially when the going is tough, when they are tired and weary. Noah’s faith was vindicated as he listened primarily to God, who strengthened him supernaturally when the scoffers tried to discourage him (Genesis 6:22; 7:5). In fact, like the eagle that flies high above the storm, God lifts us up, undergirds us, especially when we are fiercely attacked by the enemy (see Exodus 19:4; Isaiah 40:31). When Hezekiah called on God in desperation on his death-bed, he was given another lease of life (2 Kings 20:3, 6). Elijah experienced encouragement when he was burnt-out (1 Kings 19:14). Yahweh is ready to uplift the despondent, ready to give a future to His people even when they are overwhelmed by hopelessness and bondage (Jeremiah 29:11-14a). God used Nehemiah to restore his people to a covenant relationship with him. It’s no Shame to be fearful Right from creation man was intended to communicate with God. Satan is the great imitator from the start, trying to cause doubt. With Eve the serpent uses a question in Genesis 3:1, distorting God’s words slightly in a sly way: ‘Did God really say that you must not eat from any tree in the garden?’ The deceiver also did it with Jesus in the desert (Matthew 4:3). Time and again he tries to make us fearful, to bog us down, to lame us; yes, he even tries to rob us from our faith by abusing Scripture. Abraham was called a friend of God primarily because he often communi­cated with God. But even he was attacked by fear. Twice he used a half truth, calling Sarah his sister when he perceived his life to be endangered. The repetition of the promise of off-spring was surely intended to reassure the aging Abraham. When his wife understandably doubted, God supernaturally supports His friend. God helps and encourages whosoever trusts and obeys him. In Genesis 32 it is mentioned without any camouflage that Jacob was afraid to go back to his people, after the intrigue, and deceiving his brother Esau. The fear of reprisal was real and awe­some. Supernaturally God intervened, encouraging him. But this only occurred after he really had a life and death fight with the Almighty, which ended with his plea: "I will not let you go unless you bless me." The Gospels take for granted that Jesus deals with a bunch of fearful followers. In fact, the very first evangel­ists after the birth of the Messiah, the shepherds on Bethleh­em’s fields, had to be comforted by the divine ‘Fear not..!’ Some diligent scholar discovered long before the age of the computer that the phrase ‘Fear not’ and equivalents with the same message occur 366 times in the Bible. Thus for every day of the year - even those of the leap year - is accounted. Bravery and all human effort without God’s help, is outlawed. In our Lord’s teaching to his disciples, Jesus said: "Without me you can do nothing...’ (John 15:5). This truth has been placed exactly between the promises of his Holy Spirit in Chapter 14 (vv. 16 and 26) and 16 (vv 7-9; 13+14) of the Gospel according to St. John. This emphasizes the unity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The invitation of Jesus and His promise to the weary has almost become classical: "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:28). Barnabas the Encourager Barnabas, one of the leaders of the pioneering church at Antioch, hailed from Cyprus. He had sold all he had and gave it to the newly formed church in Jerusalem. Barnabas was known for his ability to encourage others. It was he who went to look for Paul in Tarsus after the gifted former persecutor of the church could possibly have been side-tracked or even lured back into the fold of the synagogue (Acts 11:25). Quite often an element of risk is also involved when giving encouragement. Barnabas and Paul made the radical decision under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Later Paul took Silas and Barnabas had young John Mark as his partner in mission work. The example of Barnabas in encouraging others seemed to have rubbed off, having a snowball effect. This could have been just the encouragement Paul needed – he had a serious disagreement with John Mark on their first trip - to utilize the gifts of the young Timothy, entrusting him with leadership responsibilities. Mark became the first to write an account of the life of Christ. He ultimately also became a great encouragement to Paul when he was imprisoned. Through his letters - even from prison - Paul encouraged thousands of Christians, right into our present day and age. He spread the Word like no one else before him, teaching among many other things that encouragement is part and parcel of God’s nature. Unparalleled was his own comfort­ing of afflicted Christians, often accompanied by the injunction that they should do likewise. A typical sample is 1 Thessalonians 5:11ff: ‘So encourage each other to build each other up, just as you are already doing... comfort those who are frightened.’ God uses the Fearful Moses is the prime example of someone to be used by God. When he still thought that he could assist the Almighty, he was useless. But after he had been humbled, the divine presence could stat rebuilding his stature as an obedient servant leader. The dynamic Moses was in the right humble attitude at the burning bush, albeit that he objected that he was not qualified (Exodus 3:1), that he did not possess all answers (Exodus 3:13), that he was not convincing (Exodus 4:1), that he was not eloquent (Exodus 4:10), objecting finally that he was unwilling (Exodus 4:13). It is significant how God assisted Moses not only when he was fearful to go to the Pharaoh and tell him to ‘let My people go’, giving him his brother Aaron as a mouthpiece, but also how Moses was vindicated when Aaron and Miriam rebelled because their brother had married an African (Numbers 12:1-12). Moses - humbled through God’s dealings with him - displays a Godly spirit, not allowing even the slightest thought of revenge to enter his mind. The Almighty wanted to use him not as a mighty liberator but as a humble instrument. The Bible teaches that God specifically uses the fearful when they trust Him, even more so when they become completely dependent on Him. This is wonderfully depicted in the life of Gideon (Judges 6-8). He could easily be described as a coward with a serious inferiority complex. Coming from the poorest family of the half tribe of Manasse and youngest of all, he thought he had ample reason to shy away from an awesome task. By the way, the inferior family background can also haunt the gifted. The tall Saul was impressive by all stan­dards. But he had an inferiority complex. The first time we read about Saul, one senses: here is a man with a destiny. He was ‘an impressive young man without equal among the Israelites - a head taller than any of the others’ (1 Samuel 9:2). But like Gideon, he was shying away from the awful task of leading his people because of his family background. Yet, God called Gideon a mighty warrior when he was in hiding from the all-conquering Midianites. God can and wants to use the fearful, yes, even the coward. There is only one condition: they must be obedient and dependent on Him alone. Gideon experienced concretely what God promised through Moses: ‘The Lord your God goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory’ (Deuteronomy 20:4). A special Form of Encouragement Guilt and sin have been major instruments which the enemy has been using to bog people down. From the moment Adam and Eve were driven out of the Garden of Eden, the need of atonement for sin was highlighted. Animals had to be slaughtered, blood shed to get the skins which eventually covered the couple. The writer of the letter to the Hebrews noted succinctly that ‘without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin’ (Hebrews 9:22). The problem which Jews have with the atoning death of Jesus - when their tradition insists that it has to be animal blood and not human blood - be­comes academic when we consider that Isaiah 53 points to the coming Messiah as a lamb, which is to be slaughtered. This was atonement because ‘it was our grief he bore, our sorrows that weighed him down...he was wounded and bruised for our sins’ (Isaiah 53:4f). John, the Baptist, twice pointed to Jesus as ‘the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world’ (John 1:29, 36). Apart from the atoning aspect in the Hebrew Scriptures, it is quite clear that it belongs to God’s nature to forgive unrighteousness and sins (Exodus 34:7). The Psalmist lists among the good things not to be forgotten, the fact that God forgives us all our trans­gressions (Psalm 103:2). His readi­ness to for­give stems from His love. This is wonderfully illustrated through the prayer of King Hezekiah when he was terminally ill. The burden on Hezekiah’s soul was at least as bad as the illness. Thus the forgiveness of his sins really filled him with joy (Isa­iah 38:1-17). Jesus quite naturally displayed this characteris­tic of God. A lame man is not only healed, but also his sins were forgiven (Matthew 9:2). The pros­titute who cried unabatedly and repentantly as she bathed Jesus feet with her tears, heard from him: Your sins are forgiven (Luke 7:48). A beautiful example of how Jesus restores even those who have failed him can be discerned in the life of Peter. This did not only occur there at the lake Galilee where Jesus thrice charged him to feed the flock in subtle variations – which obviously broughtback memories of the threefold denial that fateful night. But also before that bold Peter dared to go to him – walking on the water – and sunk… The Master did not let him drown. He saved Peter and carried him back into the boat. The Saviour offers a lifeline to every drowning creature who is willing to take His outstretched hand. It is no wonder that the religious establishment got upset. In their eyes our Lord elevated him­self to the status of God with such a stance. In the view of Mus­lims this is dis­gust­ing ‘shirk’, to attach a partner to God. In stead of fighting with them, Chris­tians should rather try to understand the problem Muslims and Jews have with the deity of Christ. If we do that, we might find some of them opening up to the Gospel, because neither Judaism nor Islam has a satisfactory reply to the problem of sin. Yet, we must be careful not to sound trium­phalistic about it. It is only by grace that we are saved, because there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ ... (Romans 8:1, 2). He has freed us from the vicious circle of sin and death. The perfect Example of Forgiveness It should not surprise us one bit that the Master teacher gave us the perfect example of forgiveness. When Jesus was betrayed by a disciple, brutalised by soldiers, mocked and abused by the masses, falsely accused, tried in a dubious ‘court’ and unjustly executed, it appeared that everything that could go wrong, did so. Significantly, the first words of the Master on the Cross according to tradition were tantamount to granting forgiveness to the perpetrators. They did not know what they were doing, because they were basically obeying demonic orders. Yet, not known to those who observed the horrendous execution of an innocent saint, as well as the perpetrators of this massive injustice, a great battle was possibly being waged in the invisible spiritual realm. The arch enemy was honour bound to emulate divine forgiveness in the religious sphere. From ancient times the idea was spread that forgiveness can be atoned for in other ways than through faith in Jesus and His blood shed for us on Calvary. Stones, trees and shrines – including the Black stone of the Ka’ba in Mecca were used in similar fashion. Payment of indulgences and offerings of sheep remained a favourite down the centuries, but this was later substituted with human agents like a priest or the denomination as is the case with the New Apostolic Church. Jesus consoles and uplifts Jesus consoles and uplifts those who have been given up by others like the lame man in Bethesda, who had been ‘decaying’ away for 38 years. But he often uses those who have been rejected and despised by others as powerful instruments. When they believe in him (like the Samaritan woman of John 4) their lives can be changed radically. Many others can be and often are touched and challenged through the testimony and Christ-like lives of radical followers of Jesus. The authoritative ‘fear not!’ of Jesus can come to people in a similar way in the most diverse circumstances. The resur­rected Lord comforted Paul when his life was in acute danger (Acts 18:9) and He uplifted the burnt out John who had been exiled to the island of Patmos (Revelations 1:17f). But He can also carry us through in the most adverse condi­tions. Jesus is the mighty sustainer, who is always ready to see us through if we put our trust in Him. Divine encouragement was of course also extended and experienced in a similar way by Hebrew Scripture prophets. The prophet Elijah was the divine instrument to comfort the widow in Zarepath when her only son died (1 Kings 17:17-24). But soon thereafter the prophet needed encouragement himself. Elijah was deeply depressed at this point in time, perceiving that he was the only prophet left when the wicked Queen Jezebel was really after his blood (1 Kings 19:1-15). He was divinely encouraged to such an extent that he even went straight into the ‘den of the lion’. In the palace he challenged the royal pair, King Ahab and Queen Jezebel, with the theft of Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kings 21). Without special anointing from on high, Nathan would never have had the courage to challenge his King about the latter’s adultery and indirect murder of Uriah. When Jonah was waiting on the destruction of the wicked city of Nineveh, God used a worm to teach Jonah a lesson: that he was selfish and without compassion towards the Ninevites. His depression was actually completely uncalled for and unreasonable. If Queen Jezebel personified wickedness in women, it is significant how God used females to encourage dejected, oppressed and rejected people in history. The French will immediately think of Jean d”Arc of Orleans and the British have their Florence Nightingale. In recent decades the brave nuns, who put their lives on the line bringing the bold Corrie Aquino to power, by ushering in the end of the wicked regime of the dictator Marcos. Few South Africans are aware that it was two brave women, the Catholic nun Celeste Santos and Nomangezi ??, who were the special instruments who opposed the mighty apartheid regime in the Black squatter settlement of Crossroads in May 1981. That would ultimately lead to the ‘battle’ of Nyanga, where Black women inflicted the first major defeat to the apartheid regime in 1981 non-violently, ushering in the removal of the resentful discriminatory pass laws. Taking God’s Forgiveness seriously An aspect which also needs mentioning in this regard is that of taking God’s forgiveness seriously. It is completely unnecessary when Christians feel that they must suffer for sin in a wrong way. There is of course such a thing as consequences of a sinful life, for example immoral actions before one’s conversion, which may almost haunt you. But even for those sins Jesus has died. We must never attempt to atone for our own sins in a sort of self-imposed purgatory. The corollary however is very necessary, and can never be over-emphasized. We must forgive those who have hurt us and we should never get tired of it. This is what Jesus intended when he referred to the seventy times seven times of forgiving. He wants to help us to concentrate on kindness and love for the perpetrators rather than on our own hurt. In somewhat different wording Paul charged believers to 'heap fiery coals' of love on those who have offended you. We may ask God to enable us through the Holy Spirit to live at peace with everyone, as far as it depends on us (Romans 12:17f), and to practise the qualities of love as listed in 1 Corinthians 13. It is indeed impossible to ‘love God and hate the brother’ (1 John 4:20). An excellent modern-day exposition of forgiveness has been given by Wilson Goeda who had gone through the mill himself. After getting to know how the cycle of rejection penetrated into his mother’s womb before his birth, he had to learn to first forgive himself and then to forgive his mother. Thrice she had attempted unsuccessfully to commit suicide because his father had fled upon hearing that she was pregnant. In later life he had grown so much spiritually that he bought flowers from a very meagre income, leaving them at the house of someone who almost killed him on racial grounds. He wrote on the accompanying card: ‘...I just want to say to you that I pray for you. I love you’ (Goeda, 2006:90). Support and Encouragement for the Frail and Afflicted I reiterate on purpose that it belongs to the nature of God to support and encourage the frail and afflicted. In chapter 5 we shall examine how God is depicted as the champion of the materially poor. The book of Job teaches that affliction is definitely not a straight-jacket result of sin, but that God often allows difficult circumstances in the lives of his beloved. In fact, the supernatural encouragement which the believer can experience in such circumstances gives a special dimension to suffering. This is what the suffering servant of God experienced tangibly: ‘He will not break the bruised reed, nor quench the dimly burning flame. He will encourage the faint-hearted, those tempted to despair...’ (Isaiah 42:3) Jesus, the prime encourager, can console us even when we are experiencing the utmost despair, because he himself was tested to the utmost (Hebrews 5:7-9). In the very dark moment of temptation, the Master chose to submit in obedience to the Father: ‘Not my will, but your will be done’ (Luke 22:42). This was the introduction to the greatest paradox poss­ible. On the one hand this was the divine yes to ‘becoming sin’ on our behalf (2 Corinthians 5:21), which would ultimately lead to our Lord crying out: ‘My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?’ (Matthew 27:46). On the other hand, this was also the start of the victory over sin and death. Through the Cross and the subsequent resurrection, death lost its sting (1 Corinthians 15:55, 56). At the Cross the teeth of the roaring lion (1 Peter 5:8) were so to speak extracted; the enemy was conquered through our Lord’s death, because this was followed byhis resurrection. His death avails for our sins. His resurrection empowers us towards a life of victory in which we need not be slaves of sin any more. Whenever the enemy reminds us of our past (sin), we may remind him of his future (as the completely defeated foe). The death and resurrection of Christ enable us to call out with Paul: ‘Thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.’ After listing many difficulties, Paul proclaims in Romans 8:37: ‘... in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.’ Yes, especially in the day to day practical difficulties Jesus proves to be the paramount encourager. While he was on the earth he encouraged people in different circumstances. How he healed the sick, is well-known. The Gospel of John cites the turning of water into wine as the Lord’s first miracle (John 2:11). Since then He has turned sadness into joy time and again. When the two despondent, bereaved, disciples discussed the difficult things of the previous days on the way to Emmaus: ‘Jesus joined them and went with them’ (Luke 24:13ff). Similarly, Jesus wants to go with us. He wants to carry us through the rough patches of life on eagles’ wings. Through the Holy Spirit we are encouraged. That is exactly the power of the Gospel: how Jesus can completely overrule the tricks and vibes of the enemy. If we confess and repent of our sins, God not only cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:9), but he can even use extreme calamities for his own sovereign purposes, by turning it around. Comfort and Consolation of Confession David experienced the healing power of confession for himself (see Psalm 51). However, he missed out later in his life when two of his children com­mitted similar sins.36 In the Bible many stories and verses illustrate that it is part and parcel of God’s nature to comfort and console like a mother (for example Psalm 118:5; Isaiah 66:13; Romans 15:4f). The Word also warns against the temptation to seek comfort from doubt­ful sources like material possessions and riches (cf. Luke 6:24; 1 Timothy 6:9). God alone can really comfort. David testi­fied to this in his evergreen Psalm 23. His Shepherd comforted his soul, bringing him to green pastures. The Good Shepherd Jesus (John 10) likewise wants to give to his children the very best, just what they need, including comfort and encour­age­ment. The Early Church cared for the marginalized. Acts 6 mentions a group that would have been doubly disadvantaged, the Greek-speaking widows. The care for widows and orphans was something that the Hebrew Scriptures had prescribed. The Assyrian Church of the first century possibly had a special facility and role for widows. It seems as if they had even been baptizing others, because a new decree was introduced, prohibiting the widows to baptize men. Paul clearly teaches that encouragement next to comforting others is a ministry which every Christian can and should be involved in. The Father of compas­sion and the God of comfort (2 Corinthians 1:4) wants to encourage us in order to empower us so that we can also do it to others. To the Galatians (6:2) the carrying of each other’s burdens is even called ‘the law of Christ’. However, it should not be seen primarily as a command, but rather as an overflowing; when others see and hear how we are carried through in our distress and problems, it can comfort and help them to put their trust in God. Just like Jesus can comfort and encourage us because he himself was tested in the extreme, we become better qual­ified through diffi­culties and sufferings to comfort others. We are not meant to be heavily burdened by the problems of others, but we have the privilege to take these afflictions in prayer to the Cross. Taking it up for the Under-dog Every time Jesus spoke about Samaritans, tax collectors, the poor and public women, he took it up for the under-dog. He praised the tax collector Zaccheus without any accusation whatsoever. The repentant prostitute (Luke 7:36ff) harvested praise without any reservation. In the process Jesus attacked the self-righteous­ness and the hypocrisy of the Phari­sees (for example Luke 18:10ff), but he did not pull them down in the mud either. Like the prophets of old, he wanted to lead them to repentance rather than scoring points. Samuel of old had already pointed to the fact that God looks at the heart rather than to an outward show of religiosity (1 Samuel 15:22). Our Lord’s comparison between the prayer of the Pharisee and the tax collector is not meant to highlight the differences, but rather to invite reconciliation after repentance. He had problems with the attitude of the Pharisees, but he neverthe­less had no qualms to accept an invitation to dine with one from their ranks (Luke 7:36). Jesus in this way demonstrated how it is not Christ-like to fear socializing and association with so-called enemies. The first Moravian refugees like Christian David brought with them the concern for the persecuted church in their homeland. This soon rubbed off on all the inhabitants of Herrnhut. Thus the Swedish academic Arved Gradin helped to encourage the persecuted Protestants in France en route to the Orient. Count Zinzendorf not only integrated this concern for the persecuted into the ethos of Herrnhut but it also became part of his vocation to see to it that the Gospel would be brought to the most unreached groups in the world. This care for the under-dog permeated the life of all early Moravian settlements. It was natural that they would take it up for those people groups that were threatened with extinction like the indigenous Indians in North America and the Khoi at the Cape of Good Hope. This they performed through work of social and educational upliftment rather than through political involvement. Associating with the Despised Our Lord was known to be a friend of sinners. The establishment took serious offence that He dined with the likes of the chief tax collector Zaccheus. The moral religious elite was surely horrified when the word went around that Jesus did not object vehemently when a prostitute dried his feet with her hair. Count Zinzendorf was a worthy follower of the Lord in this regard, completely unconventional. He appeared to have had no qualms to take the Pilgrim Church into the castle Ronneburg, to live there with the despised of their society, ‘thieves, gypsies, sectarians and Jews’, but he also defended the move when the respectable refugee leader Christian David objected (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:68). One of the reasons why people opposed Zinzendorf was because he took it up for the under-dog. When King Friedrich Wilhelm I asked him why he was resented by others, he explained that his opponents abused such socializing, ‘um mich mit dergleichen Personen in einen Topf zu werfen’, throwing him into the same pot with the people he tried to defend (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:76). The Purpose of Cell Groups: Mutual Encouragement Count Zinzendorf picked up the provision for widows, by creating a special group for them. Theodore, the widow of his good friend Heinrich von Reuss, led the widows ‘choir’ in Herrnhut. One Sunday in the year it was their special day. Zinzendorf understood this biblical principle better than most of his contemporaries. The community of Herrnhut was divided into little cells, into bands and choirs for the very reason of mutual encouragement and upliftment. The communication with each other and with the Lord - as they shared joy and sorrow - made out of them such a radiant and loving community. By taking seri­ously the scrip­tural principle of mutual care for each other into the stat­utes of 12 May 1727, the soil for the revival was prepared. Every member of the community was required to use his gifts for the common good. Everybody received a task: for example to care for the widows, the orphans, the aged or the sick. A whole series of social institutions were started. In fact, it was quite revol­utionary for those days that the Church was now told to care for those who are old and sick (Beyreuther, 1965:71). It has been reported how Zinzendorf missed John Worthington, the regular organist on a certain Sunday during a visit to the Moravian congrega­tion of Fulnek in Britain. When he heard that Worthington was terminally ill, he immediately visited and prayed with him quietly (Spangenberg, 1773-5[1971]:1963). God blessed his stand with the afflicted when the organist was up and about a few days later. There are many examples how the Moravians took the mess­age of empathizing and encouragement seriously. Even the children took up the cue. After the Moravians had to leave Herrnhut mainly because of the support the community had given to foreign refugees, they landed eventually at the Ronneburg. This was a derelict castle, which was inhabited by thieves and various other outcasts of their society. But Zinzendorf’s off-spring invited the children of the beggars to come and join them at the table for meals. Fellowship in stead of Boycott the Count practised the principle also outside of the community. He saw it as his duty to stand with those who have been rejected by the society at large. His vision of the bigger body of Christ, made it imperative for him to visit the Separatists and the ‘inspired’ Christians, groups which were shunned by the Lutheran State Church and the Pietists alike. Even though he disagreed with their ideas, for example their rejection of infant Baptism and Communion, he believed in keeping the communication lines open. In stead of joining the general boycott of other Christans, he endeavoured to persuade them to discover what the Bible teaches. The issue of boycott, a weapon that was used effectively in the 20th century to isolate the racist regimes of the former Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa, did not fit into Moravian Church policy. In fact, Moravians were taught to stay clear of politics.37 It is nevertheless not completely insignificant that although Zinzendorf did not distance himself from the Pietist practice of non-interference in politics, he was not indifferent to injustice and oppressive conditions. It is however debatable how helpful it was that he criticized the bad conditions in the church anonymously through a polemical weekly, ‘The Socrates of Dresden.’ Professor Johannes Verkuyl (Break down the Walls, 1973:155) refers to the momentous speech of Dr Robert Nelson at the WCC consultation on racism in Notting Hill, London (1969). Referring to a fresco of the Italian painter Giotto about the awakening of Lazarus from the death, Nelson noted that the man who helped Lazarus was a Black. (It is generally known that Simon of Cyrene in North Africa, who carried Jesus’ cross, is sometimes associated with Simon Niger - the Black - of Acts 13). Dr Nelson asked: ‘Could it be that we Western White people need to take the hand of fellow Christians from Africa, or Asia, or Latin America to be helped out of our dead faith into a new power of life? ... a power for reconciliation and forgiveness is hard to find.’ South Africa could become a blessing to the nations if those who have become strengthened through many afflictions, utilize this power to encourage and uplift others. A good start was made through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of the late 1990s and the church-led restitution that was initiated by Dr Charles Robertson and started at the Cape in 2004. Food for thought: What part does encouragement and comforting play in correc­tion? We easily tend to forget that people who have wronged or hurt us, could even feel bad about it. By saying to them and showing them that we have forgiven them - even before they have apologized - we could encourage them. And some ideas Possibly the mere showing of interest, for example by a (short) visit and a phone call, just to enquire how someone who has been known to be depressed or de­spondent, can make his/her day. It is definitely a good exercise if you yourself have been helped out of the gutter of some sort of despondency or in another way, and after having received encouragement from the supreme uplifter through prayer - or through counselling by another Christian - to try and console someone else who may need your support. Forgiveness is a major encouragement, but continuing to speak about the hurt of the past often rips up old wounds. A good antidote for gossip is to check whether the person has forgiven the perpetrator. Otherwise one could so easily become a dumping ground for his/her negativity and gossip. 4. Jesus, God’s true Son: the ultimate Example of Obedience The prophets knew that God’s Word was the vehicle to bring His rebellious and back-slidden people back to Him. Repeatedly divine promises were linked to obedience to the Word and its teachings on the one hand and punishment for disobedience on the other. Down the ages obedience to the preached Word was also used by God to call back-sliding Christianized peoples back to Himself and his ways. God thus used the Wesley brothers and George Whitfield in the 18th century to bring about a revival in England. The biblical Tenet of Obedience The all-import­ant biblical tenet of obedience is really at the heart of the Word. All sin and hurts could possibly be derived from the opposite. The disobedience of Eve and Adam started the rot. By way of contrast, the hall-mark of Noah was obedience. Obedience is honoured by God, but compromise is seen as disobedience, as sin, which incurs His wrath and punishment. A classic example of obedience to God’s law and the teachings he had received, is Joseph who refused to be seduced towards adultery (Genesis 38:7-20). We note that it was not so much Joseph’s superior sexual morality that swayed the matter. That he would have abused the trust of the master would have negatively impacted his faith in Yahweh. His integrity led to his imprisonment. However, his faith in the God of his forefathers was vindicated when he later became the second in command in Egypt. Saul was initially raised by God, after he had showed exemplary traits like modesty. However, his disobedience to the Word of God via the prophet Samuel led to his shameful demise. The lesson is clear: God honours radical obedience, but any compromise is already tantamount to dis­obedience. Gideon (Judges 6-8) and King Asa (2 Chronicles 15+16) are the examples of initial obedience to God with ensuing success, followed by compromise at the end of their lives. In both cases tragedy and disgrace were the results. ‘New Testament’ teaching is the complement of what the Law and the Prophets had been pioneering for centuries. Yet, it needs to be emphasized that the Bible definitely does not teach slavish obedience. It would be more correct to see critical obedience as the biblical norm. When Gideon could not see his way clear to obey straight away, God nevertheless took him seriously. His hesitant obedience, initially expecting a proof of the presence of God (Judges 6:17) and his need of absolute certainty that God wanted to use him (Judges 6:37ff), can be seen as an example for checking God’s will. The enemy does have ways of emulating God. In our time and age some people speak too glibly about what God has purportedly said. It should become a custom and habit to use biblical checks and balances to discern God’s will otherwise we can be deceived so easily. His written and preached Word, peace at heart and the advice of mature believers should usually assist to this end. Radical Obedience Both Noah and Moses pointed to Jesus through their radical obedience. Oral tradition - confirmed by the biblical report - notes that a hall mark of Noah was his total obedience. Almost as a refrain we read about the former: ‘Noah did everything just as God commanded him’ (Genesis 6:22; 7:5; 7:9; 7:16). Noah’s obedience was combined with his trust in God although we do not read about a special relationship between him and the Almighty. Noah nevertheless became the example to all of us, to put our complete trust in God. He simultaneously challenges us towards complete obedience to the divine revealed will. Noah’s obedience culminated in him entering the Ark with his family only upon God’s Word. Moses has set the example magnificently. Over fifty times it is recorded of Moses: ‘As the Lord commanded Moses, so did he do. In the ‘New Testament’ radical obedience is highlighted when we read of actions by followers of Jesus that would not make common sense. Thus Peter threw the net ‘on the word’ of the Lord after failing to catch any fish at night and Philip leaves the successful ministry in Samaria, the revival (Acts 8), going so to speak in obedience on a ‘wild goose chase’ to the lonely desert road to Gaza. The believer knows however that God’s ways are higher (Isaiah 55:8, 9). John, the apostle, repeats in a circular style in 1 John the relationship between loving and believing God on the one hand and obeying him on the other hand. Obedience is the proof of loving God. The deacon Philip went ‘down’ to Gaza on the inspiration of the Holy Spirit at a time of blessing and revival in Antioch (Acts 8:26ff). Don Richardson in his book Eternity in their hearts suggests that the Philip mentioned in Acts 8 was one of the deacons who had been inaugurated in Acts 6 to take care of the neglected Greek widows.38 What a ‘stupid’ thing to do, we would say! To go to the desert road! Philip follows it up with something just as completely unheard of. He, a very ordinary Christian, addresses a foreign dignitary, an African finance minister, with a rather audacious, insulting question: "Do you also understand what you are reading?" Perhaps one could say that this was the beginning of the evangelization of Africa, started by an ordinary but obedient follower of Jesus. The letter to the Hebrews (5:8) states that the Master learned obedience through his sufferings and Paul, the apostle, gave a summary of Jesus’ life as one of utter obedience: He, ‘being in very nature God...humbled himself and became obedient to death - even death on a cross.’ Obedient Submission The obedient submission to God is a tenet that is well known in rabbinical Judaism. The Talmud reports how Abraham referred to Isaac as the substitution for the lamb. On the way to the Akedah – the sacrifice – Satan is said to have attempted unsuccessfully to dissuade Isaac from obeying his father and when he failed, the deceiver tried to impede their journey. According to oral tradition, Isaac however cooperated fully in the proposed sacrifice, even begging his father to bind him tightly lest he might struggle involuntarily and render the sacrifice invalid. According to tradition the obedient son replies: ‘To the will of the living God in thankfulness I bow.’ Just like Isaac, the Lord Jesus would willingly lay down his life. One almost hears the echo centuries later, in the Garden of Gethsemane after Jesus had been agonising when he was required to empty the cup. It must have ‘contained’ something against which his whole being rebelled. It has been suggested that it could have been the sins of the world against which the sinless Son of God came in fierce opposition. The victory is achieved after the Son had learned obedience through his suffering (Hebrews 5:8): ‘Not my will, but thy will be done’ (Mark 14:36). The events leading to the crucifixion and the Cross of Calvary itself echo Abraham and Isaac’s obedient submission in every respect, culminating in Jesus saying: ‘Father, in Thy hands I commit my spirit’. God, who provided the ram on Moriah, also gave the Lamb on Calvary, his only Son. The ram prefigured the slain lamb of the Passover that saved the Israelites in the hour of judgement. The Lord Jesus became the Lamb slain for the sin of mankind. Now whosoever believes in Him as Saviour, receives everlasting life. Paul recorded the significance of this fact in the following words: ‘For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified’ (1 Corinthians 2:2). Two other types of Christ with regard to obedience occurred in the wanderings of the Israelites through the desert. The cloud pillar and the fire resting on the Tabernacle prefigured in a special way what Jesus said: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12). Closely connected to the cloud pillar was the sound of the silver trumpets. They were used as a signal for the journeying of the congregation. The believer needs to listen to the voice of the Lord, whose words are as tried silver and purified gold. “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me” (John 10:27). The Serpent at Work The Israelites had the option to obey or not to do it, to go for the blessing or for the curse. They could choose between death and life. The most significant instance of this choice for life was probably where Moses was required to put a brass serpent on a pole after poisonous snakes had bitten many Israelites (Numbers 21:4ff). This was God’s punishment after the Israelites had rebelled, displaying grave ingratitude at His provision for them. The serpents which had bitten the rebellious, disobedient Israelites in the desert, remind the Jew of the serpent in the Garden of Eden. As they once had to slaughter innocent lambs obediently at the exodus from Egypt, the obedience of the Israelites was tested when they had to look at the brazen snake which would bring healing in its wings. The great serpent’s head was so to speak smashed on the Cross of Calvary. That is why Jesus could prophetically challenge all generations to heed the universal meaning of his death on the Cross: ‘Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life’ (John 3:14f). The letter to the Hebrews, which is so close to Talmudic thinking, picks up the cue: ‘Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death - that is, the devil - and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death’ (Hebrews 2:14ff). Paul, the apostle, surely had the same idea in mind when he wrote ‘the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet’ (Romans 16:20). The brass serpent of Numbers 21:4ff served for the temporary healing of those Israelites who were bitten, but who got a second chance if they were obedient. Jesus would be lifted up so that all who believed in him might have eternal life. Whosoever believes in faith in Jesus as God’s healing instrument, the ‘New Testament’ ‘serpent’ on the Cross, will be healed from being bitten by satan, the ‘snake’ who is the liar from the beginning (John 8:44). In the book of Genesis it is described how satan originally came in the image of a serpent to deceive Adam and Eve. The issue of obedience is thus highlighted. One can state that the way Moses did this is depicted even more pronounced in the Book of Deuteronomy. Again and again the Israelites were told that the demand of obedience to the laws are for their good (e.g. Deuteronomy 6:24). Moreover it is clear that their obedience is not an effort to buy God’s favour, but rather it is expected because they enjoy His favour. The Israelites were not called to purchase their redemption by obedience, but to obey because they are a redeemed people. A servant girl, who had been taken along as a captive, became God’s instrument to point Naaman, the Aramaic army officer, to Elisha as a prophet of God (2 Kings 5). In the enfolding story, Naaman got healed only after he had obeyed the instructions of the prophet. Link between Suffering and Obedience One of the spiritual lessons strange to the rational (Western) mind is the link between suffering and obedience. Already in the Hebrew Scriptures biblical personalities had to learn obedience, albeit often through trial and error. Biblical figures knew that choices for God often incurred the displeasure and even wrath of their family and countrymen. When Abraham chose to oppose the idolatry in their home and even to leave his home region, his father Terah would have been very unhappy. He could have been even angry with Abraham because of this. Similarly, Moses had to be severely reprimanded – almost becoming the victim of divine wrath because of his disobedience – after initially offering various excuses for not being able to lead the Israelites out of Egypt. On the other hand, his siblings were very angry when Moses married an African, the Cushite. He received divine confirmation. But he would have known that such a step of obedience was not prone to harvest elation, joy and affirmation from friends and countrymen. To obey God, Gideon needed the cover of night to destroy the Baal idol in their home (Judges 6:27). The obedience of Daniel’s three friends to the divine command brought them literally into the fire, the furnace of a pagan King. In the case of Daniel himself, his faithful prayerful obedience led to the company of hungry lions. It should be a sobering thought that one of the reasons for the anger of the Jews at the teaching of Jesus was his opposition to their proud national­ist thoughts. According to the Gospel of Luke (chapter 4) he referred positively to other peoples in his sermon in the syna­gogue of Nazareth. This rubbed the Jewish audience up the wrong way. The initial excitement about the return of their renowned prodigy and amazement at the words of the son of Joseph (4:22) turned sour when Jesus referred to the widow of Sidon, a foreigner and Naaman, the Syrian military officer. By far not everyone was spared persecution after the conscious choice of obedience. The Master led the way. ‘Even though Jesus was God’s Son, he had to learn from experience what it was like to obey, when obeying meant suffering’ (Hebrews 5:8). And when his followers wanted to crown him King (John 6:15), the Master refused it, to be ultimately mockingly hailed as King of the Jews – with a crown of thorns. Second century martyr Bishop Polycarp became the model so much that Tertullian was led to proclaim the blood of the martyrs to be the seed of the church. The truth of Tertullian’s adage can be easily verified in the lives of people like Jan Hus from Prague, whose martyrdom we commemorated recently. He died on the fire stake in Constance in July 1415. Of the great personalities of church history Martin Luther was the exception rather than the rule, when he was spared the experience of the martyr’s death. Already as a boy, teenager and young man Count Zinzendorf was mocked and derided because of his choices for the Gospel. In stead of following in the footsteps of his late father to become an influential minister of the King of Saxony, he took it in his stride to become almost a nothing, to be banished for standing with the refugee believers. Moses, God’s Friend but no Robot We read in Exodus 33:11, ‘The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend’. The special relationship is also seen in Moses’ words to the Almighty. Thus we read about him saying in the same context ‘If you are pleased with me, teach me your ways so I may know you and continue to find favour with you.’ God responds with: ‘My presence will go with you...’ The replies of Moses show however that he was no robot; the friend of God can also voice negative feelings. God shows understanding when Moses raved in bitter disappointment and frustration: ‘...What have I done to displease you that you put the burden of these people on me? ... I cannot carry all these people by myself; the burden is too heavy for me’ (Numbers 11:11,14-15). In a sovereign display of Divine understanding, Yahweh encouraged Moses, by instructing him to appoint seventy leaders and officials to assist him. Whereas Aaron and Moses were disqualified to enter the promised Land because of their disobedience – they smote the elevated rock whereas they were required to speak to it – Jesus became the example of meticulous obedience and submission to the will of the Father. It is remarkable in the context of the discourses of Moses with the Almighty that He does apparently allow believers to question Him. We do not have to believe slavishly and uncritically. In the Bible questioning God is accepted. In fact, there are passages, for example long ones in Job, Psalm 73 and the whole book of Habakkuk, where the questioning of God is mentioned as the most normal thing on earth. In these Scriptures God dialogues with the doubtful, for example as He did with Abraham and Moses. As friends of God we are fully permitted to voice our disappointment and frustration in prayer. God sees the heart and we may reckon with it that He takes our views seriously. A condition is that we must be honest in our questioning and willing to submit to his overruling and guidance. The sovereign God can however also become angry, when he regards our arguing as unreasonable. Moses experienced the anger of God more than once. We have seen with Gideon how uses even the coward. There is only one condition: they must be obedient and dependent on Him alone. Gideon experienced concretely what God promised through Moses: ‘The Lord your God goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory’ (Deuteronomy 20:4). God’s Moulding process God often uses affliction, disappointment and trials to mould us. The spiritual growth of Joseph in this regard underlines this principal. As an arrogant young man he became haughty because of the gift the interpretation of dreams - that he had received. After he landed in prison and after using this gift once again in respect of the butler and baker, he seemed to have learned the lesson well. When he was summoned to interpret the dreams of Pharaoh he replied humbly: I cannot do it by myself, but God will tell you what it means (Genesis 41:16). Psalm 66 highlights an interesting anomaly. God cannot be enveloped in a mould. Yahweh brought the Israelites through the waters of the Red Sea and He saved individuals like Lot from fire. Destructive waters and purifying fire are used to strengthen and mould David – just like Abraham and the other arch fathers before him. Every follower of the Lord is treated like silver in the crucible. In Malachi 3:2 the Almighty is compared with a goldsmith who purifies the special metal from all impurities in the red-hot fire. God had to reprimand Joseph and Moses, using exile after they had acted in the flesh. Yet, His hand was on them, guiding and chastening them through suffering. It is especially hard to witness our loved ones suffer. But then, it is so wonderful when that what Bishop Retief (1994:59) calls ‘the Joseph principle’ comes into play: ‘...You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives’ (Genesis 50:19-20). We detect the divine hand - especially in the light of the constant enmity between the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael up to this day - when we note that both Joseph and Moses were rescued by Ishmaelites. The Midianite traders (Genesis 37:25, 28) who pulled Joseph out of the cistern were called the descendants of Ishmael. Moses spent the years after his flight from Egypt in Midian. This was a time when these ‘Ishmaelites’ seemed not to have been regarded as Israel’s enemies. Moses’ father-in-law Jethro was a Midianite priest with whom he co-operated without major reservations or hassles. Jethro actually ‘was delighted to hear about all the good things the Lord had done for Israel in rescuing them from the hand of the Egyptians’ (Exodus 19:9). And Moses gladly accepted the advice of Jethro to delegate the work, which had become too much for him to accomplish alone (Exodus 19:24). That the Midianites became enemies of Israel was apparently not because of their religion, but because of their idolatry. In this regard, Israel was however no better. Moses and so many prophets after him had to rebuke the Israelites on this very score. To the same end of moulding, God used a worm to teach the prophet Jonah that he was selfish and without compassion towards the Ninevites. In the ‘New Testament’ Peter’s denial of Jesus before his crucifixion was part and parcel of the divine preparation to make out of him the rock on which the Master could build his Church. Paul was a young believer with a misdirected zeal when the resurrected Jesus confronted him on the road to Damascus (Acts 9). He had to be moulded and shaped before God could use him. This process covered at least twelve years. This should make us think deeply about the sending of young people on missionary outreaches with very little preparation. Sometimes the Father gives us a second Chance How gracious of the Father that he gives us a second chance, yes sometimes even a third and a fourth one, to bring us back to His purpose for us. The biblical condition is remorse and repentance. In 1 John 1:9 we read: If we confess ours sins, God is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. We should be thankful for the ‘great fish’ - the pits of despair and tribulation that bring us back to our senses. We should praise the Lord for the storms, the troubles that focus our faith and give us opportunity to share the good news with those who might not be our first choice, but who are God’s challenge for us. Jonah assumed that Nineveh would have no time for God. Christians too easily assume that certain people groups are resistant to the Gospel. Jonah had to learn that it was not only the city of Nineveh that had to repent. He himself and especially his attitude to the Ninevites had to change. We as Christian Capetonians might still be very surprised by the reaction of Muslims and Jews to the Gospel if our own attitude changes to one of love and compassion. Obedience rather than Glamour A sign of really great personalities is that they can choose suffering rather than glamour when the chips are down. At the outset of his ministry Jesus chose not to be impressed by the adulation of his Nazareth townsfolk. In stead of riding on the crest wave of praise, he swam against the stream, risking his life in the process (Luke 4:14-30). When a multitude of Jewish worshipers wanted to forcefully make Jesus their worldly King (John 6:15), he refused this elevation. In stead, he left the multitude. In the same chapter it is recorded how he responded with a hard word, after which the crowd left him en masse (John 6:66). When Peter merely faintly suggested that Jesus should escape his innocent death, the Master had to rebuke him strongly, seeing no less than satan behind this idea (Mark 8:33). Although he was the Son, the Lord had to learn obedience to the Father (Hebrews 5:8). By the time of the Gethsemane struggle he had obviously learned the lesson when he was required to empty the cup, the content of which ultimately took our Lord from the presence of His Father, so much so that he ultimately used the word forsaken. In the agonizing prayer of the Garden, He responded thrice with ‘not my will but your will be done…’ (Mark 14:36). Jesus chose the road of suffering, to be ultimately crowned with thorns. His Kingdom is not of this world. The line between acclamation and rejection can be very thin at times. Choosing for absolute truth often makes the difference. Compromise could sometimes prevent persecution or rejection. When Bishop Comenius had received secular recognition via the invitation to become the rector and pioneer of the newly established Harvard University near Boston in the ‘New World’, he declined, preferring to stay with his small persecuted flock in Poland. Count Zinzendorf not only taught, but he also displayed that he was teachable. Thus he became willing to go to Dresden in 1721, although that was really the last of the places where he wanted to serve the Lord, after the godly Magister Schwedler had spoken to him (Beyreuther, 1957:231). When Zinzendorf was offered a full-time post as one of the cabinet ministers of the Danish throne, he declined, citing his commitment to Herrnhut as a reason. (Earlier he had aspired to go to Denmark.) He was willing to be employed in some lesser capacity, so that he would have time for free-lance religious activ­ity. He really understood the bibli­cal injunction ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of God and its righteousness.’ More Examples of the Principle Similarly, Andrew Murray declined the invitation of Dwight Moody to address the World Church and Mission Conference in New York in 1900. In view of the South African War he stood in the middle of the warring parties with his Scottish background but his intense love for the Boers. His obedience to the Holy Spirit bore ample fruit through The Key to the Missionary Problem, which he wrote in 1901. He wrote the booklet after he had requested the papers that had been delivered in New York. In them Dr Murray discerned the lack of an emphasis on prayer and missions. In a similar way, the German martyr and pastor Dr Dietrich Bonhoeffer returned from the USA to the lion’s den of Hitler’s Nazi regime, knowing full well that he could soon be in trouble there. Watchman Nee voluntarily went back into the despotism of Mao Zedong in 1949. Richard Wurmbrand on the other hand was used by God after his release from Nicolai Ceascescu’s dictatorship to expose the cruelties of that regime. Special Responsibility of Leaders The Bible relates clearly how there is a special responsibil­ity for leaders to walk before the Lord in meticulous obedi­ence. The enemy is quick to pounce on any failure on their part, to exploit it to the full. Adam and Abraham are examples of men who listened more to their wives than to God, with disastrous consequences. Through Adam’s disobedience sin came into the world. In human terms we could really empathize with Abraham because the couple was still waiting on the repeatedly promised child. After 10 years in Canaan, Sarah’s suggestion must have made a lot of sense. But this compro­mise - like that of Saul many years later - brought them much sorrow. The major rift between the Jews and the Muslims can be traced back to Abraham’s compromise. To us it might sound as a ‘minor disobedience’ when Moses beat the rock with a stick after God had instructed him to speak (Numbers 20:8, 11). In God’s sight however, it was so serious that Moses and Aaron were harsh­ly punished: they were not allowed to enter Canaan. Joseph’s haughty or arrogant attitude is not spelled out in detail because of his gift to expound dreams, but it is not difficult to derive at the conclusion that he needed correction. Apart from the apparent favouritism by father Jacob, why would his brothers otherwise have been so resentful, to the extent that they were prepared to kill him? Of course, in Jesus we have a second Adam (see Romans 5:15-19), the perfect reply to the problem of sin. He was also a second Moses. The Hebrew Scripture prophet was prepared to have his name blotted out of God’s book (Exodus 32:32) because of the sins of his people. The Lord - in taking our sin onto himself (2 Corinthians 5:21), became the perfect ran­som (Mark 10:45). Our Lord Jesus, the sinless Lamb of God, became a curse as He was nailed to the Cross, as the payment of our sin to reconcile us to a holy God (Romans 3:23). Modern Examples of inconvenient Obedience One could cite various examples of Christians in recent decades who were prepared to take flack and harsh criticism for responding to what they knew they had to do, yes, to be sometimes ‘fools for Christ’ (This is however by far not the same as foolhardiness). The best examples are found possibly in the breaking down of the communist ‘iron curtain’. When Pastor Richard Wurmbrand came to the West after he had been bought free - after an extended period in Romanian communist imprisonment - he dared to expose not only the sad role of Christian leaders in accepting Soviet puppets as representatives of the World Council of Churches, but he also highlighted the suffering of underground church leaders. Dr Billy Graham was severely criticised for going to places like Moscow when it was the in thing in evangelical circles to boycott everything that reeked of Communism. When Anne van der Bijl – more widely known as Brother Andrew – inconveniently visited a communist youth event in Warschau in 1955 and Prague at the time of the Soviet invasion in 1968, his eyes were opened to the vicious ideology. A programme of smuggling of Bibles – at considerable risk - was developed in obedience to the Lord. His insight to bring the Word to communist countries ultimately contributed not only to the smashing of the ‘Iron Curtain, but he also blessed many believers around the world with his penetrating unconventional teaching through many books. An Example of Compromise The obedience of Abraham sounds so overwhelming. If ever there was one who had to learn obedience through his suffering, then Abraham was one. Learning the hard way, he now stands there as a prime negative example to every believer who dare to play around with compromise. It has been suggested that by taking his father Terah with him from Ur, Abraham delayed God’s dealings with him. For as many as fifteen years there were no further commands, no additional promises and no communication between Abraham and God. There is every indication that the worldly Lot could have been a drag on his spiritual pilgrimage. Abraham definitely still had to learn to wait on the Lord before acting in panic like going to Egypt when famine broke out. God had to deliver Abraham after his ‘white lie’ that Sarai was his sister. This had brought him out of the divine will. The habit of lies proved very pervasive. When Abraham perceived a threat from King Abimelech, he resorted to the same half truth once again, saying that Sarah was his sister. By this time he had received the divine promise of off-spring more than once. God’s mercy and grace came through. Yahweh of the Hebrew Scriptures is forgiving and merciful in the extreme!! Abraham compromised by listening more to his wife than to God to have a child with his slave Hagar. This was the cause of division between the offspring of Isaac and Ishmael. The strife between his descendants via Isaac and Ishmael had repercussions that still keep the Middle East in suspense. Through his mistakes Abraham had to learn that it pays to be completely obedient. He thus became a pointer to Jesus also in this way and an encouragement to every believer. Examples from Disobedience Initially, God had his hand on Saul, who stood head and soldiers figurat­ively and literally above his compatriots, ‘an impressive young man without equal among the Israelites’ (1 Samuel 9:2). He was so to speak hand-picked from the insig­nificant clan of Matri from the minute tribe of Benjamin (1 Samuel 10:20)). The impatience of Saul was perhaps the major difference between David and his predecessor, who tried to cover up his sin by giving others the blame after he had been impatient, rendering his burnt offering disobediently and prematurely. Saul was rejected because of his impatience because he could not wait on Samuel. ‘You have disobeyed the commandment of the Lord’ (1 Samuel 13:13). Still later, he was struck, falling full length on the ground as divine punishment after he had consulted a witch, a spiritist (1 Samuel 28:20). This was symptomatic of his falling from divine grace. The life of Saul illustrates the principle that God will definitely find someone else to finish the task in the case of disobedience. That David came to the throne in this way is well-known, but generally it is over-looked that Abraham was used similarly after his father Terah remained in Haran, in contra­vention of God’s purposes (Genesis 11:31). This message is also conveyed by Luke and Paul with regard to salvation history. God has a special pur­pose with the Jewish nation (Bosch, 1990:59). We as Christians should however remain humble, remember­ing that we are only the wild olive which was grafted into the real olive tree, Israel (Romans 11:17, 18). Jonah was rebuked by God for his nationalist thinking. He had fled in the opposite direction to which God had sent him. That speaks of disobedience. It is striking that in spite of his disobedience, God still used him when he testified on the boat to his faith in the unseen God. Initially it could have been fear of the wicked Ninevites which drove him to the frantic step, but the end of the story clarifies the issue: Jonah had evidently been more interested that the Ninevites should be punished, rather than that they should repent. We are also tempted by this carnal trait, seeking retribution and revenge, at least occasionally. One of the Bible’s greatest themes is that God loves the whole world - not just one group. Abraham was called to be a blessing to the nations. Jonah did not understand this and had to be reprimanded. Jonah was not alone in his thinking that the Jews were so special in God’s eyes that it excluded other peoples. Jesus corrected the congregation in Nazareth, making them so angry by his reference to the widow of Zarefath in Sidon and Naaman from Syria that they wanted to kill him. Obviously their thinking corresponded with that of Jonah. An Invitation to Self-denial The rebuke of Jonah was tantamount to an invitation to self-denial, so to speak a challenge to take up his cross. (We are reminded that Jesus first said ‘deny yourself’, before inviting his followers to take up the cross.) To accept that the Ninevites could be forgiven, that God could change His mind, was obviously very difficult for Jonah to accept. Sometimes the impression has been spread that God is not moved easily; that He can just do what he likes in an authoritarian and wanton way. Jonah thought that God was bound to His original prophecy of doom. He had to learn that God was basically compassionate, that the Almighty takes ‘no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their wicked ways and live’ (Ezekiel 33:11). We compare the reprieve of David (2 Sam. 12:13) and Ahab (1 King 21:28) after they repented and humbled themselves before God. He gave them a new chance. That is the nature of God: loving forgiveness after repentance, rather than punishment for our sins. Jeremiah 18:7ff possesses special actuality for Capetonians. Evangelicals who think that God is obliged to bring many prophecies over the city - without united repentance and prayer - would do well to know that the Bible forces a good rethink on the matter: ‘...And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it’. I am convinced that if Christians are willing to accept corporately that we cannot put God into a box of Western Theology ‑ the Scriptures have actually originated in the Orient ‑ we might find Muslims and Jews more open to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The complete biblical message seems to be: God is loving and forgiving, he is slow to anger but there comes a time when continued sinning will call forth his wrath.39 Furthermore, the verse from Jeremiah 18 quoted above repudiates the belief that God never changes His mind. The Bible repeats more than once that the Almighty is in principle unchangeable and sovereign, but not arbitrary and aloof. Compassionate and remorseful prayer moves him, especially when it is done corporately. We note for example how the Ninevites averted the destruction of their city through united repentance. In the totality of the biblical message Isaiah 57:15 puts it pointedly that the high and lofty one who inhabits eternity is also with the low and humble, giving new courage to repentant hearts. From God one cannot flee Jonah ultimately had to face the music: You can attempt to run away in disobedience, but so often you take your unresolved problems with you. From God one cannot flee. Jonah was convicted of his sin and admitted his guilt. Faced with severe judgement, he did not lose hope but cried out for mercy. He confidently confessed his belief that “Salvation comes from the Lord” and promised to make a sacrifice with thanksgiving (Jonah 2:8,9). Being an Israelite, Jonah knew that the Law of Moses required a sin offering to be sacrificed. He knew that it provided a basis for forgiveness. Significantly, Jonah did not jump into the water when his disobedience caught up with him. He requested to be thrown into the sea (Jonah 2:12). Thus his action became a pristine form of baptism - a voluntary decision after the recognition and confession of sins. Similarly, Jesus submitted himself to be baptised by John at the beginning of His ministry - although he was without sin. No wonder that John the Baptist was taken aback at Jesus’ request. Jonah was the sign of someone going down into the depths and being raised to new life, an example of God’s power to raise someone from the dead. He thus typified the death and resurrection of Jesus. But Jonah was only a type. He finally died whereas Jesus did not die again after his resurrection. The message of Jonah includes God wanting to take us out of our cosy zones. In the age of the internet we are tempted to want to do too much from our computer. In no way does this invalidate the parable of the Sower, who had to go out to sow his seed. Sometimes one feels like running away from the task at hand, just like Jonah. Then God has to whistle us back to the point of our ‘infringement’, giving us another chance. Disobedience and Compromise as a Handicap Biblically, compromise is regarded as disobedience, as sin which incurs the wrath and punishment of the Almighty. The Hebrew Scriptures depict more than once how defeat followed when disobedience and compromise crept in. Moses had to tell the Israelites – this is recorded in Deuteronomy 1:45 – that their tears before the Lord were of no avail. ‘He paid no attention to your weeping and turned a deaf ear to you.’ The reason for God’s deaf ear was their rebellion and arrogance. Tears of frustrated foolhardiness do not move God. The downfall of Gideon (8:24) and King Asa (2 Chronicles 16:3+7) was caused by their disobedience. In both cases their exceptional feats, which had their origins in obedience, were marred. A very tragic case is that of the child king of Judah, Josiah.Through the godliness of King Josiah, especially after he had heard the Law read (2 Kings 22:8-20), the judgment was delayed until after his death. A prophetic word had been given to him to die in peace. However, through disobedient premature military involvement he was slain prematurely on the battlefield death. Saul is the negative example of one who went it alone, cutting himself off from correction and encourage­ment. His actions included all the elements of dishonesty and dis­obedience: improper modesty (1 Samuel 10:22), taking honour for himself, 40 impatience (1 Samuel 13:9), imposing his will on others (1 Samuel 14:24), followed by sinful independence and activism (14:.36). Yet, also in this regard we cannot pack God neatly into a box. The Bible gives some interesting examples of disobedience to instruc­tions which are contrary to God’s will. When Jonathan inadver­tently ate honey when he was supposed to have fasted on the instruction of his father (1 Samuel 14:27ff), Saul was ready to kill his son. The soldier colleagues were not punished by God for coming up in support of the disobedient Jonathan. Likewise the soldiers who refused to kill the family of the priest Abimelech for inadvertently protecting David, did not come under any divine reprimand (1 Samuel 22:17). Christians should be guarding biblical values and basic freedoms against oppressive laws and policies enacted by the government. We should take to heart the prophetic warning given by the Lord through the prophet Ezekiel: ‘Because they had not obeyed My laws but had rejected My decrees and desecrated My Sabbaths, and their eyes lusted after their fathers' idols. I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by’ (Ezekiel 20:24-25). Could it be, the reason we are constantly fighting statutes that are not good and laws we will not be able to live by - is because we are not obeying God and living righteously before Him? God still warns us for not listening to Him or obeying His Word. He gave His people over to severe correction through the means of the unbearable laws of pagan nations. If we will not obey His Word willingly, we may be forced to obey pagan, oppressive laws unwillingly or resist at great cost. Disobedience to the Great Commission I deem it appropriate to repeat a warning of Andrew Murray ([1901]1979:154), namely the danger of disobedi­ence to the Great Commis­sion, the last command of our Lord Jesus. No wonder that churches which do not reach out to the lost, turn inwards and get entangled in internal quar­rels. In this regard the moral high ground of Paul, the apostle, should be noted. Everything has to be uprooted in the Church, which could hinder the spreading of the Gospel: ‘We try to live in such a way that no one will be offended or kept back from finding the Lord by the way we act...’ (2 Corinthians 6:3). But we can also put it positively, for example in the words of Robert Coleman: ‘Evangelism is not an optional accessory to our life ... It is the commission of the church which gives meaning to all else that is undertaken in the Name of Christ.’ Deliberately I do not make any distinction between evangelism and mission. If anybody would insist on a choice, then the priority should be on ‘making disciples’, working in depth rather than in breadth. That was the example of our Master. We have to share the Gospel with the unreached, to those nearby and those far away. The use of modern tools like the internet should be included in the process. Cornelius can be compared with the staunch Muslim or any true seeker after God. In Acts 10:4 one reads: The angel answered: Your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God.’ God looks at the heart. This confirms the way God looks at things, as 1 Samuel 15:22 states: God is delighted more in obedience than in burnt offerings and sacrifices. Almost simultaneously Peter’s heart was prepared by God to step down from his haughty view of Gentiles. Thrice he objected to the unclean animals, which he was required to eat in the vision. Only hereafter Peter was obedient to ‘go downstairs’ (Acts 10:20), to drop his condescending view of non-Jews, which was very common in his environment. He had to realise that the Gospel was for Gentiles too. As Christians we should nevertheless remain humble enough to confess our collective debt because millions of Muslims have been misled. It is sad that a Christian priest was instrumental in assisting Muhammad to believe that the supernatural figure which appeared to him was identical to the angel Gabriel of the Bible. Furthermore, if we consider that the Bible speaks of arrogance (1 Samuel 15:22) and materialism (Colossians 3:5) as equivalents of idolatry, we discover that Western Protestant Christians are basically no better than any other people groups whom we would like to accuse of idolatrous practices. The appropriate attitude is repentant humility, asking God to open the eyes of many to the nature of the biblical Gabriel as a candidate to be the Angel of the Lord, and especially to accept with thankfulness that Jesus also died for Muslims and Jews. The Lord used similar words of encouragement to the fearful and faint-hearted via the angel Gabriel of the biblical and Talmudic tradition in Luke with the shepherds on Bethlehem’s meadows, as well as when angels occur in the Bible elsewhere. It is so important that children learn at home to be obedient to their parents. The proverb ‘Spare the rod and spoil the child’, might sound antiquated in our day and age. (Children have been taking parents to court for taking these words too literally.) This is basically nevertheless a biblical injunction (compare Proverbs 13:24; 29:15). The fact of the matter is that the lack of discipline and admonishment - also in families of believers - is creating a lawless society where everybody does what he likes. It is in our own interest to get back to biblical basics, taking discipline and correction seriously. Herrnhut Discipline The Herrnhut Moravians took discipline seriously. An interesting case was our own Georg Schmidt, who was sent to the Cape initially ‘on probation’ as punishment for a perceived serious misdemeanor. Schmidt had been imprisoned in Moravia because of his faith. After his release he was slandered. A rumour was hereafter spread - which Count Zinzendorf believed as the truth - that Schmidt signed a document in which he was supposed to have recanted his faith to regain his freedom. The Count ordered that Schmidt had to forego fellowship, going alone to the ‘Wilden’, the resistant ‘Hottentotten’- not in a team but alone as further punishment. Without any apparent grudge, Schmidt accepted the unfair punishment to be ‘banished’ innocently to go to the distant Cape of Good Hope. Two weeks after his call he was already on his way to Africa. A second example of Moravian discipline is Christian Protten, an African from mixed parentage. He was the son of a European soldier and the daughter of a tribal chief, one of the first persons from the third world to become a Moravian in Herrnhut in 1735. He was probably the first indigenous person to minister in his home country as a missionary since the Eunuch of Ethiopia (Acts 8), landing in St. George del Mina (Elmina) on 11 May 1737. After a sad incident when he accidentally killed a child when cleaning a rifle, he was recalled to Europe a second time. His bad temper and alcoholic habits prevented him to get a hero’s place in the annals of the Moravian church. (see p. ?? for more information about the special contribution of Christian Protten). Food for Thought: Am I willing and ready to suffer even rejection because of my decision to be obedient in following guidance which opposes the status quo? Am I prepared to tread the lonely road when compromise could avoid suffering persecution or rejection? And some Ideas: Are we as local congregation prepared to demonstrate visible expressions of unity, breaking through local, regional or sociological barriers of our society? How can we make obedience to God more practical in our families, for example by attempting to reduce the role of TV? 5. Jesus, the Son of poor Parents: An answer to economic Disparity. Through the ages the full implication of the (voluntary) poverty of Christ has often been spiritualized. It has usually been scaled down and sometimes the application was limited to attitudinal matters. Of course, at Christmas time we commemorate that the baby Jesus was only wrapped in swaddling clothes, that a crib was his manger, a baby cot with hay. Rarely, it might be stated that His parents brought along turtle doves as an offering: the sacrifice of the poor. The Gospels do not hunt for a reason to explain away that Jesus had no place to live, no head to rest his head (Matthew 8:20). He was poor, full stop! A biblical Injunction watered down A typical example of how Western theology watered down the impact of the Gospel has been theologizing the Lord’s saying ‘The poor you have always with you’ (Matthew 26:11). This Bible verse has all too often been abused to justify economic disparity. The context of these words shows that Jesus praised the lavish warmth and love of an unknown woman (or Mary, the sister of Lazarus). Was it perhaps too radical for male-dominated Western Society to accept that this act of the anointing of the Messiah (meaning anointed) was actually performed by a socially despised woman? What makes the narrative of Matthew even more remarkable is that this happened to the Master while he was enjoying the hospitality of an outcast, a leper in the report of Luke 7. (According to the Gospel of John a similar event took place at the house of Lazarus and his two sisters.) Another case in point is the beatitude ‘blessed are the poor’ (Luke 6:20). The watering down even crept into a Bible translation of this verse. The 1983 Afrikaans translation comes up with a spiritualized rendering of this beatitude about the poor: Blessed are they who know how dependent they are on God.’41 Thus the intention of the Greek metaphor has been eradicated. According to the original text, the poor is blessed, full stop. The translation of Proverbs 22:2 is another example. Earlier versions brought the rich and the poor in a close proximity to each other. The Afrikaans translation, which was still reprinted in 1983, translated the notion that rich and poor42 meet, but the Nuwe Afrikaanse Vertaling (1984) and the more recent English ones, for example the NIV and the Living Bible, simply note that God has created both rich and poor. I suspect that we westerners have fitted the words to what we would like to hear. Paul, the apostle, describes this phenomenon in 2 Timothy 4:3 as follows: ‘what their itching ears want to hear’. Opposition to Cost-effectiveness In the parable of the poor widow (Mark 12:41-44) Jesus uses a typical sample of the despised of his society, as an example of radical giving. The Gospels clearly show that the poor have a lot to give, especially immaterial gifts like love, warmth, devotion and hospitality. Jesus taught that giving should not always be measured in terms of its (cost)-effectiveness. This goes com­pletely against the grain of typical Western thinking, where we might for example be tempted to ask how effective it is to give to the poor. A typical Western expression is ‘a drop in the ocean.’ In God’s eyes the love and devotion to Him could have unintelli­gible ‘waste’ as result! When his disciples43 or Simon the Pharisee were ready to condemn the ‘wasteful giviing’ of the precious nard ointment by the unnamed prostitute, Jesus praised her affection as a prophetic act. Prayer journeys to strongholds of the arch enemy might not look very ‘cost effective’, but they may turn out to be more ‘productive’ than years of toil, of writing books and compiling expensive video productions. Jesus was of course taught by rabbi’s who used the Hebrew Scriptures as a basis. In fact, the verse about the poor among us (Matthew 26:11), is simply Deuteronomy 15:11 quoted by Jesus. Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures God is depicted as the champion of the materially poor. If they were treated unjustly and exploited by the wealthy, they could call on the king who would have been compelled to intervene on their behalf. Special laws were divinely promulgated to see that nobody should starve. Thus the people of Israel had to let land lie fallow during the Sabbath year and ‘let the poor among the people harvest any volunteer crop that may come up’ (Leviticus 19:10). The Sabbath year (every seventh year) and the Jubilee year (the 7th Sabbath year) were intended by God to be equalizers, so that everybody should get a chance to start anew. Cape Town was put to shame when the Weekend Argus reported on Saturday 3 November 2007 how a Congolese refugee died on a CBD street basically of hunger. Jesus was definitely deeply influenced by this thought pattern. Bosch notes that the the idea of the year of jubilee permeates the Gospel of Luke (Bosch, 1990:41).44 That the nation of Israel did not heed the laws given to them, may never be an excuse for us to perpetuate the historical pattern of greed and exploita­tion, but it should rather be a challenge for us to adapt these traditions for our time. The first Christians carried on in this tradition, giving aid to the poor siblings in Jerusalem. Visser ‘t Hooft calls this inter-church aid ‘.. a witness to the solidity of the bond between all who belong to Christ’ (Visser ‘t Hooft, 1959:49). Paul, the apostle, also came from the same school of thought. Thus he laid a link in the economic sense, as can be seen in his wording of 2 Corinthians 8. Here he radicalizes the idea: ‘Though they (the Macedonian churches) have been going through much trouble and hard times, they have mixed their wonderful joy with their deep poverty, and the result has been an overflow of giving to others. They gave not only what they could afford, but far more...and not because of nagging on my part (verses 2 and 3)... Now I want you (wealthy Corinthians) to be leaders also in the spirit of cheerful giving (v.7)...You know how full of love and kindness our Lord Jesus was: though he was so very rich, yet to help you he became so very poor, so that by being poor he could make you rich ...(v.9)’ Also in the teaching of John, the Baptist, sharing is mentioned. When his listeners asked him what they ought to do as a token of their repentance, he identifies their sin in terms of the preparedness to share their possessions with the poor (Bosch, 1990:22). This means that riches as such are not condemned out of hand. Job, Abraham, Joseph, David and a few other personalities in the Hebrew Scriptures are examples of affluent people who were nevertheless mentioned as positive examples. But Jesus warned against riches that could even make it well-nigh impossible for someone to enter the kingdom of God (Matthew 19:23­, 26). Also Paul saw riches as a snare, as a temptation. The love for money is described as ‘the root of all evil’ (1 Timothy 6:9, 10). Also for the Rich there is a Place in the Sun Nevertheless, Jesus had no scruples to socialize with rich people. He entered the house of the wealthy Zacchaeus, dined with the Pharisee Simon (Luke 7), who surely was not a pauper either. The affluent Joseph of Arimathea regarded him as one of his friends, so much so that he offered his tomb after the crucifixion of Jesus. Likewise Peter visited the influential Cornelius and Paul never made a secret of it that he hailed from the Pharisee establishment. The latter group was not regarded to belong to the poor of their society. The message is clear: rich people should be challenged to share their wealth in a dignified way. Without delving too deeply into a biblical motivation for it, I suggest that this indicates a ‘red card’ to a paternalistic ‘Father Christmas’ attitude of giving or - even worse - to give conditionally, with strings attached. At the same time the dual content of mission work, spiritual and social, is evident. Missionary endeavour can never be limited to mere economic upliftment. By his life-style Jesus demonstrated that mission and social involvement belong together. He taught and preached the Gospel of the Kingdom and healed all illnesses (Matthew 9:35). His disciples were expected to do likewise: According to this report of his public ministry, Jesus asked them to pray for more workers for the white harvest. Yes, the evangelist noted specifi­cally how the Lord had been moved with compassion. His practical compassion for the despised woman that came at midday to Jacob’s well ushered in the harvest of Samaritans who discerned that he was the Saviour of the world (John 4:42). Concern for the practical needs is more than only a valid reason for evangelization. Jesus looked at the whole person: we should do likewise. With regard to a holistic approach including social involvement, the ‘father’ of modern missions’, William Carey, followed in the footsteps of the Moravians in many a way. Profusely using the work of Bishop August Spangenberg, he first wrote his monumental An enquiry into the obligations of Christians to use means for the conversion of the heathen, which singularly ushered in missions like no other work before it. Carey established the Serampore Mission, a Christian community that had an impact on all of India after being more or less insultingly exiled from Britain by his fellow Baptists. Carey not only translated many Christian and secular works in India, but he also fought to bring an end to the practice of sati, the burning alive of widows on their husband’s funeral pyre. He also influenced young British civil servants to deal with the Indian people in a just and culturally sensitive way. Non-material riches Christ ‘became poor to make us rich’. Surely this must especially be understood in a spiritual sense, because Jesus did not even possess a bed. The poor Macedonians shared from their ‘riches’, which they received through their faith in Christ, after they had first dedicated themselves to Him (2 Corin­thians 8:5). The stark difference between wealth and poverty, along with materialism,45 belong to the greatest societal sins of our time. Both excessive possessions and survival worries suffocate the preached word;46 money can stand in the way of the salvation of someone.47 Spiritual values have abso­lute priority compared to material ones. As Proverbs 16:8 ?? states and it is repeated in other wording in 28:6: ‘Rather a little justly than a big income with injus­tice.’ Furthermore, there is a connection between poverty/riches on one hand and faith on the other hand: ‘For if I grow rich, I may become content to live without God. And if I am too poor, I may steal, and thus insult God’s holy name’ (Proverbs 30:9). There is also an interaction between spiritual and material values: A surplus of the one can lead to a dearth of the other. Many a believer fell away from the faith when his wealth increased. Generally, material­ism has led to a mixture, a syncretism in Western society which is alien to the spirit of the ‘New Testament’. Wealth has not only effectively divided the rich from the poor; it divided the Church. Spangenberg (1773-75:1181) reports how Count Zinzendorf was filled with compassion when the Jewish Daniel Nunez da Costa and his wife approached him just before his return from the Caribbean in 1739. Zinzendorf paid their fare to enable them to get back to Europe. Zinzendorf understood very well that border-crossing mission work implied a holistic approach. He even went the second mile, giving his state-room to the couple, while he himself shared a cabin with other passengers (Weinlick, 1956:146). How drastically that differs with some modern giving for missions. One of the best (i.e. worst) example is probably a stingy old lady who ‘generously’ sent a parcel with tea-bags as content to a missionary family, with the note: ‘these bags have only been used once!’ Zinzendorf's generous gesture was evidently not meant as a bribe, but Da Costa did get interested in the Gospel hereafter. On the ship he would often be with the Count until after midnight. But Zinzendorf would not coerce him in any way; he did however share his faith freely and ‘how the Lord loved him’ (Spangenberg, 1773-75:1183). In fact, Da Costa stayed for four months with the Moravians in Marienborn and corresponded with Zinzendorf for years hereafter.48 It however also happened that the Count ran out of cash himself. He was not too proud to walk long distances such as in November 1735. Casually he reported how he arrived in Beyreuth at nine in the evening after walking during the day from Ebersdorf. His nourishment for the day had been three pears and some bread (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:39). Economic Disparity as a Challenge The apparent global economic disparity is demonstrated in every South Afri­can city. Even in small country towns there still is a clear divide between the haves and the have-nots, a heritage of apartheid practises. A clear challenge has arisen for South African Christians. Just like in the Jerusalem of the first century (C.E.), the differences could become another reason for the ministry of relief. Grave economic disparity goes against the spirit of the ‘New Testament’. Paul advised the Corinthian believers: ‘Right now you have plenty and can help them; then at some time they can share with you when you need it’ (2 Corinthians 8:14). Will the incarna­tion, our Lord’s becoming flesh, also be made concrete in the new Southern Africa? Will we as the wealthier Christians see the biblical necessity of sharing meaningfully, yes to the extent of becoming prepared to ‘impoverish’ ourselves? Throughout the history of missions, the greatest impact has been made on world evangelization by men who took this biblical imperative seriously. St Francis of Assisi, wealthy as a young man, has been the universal model of apostolic poverty. ‘It was his release from the powers of greed that enabled him to move into levels of spiritual power and save whole cities’ (in Wagner, 1995:26). Count Zinzendorf put all his material pos­sessions at the Lord’s disposal to further mission work. Sharing of possessions was common in Herrnhut after the revival of 1727. In fact, for twenty years a communal life-style was practised by North American Moravians, where sharing with the local Indians was seen as the biblical command. C.T. Studd - famous cricketer and millionaire of the late 19th century - gave away a fortune because he realized that no sacrifice could be too great in the light of what Jesus has done for us on the Cross of Calvary. Kwa Siza Bantu in Natal has shown that the principle is far from anti­quated. Communal living is still practised there after the start of the revival there in 1966. A subsidiary project was started near to Malmesbury in the Boland. To a lesser extent some mission agencies have been practising the principle with success. A communal life-style is somehow determined by charismatic leadership. It happened more than once that the initial drive petered out after the death/demise of the original leader. The Moravians were blessed that the gifted Bishop August Spangenberg could take over the helm after the death of Count Zinzendorf in 1760. A Challenge to the Rich Zinzendorf made full use of his status as an aristocrat to get acquainted with the very rich. In fact, it was the invitation to the coronation of Christian VI in Denmark which became the decisive spur to the missionary movement from Herrnhut. Of course, the Count loved meeting those wealthy people who also served the Lord. (However, he had utter disdain for the immoral life-style of the nobility of his day.) As a rule the rich whom he befriended, rose to the occasion, enabling the Moravians to do all the missionary work they did. Through the influence of the rich merchant Cornelis Schel­linger, the Moravians could for example buy the castle at Zeist in Holland. They had been desperately looking for property closer to the sea, from where the missionaries could go out to the unevangelized world. At the Lausanne II congress in Manila (1989), the congress leaders made the following statement: ‘World evangelization will make little progress, unless the Christians accept the challenge of the poor.’ We should take to heart what Josefina Gutierrez, said in the light of her experience in the squatter camps of Manila: ‘Our faith does not make any sense unless it is coupled with appropriate deeds.’49 Viv Grigg boldly summarized this issue very aptly: ‘Many sins prevent effective intercession. Penetrat­ing urban centres of affluence may require the voluntary renunciation of wealth’ (in Wagner, 1995:26). Wealthy and middle-class South African Christians have all the chances to practise ‘charity begins at home’ in this regard. Thus they could become an example for other Western Christians, who do not have the close proximity of third world living condi­tions. We should be careful that we do not speak too glibly about this matter, knowing that there is a price to pay. It is no wonder that the rich young man went away sadly (Matthew 19:16ff).50 It is important to note the relationship of possessions to the call to discipleship, to following Jesus. This is the biblical basis on which wealthy people can be challenged to share their privileges voluntarily. It would be wrong to dilute the bibli­cal challenge in any way. Nevertheless, it might be a help to note that there exists an oral tradition according to which the Cypriot Barnabas was the rich young man. Later Barnabas not only had the special insight to search for Paul to help him (Acts. 11:25), but he also became a stalwart warrior leader in the missionary con­gregation of Antioch. … and a Challenge to the Poor People who are generally regarded as materially poor South African Christians, have a special obligation to share from their brand of ‘riches’. In spite of even abject poverty, these people often still radiate human warmth and hospitality as part and parcel of their way of life. They should however be wary of becoming infected by the materialism of Western society. South Africa has robbed itself by not fostering inter­racial contact in the past. But it’s not too late to make amends. Blacks should be invited to share from their imma­terial riches. The wealthier compatriots could do their part by conceding the poverty of their individualistic living and becoming open to learn from the more communal living of Africa. The world at large has already profited through the contribution of Archbishop Tutu. He has been advocating the continental concept of ubuntu, whereby people can only realize their full potential via respectful inter-action with other human beings, irrespective of their religious, social, cultural or whatever other conceivable background. The Republic of South Africa has always been proud to be known as a Chris­tian country. If we would live up to it, then it should not be a problem for all financially able South African followers of Jesus to be prepared to share with those who are less fortunate materially. Then we could for example support missionaries from other African countries and even from other parts of the world. In fact, the principle is not so strange any more. Some South African churches are already supporting evangelists from the Indian subcontinent. Various training institutions have been offering relatively cheap Bible School training as well as giving bursaries to the indigent. This has been going on already for some years. In the Peninsula, the Cape School of Missions in Ravensmead (later in Grassy Park) pioneered to empower people from the disadvantaged groups and from other African countries through very affordable fees and acceptance of candidates without secondary education certificates. More of this sort of thing could go some way to meet the new missionary challenge. Wheels for God’s Word and Ten Forty Outreach/ Africa Arise were two other initiatives that started in Cape Town in recent decades after servants of God had been moved by the Holy Spirit to start projects that attempted to ultimately reach millions with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, using simple tools and basic training of evangelists. The idea of training given by some churches, using African languages as teaching medium, is of course quite old. In many of those institutions the motivation was not to get Black South Africans as missionaries to the rest of Africa. The most extreme case occurred when only White graduates were chosen to go to other countries of Southern Africa and individ­ually even further afield. The Black students were often only trained in order to go and teach their ‘eie mense’ (own people). Biblically speaking this is not good enough. Acts 1:8 does not speak only of Jerusalem, but also about Judea, Samaria and the ends of the earth. Professor Gerdener was a notable exception in Dutch Reformed circles at a time when the apartheid ideology took shape in a rather isolated instance when he envisioned his denomination to become ‘Not a sending church as opposed to a receiv­ing church, but two sending churches for the waiting millions who are still outside’ (Gerdener, 1959:103). 51 Sacrificial giving and radical sharing still is a challenge to all South Africans. A few positive Examples South Africa has one major positive example. The Christian community of Kwasiza Bantu, where common sharing of resources is still the practice, has been functioning in harmony for over four decades.52 Christians from all races and various strata of society, even Christians from overseas have been blessed. This community - along with the reconcili­ation work of Africa Enterprise - contributed significantly to the break­down of apartheid. Here the unity in Christ has been practised and preached. Unfortunate­ly Kwasiza Bantu is situated so far away from the rest of South African society that it took years before its existence was even generally known. (In the 1980s there were other groups like Koinonia under the leadership of Dr Nico Smith that also tried to break down the racial barriers, but us a rule there was not a general sharing of income like Kwasiza Bantu.) Cape Town has seen a few splendid examples of meaningful sharing of resources in recent years. In 1998 a couple from Mitchells Plain, who came to the Lord from Islam, Abdul and Zulpha Morris, became God’s special instruments to help abused women and abandoned children. Charles and Rita Robertson, an Afrikaner couple made significant resources available for the Cape offices of Jericho Walls. This movement helped usher in the Global Day of Prayer, networking closely with Graham Power and his construction company which significantly contributed to some spiritual transformation of the Cape Peninsula. Dr Charles Robertson was a catalyst for church-led restitution. A French immigrant has been helping many French- and Swahili-speaking female refugees sacrificially with accommodation, practical assistance and generating employment towards a modest income. Very few people are in the position to emulate this, but the principle could become an example of how to deal with the economic disparity in the world at large. Nevertheless, this can mainly be expected from people who have a new mind-set, for example committed believers in Jesus who have been transformed from within (see Romans 12:1,2). Is the sharing of employment too radical to suggest as a possibility at this time of enormous unemployment? The alternative is quite ghastly, to quote ex-Prime Minister Vorster in a different context. Less people doing more work has become general and fashionable. The tag 're-organization' is nothing else than a dubious euphemism for modern exploitation. This will inevitably lead to more and more people being stressed, if not getting burnt out. Rising oil prices have been causing substantial increases of basics. Much of the profits disappeared into the pockets of the rich. This is sinful, which may lead to squatter food riots, unless the problem is tackled at its roots. Economic injustice is becoming the new time bomb. Assisting the underdeveloped first World It hardly needs any debate to state that the so-called first world is socially completely underdeveloped with its emphasis on individualism and materialism. South Africa’s Christians could become a role model to the rich Western countries not only in the voluntary sharing of wealth but also in accepting non-material aid from the poor magnanimously. Hospitality and spontaneity are sadly lacking in most Western countries. By the way, the relationship between wealth and inhospitality is not new at all. Jesus had to reprimand the relatively socially high standing Pharisee Simon about his duties as a host (Luke 7:44-46). The biblical imperatives of patience and long-suffering are virtues which have been tested and tried by Black South Africans through their experiences under oppress­ive apartheid policies. What a blessing these Christians could become to many countries if these immaterial advantages are put into the service of the Lord. This has been realized in some unexpected quarters. In an article in the December 1991 issue of IEM (Indian Evangelical Mission) ‘Outreach’, a ‘Macedonian call’ was published, which originated from a part of the former Soviet Union. It included the following words: ‘If you Asians and Africans come, you do not come with green paper53 in your pocket, but you come with a heart of love. No one will expect you to pay for a big project, or deliver some technology, or bring millions of books along. ... So you will bring... your experience and your answers to problems that you have faced in your country. We talk about reconciliation and about mistrust. Where should we learn this if not in Latin America or Southern Africa? You Christians of Africa and Asia have solved the problems you are facing daily, and some of them are very similar to the Soviet problems. May be you have more answers than some theology professors from Germany or North America.’ Of course, we know that we are still far removed from solving all the problems in South Africa we are facing, especially that of the ongoing violence and crime, (even though the cause of the present malaise can easily be detected in the spiral that followed the law that created easy bail opportunity.) It is generally recognized that South Africa has some experience in the area of racial reconciliation. Viv Grigg points to a special dynamic of reaching the poor: ‘From the ministry of preaching among the poor emerge spiritual leaders... Being among the poor proves to be a training ground for understanding the structures which oppress and cause poverty. Luke 4:18 tells us that God unleashes his spirit especially on such servants' (in Wagner, 1995:27). Food for thought: How far am I prepared to share my livelihood, my income with poorer brothers or sisters in Christ, even to the extent that it hurts? Am I also sharing immaterial riches like love, compassion, warmth, my time, hospitality? Deon Snyman, a full-time worker of the Foundation for Church-led Restitution, suggested that the property owners should invest the ‘dividend’ they earned from the steep increase of the value of real estate into a fund to empower the poor. Assisting their domestic workers to buy a house is another suggestion that has been followed up by quite a few affluent people. And some ideas: How about supporting a missionary/missionaries from your area, in combination with other churches from a different economic back­ground? If you belong to the upper layers of society, have you ever thought of getting some experience of township hospitality? The accommodation there might probably not be that what you are used to, but it will definitely help you to understand another culture better. 6. Jesus, the Servant leader: An Object Lesson in Servitude Jesus himself set the pace as he washed the feet of His disciples (John 13). In so doing he performed the menial task that was usually done by slaves. The importance John attached to this act of love is amplified when one considers that the story of the feet washing takes the place in the context of the last supper in the fourth Gospel. The Servant Leader pre-figured Paul penned in his letter to the Philippians (2:5-8): "Your attitude should be the kind that was shown to us by Jesus Christ, who, though he was God, did not demand and cling to his rights as God, but laid aside his mighty power and glory, taking the disguise of a slave and becoming like men. And he humbled himself even further, going so far as actually to die a criminal’s death on a cross." It is interesting how this was pre-figured in the life of Moses. The rejection by his own people again and again, especially during the desert travels, is well-known. But also the run-up to this tragedy points clearly to the ultimate destiny of our Lord, to save people from slavery, from every form of bondage. We see the former prince of the Egyptian palace doing the work of a slave at the well, drawing water, filling the troughs and letting the sheep drink (Exodus 2:20). The deeper message of Philippians in the life of Moses pointing to the death and resurrection of our Lord was aptly summarized by the author of the Hebrews (11:24-26): ‘By faith Moses… refused to be called the son of the Pharaoh”s daughter, choosing rather to endure ill-treatment with the people of God … considering the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt’. The implication is clear: Christ descended from the heavenly glory, not regarding it as degrading to come and live among men. In fact, Christ became a servant; a doulos, a slave. Voluntarily he took upon himself the humiliation of the Cross to redeem us from our sins. Another implication is that servitude means giving of yourself uncondi­tionally. Sacrificial living is missionary in itself, opening people up to the Gospel truths without words. Peter likewise deemed the fellow­ship of mutual service (1 Peter 4:10) as quite important. The Gospel according to Mark depicts the fact that Jesus gave his atoning death as a duty done by a servant: ‘And whoever wants to be greatest of all must be the slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to help others, and to give his life as a ransom for many’ (Mark 10:44f). In the first chapter of the Gospel of John (verse 12) it is specifically mentioned that he came to His own but that ‘those who were His own did not receive Him.' This was applicable to His home town where He could not perform miracles because of the scepticism and unbelief there. This was also valid for the nation of Israel as a whole to our day. The Ball Game: modern Feet Washing Steve Sjogren gives an interest­ing modern-day adaptation of feet washing: ‘Jesus would be showing people the love of God in practical ways. Instead of washing feet he might be washing cars. After all, that’s the way people get around these days.’54 Sjogren makes quite clear that - following the example of Jesus - credible deeds should ideally precede words. He calls his whole approach appropriately ‘Servant Evangelism’. Another aspect which is also implied in the Lord’s example in John 13 is servant leadership. In so many words Jesus taught His disciples when they were quarreling about who should be the greatest: "The greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves... I am among you as one who serves" (Luke 22: 26-27). In their book Lead like Jesus Ken Blanchard and Phil Hodges point out that the word leader is mentioned six times by the Lord but the word servant/slave more than 200 times. And in one of the six times Jesus actually said: ‘Do not be called leaders…’ (Matthew 23: 10). Servitude in a church implies a mutuality which fosters fellowship, but at the same time it calls for a commitment to one another. Our Lord’s ‘new command’ to love one another (John 13:34), has many variations in the epistles: accept one another (Romans 15:7), encourage one another (Hebrews 10:24f), forgive one another (Ephesians 4:32), honour one another (Romans 12:10), instruct one another (Romans 15:14), serve one another (Galatians 5:13), submit to one another (Ephesians 5:21). The biblical Way to Leadership Jesus taught his disciples the way to greatness, one could just as well say the biblical way to leadership: Whosoever aspires biblical leadership, must be prepared to take the lead in servitude. The way in which someone ‘climbs the ladder’ in secular society is in complete contrast to the biblical way. The widely ‘accepted method’ of modern society is to blow one’s own trumpet and deride the rival. More than once Jesus forbade people to spread the news that he had healed them. The apostle Peter summarizes the biblical way of getting to the top: ‘If you will humble your­selves under the mighty hand of God, in his good time he will lift you up’ (1 Peter 5:6, similarly James 4:10). There is furthermore a modern tendency in some circles, purporting that democratiz­ation makes leadership superfluous. ‘Rotation of the chair’, ‘self-realization’ and similar con­cepts cloud the fact that people have different gifts. Jesus definitely looked at the issue differently. A closer study of his dealings with Peter will show how He nurtured and developed the natural leadership gifts of Peter. Through his impulsiveness the disciple was courting with disaster. The Master used exactly Peter’s major weakness to bring him down from carnal bravery to mature him into the eventual mighty apostle. The Bible acknowl­edges natural gifts of leadership, but some­times the sharp edges must be cut away, the shouting tendency toned down before a natural leader can be used by God. Alter­nately, too often the spiritual God-appointed leader is not the impres­sive-looking person or the eloquent speaker. However, the Bible is quite clear that servant leadership is needed, optimally in the context of a team. It seems furthermore as if the ‘New Testament’ churches had a group of servant leaders rather than a single leader. This was certain­ly the case in Antioch (and this was also the situation in 18th century Herrnhut). This does not rule out the presence of a charismatic gifted leader, a ‘general’ or ‘captain’. But he should still be a servant leader of course. Finally, it is important to take a quick look at the way in which leaders were chosen in the ‘New Testament’. Jesus spent time ‘in the hills’ (Matthew 4:1-11; Mark 3:14) before he summoned certain ones to become his chosen twelve. After his ascension the eleven remaining disciples prayed and drew the lot to determine the successor of Judas. Barnabas and Paul were commissioned while the Anti­och church prayed and fasted. Nowhere do we read of ‘democra­tic’ elections after men/women had been required to blow their own trumpet in one way or the other, as is the custom in so many churches. In Acts 6 we find the cri­teria for deacons to be chosen, included being Spirit-filled. In his letters - notably in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 2 - Paul also gave clear guidelines what sort of people should be in the leadership of churches. That should give ample guidelines when the time has arrived for leaders to step down, for example when the behaviour of children bring dishonour to their parents. An honourable reason to step down is a mu­tually agreed moment to give others the chance to grow into leadership, especially when there is a case of over-commitment. The open transparent church council meetings - where ordinary church members could join in - is another option which would be in accordance with the Spirit of the ‘New Testament’.55 In home churches and informal fellowships this model can nowadays be more easily practiced (See also consultation with church leadership below on p.105). Biblical Leadership The Bible clearly contradicts the way in which leadership operates in secular society. Natural man tends to look up to the man/woman who shouts loudest, to those who can make the best impres­sion. We should contrast this with the way how Saul was hiding in the baggage after he had been anointed as king (1 Samuel 10:22), albeit that we cannot take unbecoming modesty and an inferiority complex as a model. Jesus left the crowd when they were about to make Him their ruler (John 6:15). Also in Christian circles the affluent mode has taken over: whoever can afford the most expensive technology, is the front-runner. Therefore, missionaries are still predominantly recruited from Western countries and from affluent societies. Koreans seem to have emulated this unhappy pattern. In the Word there is an emphasis on the calling of new workers by God rather than their recruitment. There is a subtle difference between the two concepts. But even then, someone who clearly has had God’s hand on his life, usually only qualifies through a humbling crucible experience. Abraham has rightly been called a friend of God. Only through experiences of humiliation, deportation and seemingly endless waiting on the fulfillment of God’s promise to him, he became true to his name, the father of nations. Moses was spared as a baby and raised in the palace. But he was not spared the experience of the life of a refugee and the dependency on a mouthpiece. He became the ultimate example of biblical leader­ship, as he did not attempt in any way to defen­d himself when his sister rebelled against him as leader (Numbers 12). He became a type of Christ where God had to intervene on his behalf: Jesus did not open his mouth after his accusers had led him away like a sheep, which was about to be slaugh­tered (Isaiah 53:7). God seems to specialize in calling and raising people from low parentage for leadership, for example Gideon and Saul. An outsider like the reddish David from the little town of Bethlehem was God’s chosen one. (He was evidently not regarded as a ‘real’ son by his father Isai. Who his mother was is unknown. That he had to be specially fetched after all the ‘real’ sons had been paraded, and that he was reddish, indicated that his mother may have been of different extraction.) But also David only qualified after humili­ating experiences. Once he even imitated a madman to save his life. And yet, he became ‘a man after God’s heart’ because he was repentant. Types of Death and Resurrection Hebrew Scriptural precedents of Jesus as the suffering servant come to mind, people who had to go through the crucible to serve their people. Joseph was more or less innocently thrown into a well (Genesis 37:21) and Jeremiah (38:6) was treated likewise because of his uncomfortable prophecies. In both cases the initial idea was that they should die. Both were rescued before this could happen. Just as the implication of resurrection is contained in the verses from Philippians quoted above, both Joseph and Jeremiah were ‘resurrected’.56 Abraham experienced Gethsemane and resurrection in a special way through the sacrifice of his son. The dark hour after the instruction to sacrifice his only son, was followed by the resurrection experience on the third day (Genesis 22:4), after which he could confidently speak about returning with the lad (22:5). With His own Son, God allowed Jesus to become a ransom for our sins, He did not intervene; that was the Lamb, that would die for the sins of the world (John 1:29,35). The Cape had its own version after Georg Schmidt, South Africa’s first missionary, deemed it feasible to leave the Cape to get a ‘proper’ ordination in Holland. (He had originally only been ordained by letter). Fifty years later the core of a congregation had been predominantly formed by Magdalena, one of his converts at Baviaanskloof, the later Genadendal, albeit that she still enjoyed two years of discipling before Schmidt left for Germany. To follow Christ means stepping down Ever since Peter gave the example of stepping down from his condescending attitude in obedience to the command of the Holy Spirit to enter the home of the Roman soldier Cornelius, there can be no excuse for any artificial social barriers in the Church of Jesus Christ. Any effort in this regard would be tantamount to disobedience to the teaching of the Word. In his Epistle to the Philippians (2:5ff), Paul showed that this is the crux of the Gospel, that our Lord 'stepped down' so to speak, ultimately into the grave, having left his heavenly glory in obedience to the Father. Through the ages missionaries have understood that to follow Christ meant ‘stepping down’, being prepared to forgo privileges and being prepared to be humiliated for the sake of the Lord. Unfortunately, but definitely not in the spirit of Christ - an air of heroism was attached to being sent out as a missionary. However, authors and publishers have been very selective with biographies and historiography in general. Those missionaries who fitted the role expectation like David Livingstone and Mary Slessor were put on a pedestal, but ‘troublesome’ missionaries like Dr John Philip, who rocked the boat of British (and South African) society by speaking out on behalf of the oppressed, were branded as ‘political.’ Similarly, South African Christian mission history displays bias against the missionaries Johannes van der Kemp and James Read. It was not appreciated that they married slaves. In the case of Van der Kemp the age difference complicated matters, as did the immoral behaviour of Read, fathering a child outside of wedlock. Of course, the society of Jesus’ days also had a problem with the religious leader who socialized with ‘sinners’, the lower ranks of their day. Ruth Tucker has given a healthy breeze in this regard with her honesty in her book From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, 2004. Thus she narrates on p. 185 the special debt of Britain in the run-up to the Opium War. (1839-42). It is very sad indeed in this regard that missionaries were involved with opium smuggling. Roman Catholics have been very good in hiding the misdemeanour of their friars and nuns. The example that Afrikaans dramatist and poet C. Louis Leipoldt used in Die Heks, viz. that of a 'witch' who had been sentenced to death when it was revealed that Cardinal D'Orilla had fathered her daughter, may be an extreme case. Only here and there records such as this can be found, but the unbiblical expectation of celibacy for all Roman Catholic clergy may have created a lot of bitterness against Christianity This surely is a part of the unpaid debt of the Church. It has perhaps not been appreciated sufficiently that real, meaningful contact between master and servant contains the seed of radical mission work. The best example in well-known mission history is probably when Count Zinzendorf ‘stepped down’ to speak to the slave Anton at the occasion of the coronation of Christian VI of Denmark in 1731, after the mediation of one of his team from Herrnhut. This was a case of meaningful dialogue57 because Anton, the slave, challenged Zinzendorf, the aristocrat, in no uncertain way. The Count responded positively, inviting Anton to come over to Herrnhut and repeat his challenge to the congregation that had already heard of the worldwide mission need. (This happened for example at a meeting on the 10th February 1728, when Zinzendorf especially referred to distant lands - Turkey, Morocco and Greenland. Twenty six men were hereafter prepared for missionary work, even though there was no immediate prospect to leave for some mission field.) In Herrnhut Anton did not mince his words either. He stated unequivocally that any prospective missionary to St Thomas, the island in the West Indies from where he originated, should be prepared to become like one of them; the missionary candidate had to be prepared to become the equal of a slave. The Moravians of Herrnhut, through their child-like faith in Jesus, accepted the challenge spontaneously. In the next few decades they left the little village in their hundreds to places all over the world. We note that the above-mentioned challenge to missions of February 1728 occurred already half a year after the widely reported revival of 13th August, 1727. Although the Herrnhut believers were apparently still very much in the revival mood, they needed the slave Anton to get them moving to the mission fields. What will be the reaction of wealthy South Africans if their poor com­patriots challenge them to share their lives meaningfully, to become servants, the equivalents of slaves?58 Stepping down as a Custom? The socialization of Count Zinzendorf with Anton was definitely not an one-off occasion. It was part of his life-style to converse with kings and slaves alike, whoever came across his path. For almost a decade the Count had been ‘on everyday terms with artisans and peasants’, confirming his instinctive conviction that spiritual gifts are independent of social rank (Weinlick, 1956:96). Zinzendorf legally renounced his titles in the US in 174?? because he found them an impediment among the colonists. Benjamin Franklin was present at the ceremony, which was conducted in Latin in front of the Governor of Pennsylvania. Zinzendorf was said to be the only European nobleman who went among the Indians, visiting their leaders as equals. Though Zinzendorf did not promote the abolition of slavery, inside the Moravian Church slaves were truly equal. In Bethlehem, PA, at the single sisters' house you could find a German noblewoman, a Delaware Indian, and an African slave sharing the same dormitory room. Where else in the world would that occur at that time? And Zinzendorf endured much criticism for allowing women to preach and to hold roles of leadership in the church. The example of Zinzendorf was also emulated outside of Moravian confines. The Dutch missionary van der Kemp, who was no stranger to the Moravian settlement of Zeist before he came to the Cape, would be a model for contextualisation. The German Karl Gutslaff would perfect the model, dressing himself like a Chinese national to gain entry into China. Gutzlaff started off in Indonesia after comissionaing by the Dutch Missionary Society. His strategy was to train Chinese refugees as evangelists and missionaries for entering the proud Chinese mainland. At this time China would not permit missionaries to enter any more in the wake of the Opium War during which missionaries played a sad role, involved in smuggling. Gutslaff, who found his way to Hong Kong, later also had the vision to train nationals of that country to reach the Chinese millions in the interior. He trained Hudson Taylor, who started the China Inland Mission. Sadly, the visionary got involved in a hoax which created a lot of hype in the West. Funds that were often sacrificially donated for the missionary cause, ultimately landed in the black market opium trade (Tucker, 2004:185). Servant Leadership Count Zinzendorf demonstrated what servant leadership was all about. Although it becomes clear from all reports that he was a dominant figure in the church, his style was nowhere autocratic although aristocratic. Thus he regarded the way Friedrich Martin treated his Negro congregants as too strict, but he did not oppose his missionary in the least ((Spangenberg, 1773-75:1177). Even though he disagreed vehemently on some issues, it seems that Zinzendorf hardly ever imposed his will on others. Although he was for example very dissatisfied about a financial transaction which had been enacted in his absence - and against which he protested as soon as he heard about it, the Count scratched the capital together with great difficulty (Spangenberg, 1773-75:1490). The Count excelled at integrating the initiatives of congregants. Centuries before cell groups were ‘discovered’, the Herrnhut congregation was divided in 56 small bands where an informal atmosphere encouraged innovation. Thus the cup of the covenant - whereby the cup would pass from hand to hand as well as the dawn service on Easter Sunday, which were both initiated by the group of the single brethren - became standard practice in the denomination as a whole (Weinlick, 1956:85). Zinzendorf instructed candidate missionaries to have this servant attitude: ‘You must never try to lord over the hea­then, but rather humble yourself among them, and earn their esteem through the power of the Spirit...’ How seriously they took the instructions is borne out by the fact that Matthaeus Freundlich, a first generation missionary in St Thomas, married the mulatress Rebecca, at a time when non-Whites were still called ‘Wilden’ even in the literature of the Brethren. The missionary had to seek nothing for himself. ‘Like the cab-horses in London, he must wear blinkers and be blind to every danger and to every snare and conceit. He must be content to suffer, to die and be forgotten’ (Lewis, 1962:92). Zinzendorf demonstrated what it means to regard the other higher than yourself. Spangenberg reports how he really praised the North American Indian believers. In his diary the following entry is found for March 9, 1729: ‘...I spoke earnestly with our servant Christoph and was deeply humbled by his testimony concerning him­self. He is far in advance of me’ (Lewis, 1962:90). It is evident that the lessons were thoroughly learned and put into practice. In his first confrontation with the Moravians with him on a ship bound for North America, John Wesley was deeply impressed: ‘...I had long before observed...their behaviour.’ He was struck by their humility, ‘performing servile offices for the other passengers which none of the English would undertake.’ Teachability and Humility On the other side of the spectrum Zinzendorf also taught that the leaders had to be teachable themselves. ‘Only when the ‘Amtsträger’ (clergyman) becomes a brother amongst brethren and accept from them fraternal help in comfort, encouragement, complimenting, admonishment, correction and prays with and practises brotherliness as one of them, then brotherhood is realized. The church cannot live on the long run from an invisible and uncommitted brotherhood’(Beyreuther, 1962:193). Through his example Zinzendorf inspired others. His teachability inspired noblemen and professors to go and sit at the bare feet of the potter Martin Dober (Weinlick, 1956:87) and his putting the kingdom first found a following when learned men declined high academic posts. Spangenberg refused an offer as professor of Theology at Jena (Weinlick, 1956:111) and Samuel Lieberkühn, who had studied Hebrew thoroughly, preferred to go and work among the Jews in Holland rather than accepting an offer to become professor of Semitic languages in Königsberg (Lütjeharms, 1935, in the footnote on p.110). Arved Gradin, a prominent Swedish academic of Theology and Philology, declined the call to a professorship at Uppsala university, coming to Herrnhut instead. Lording and Servility The lording attitude was often copied and emulated by non-Western ministers in our continent. South Africa has been no exception to this general statement. Bossing is still one of the problems in churches throughout Africa. This has sometimes made it difficult for church members to submit, with splits as a common result. Some of these ministers had - and sometimes still have - their own domestic workers living in sub-standard living conditions. What a change would take place in South African society if Christians of all races start doing things together on a substantial scale, including the household chores, gardening and drinking tea. Unfortunately the servant attitude of the early Moravian missionaries degenerated to such an extent that missionaries were later not commonly known any more for a servant-like attitude. In fact, in South Africa just the opposite took place, as the influence of apartheid society took its toll. In the (Moravian) mission town of Elim for example the townsfolk were calling the missionary ‘Heer’ (Lord) in the late 1950s. They were looking up to the missionaries in an attitude of servility rather than with a healthy reverence and respect. Too often how­ever, the missionaries unfortunate­ly also adopted the condescend­ing habits of the White colonists. South Africa has another problematic legacy, which is related to the issue under discussion. People of colour have often gone to the other extreme, which is best described by the ‘ja-baas’ mentality: even educated people sometimes went cap in hand in an undignified attitude to get some things from Whites. It was all too often regarded as ‘Christian’ to suffer under the bossy attitude of a superior. In the next chapter we shall look separately at the issue of suffering for the sake of the Gospel. It should suffice to say here that although Jesus taught us to have the attitude of a servant, yes even of a slave, this does not mean that it should transpire in an undignified way. Paul taught Philemon that he should take his run-away slave Onesimus back as a brother in Christ. Both the bossy attitude as well and the cap-in-hand mentality is outlawed by Scripture! South Africans may have to repent of both, as the case may be, and ask forgiveness from the Lord and from the other party where possible. Thumbs down to hierarchical Church Structures In the ‘NT' church plural non-hierarchical leadership seems to have been the norm. Presbyters and deacons were not regarded as titles but given respectively as a token of respectful honour and a function in serving. Pastors, teachers and evangelists were on a par as part and parcel of the four- or five-fold ministries. Likewise apostle was a function, those sent from the bosom of the church from which the word missionary was derived via the Latin missio. The biblical model has hardly been practiced better than among the Moravians of Bethlehem (Pennsylvania) in the ‘new world’ in the 1750s. ‘Seldom has even the most easy service executed with such holy reverence... a brother in the stable or in his manual work can ever think that he does nothing for the Saviour; whoever is faithful in the outward (things) is just as well a respectable servant of Christ as a preacher or a missionary.’ The joy with which they performed mundane tasks, intersperse with love feasts, could make one jealous. Even at work they would sing. Thus Spangenberg could write: ‘In our economy the spiritual and physical fit together like the body and soul of man...’ The practice in South Africa became a complete caricature where the clergyman in White Reformed denominations was called dominee (from the Latin word for Lord) the colleague working in one of the Black churches was an eerwaarde, reverend. In rank and file Afrikaner parlance the latter clergyman was derogatorily called the kafferdominee. Black clergy with inferior training were called evangelists. In episcopal Protestant denominations the whole papal hierarchy is still intact minus cardinals and the Pope. Hierarchical church structures have favoured and condi­tioned leaders to become bosses. The dictum coined by Lord Acton that power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely, is so true, also in religious contexts. This is however alien to the spirit of biblical servitude; loving brotherhood, or rather siblinghood, should be the hall-mark of Church work where the leader’s endeavours should aim to empower the congregants. The early Moravian missionaries evidently understood this very well. They discerned that ‘New Testament’ life had to be demonstrated. In the Caribbean they bought slaves free, took them into their houses and worked alongside them on the plantations (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 [1971]:1177). On the other hand, the Herrnhut fellowship respected the culture gender pattern of their day, whereby a distance of mutual respect had to remain intact. The sisters called each other ‘Du’ but used the polite respectful‘Sie’ when they addressed the brethren. Among the brothers the same thing happened. But also the Bishop was not addressed with a title, but merely as brother so and so. (In fact, his role to this day is merely that of the pastor of the clergy, without an administrative function). The caricature of Christianity as it has been practised around the world, is definitely not very attractive. The advantages of superior educational opportunities and good medical care became the misleading trophies of missionary work. Indigenous people were regarded as civilized or Christian when they started to wear Western clothing. No wonder that an oppressive system could flourish - a set-up where suppression became the order of the day. Wealthy ‘Coloured’ and Black Christians often unfortunately also adopted repugnant superior attitudes, playing the boss in the worst sense of the word. What a pity that the unity and fellowship in Christ of rich and poor, of educated and unskilled, hardly got a chance. In this climate, the brotherhood of Islam became for many quite attractive. Others saw the only solution in Communism to achieve some sort of parity. Grace versus Law Paul's distinction between Isaac as the son of the promise and Ishmael as the son of the bondswoman is unquestionably very valid just as that between grace and law. It has however become a tragic by-product, a haughty condescending attitude towards Islam and Muslims. The distortion of Paul's distinction between grace and law developed into a sickening arrogance not only between Protestantism and Catholicism, but a travesty of what the Bible teaches. Protestant theologians were taken on tow by Martin Luther in his going overboard to create the impression that grace and law are mutually exclusive or even asserting that ‘Law’ belongs to the ‘Old Testament’ and grace to the new covenant. In spite of Paul's warning against a lackadaisical attitude towards sin – he actually said in Romans 8 'far from it', licentiousness and even grave sin is tolerated with the excuse that 'grace abounds' or 'die liefde bedek alles', love covers everything. This often happens without remorse and clear evidence of breaking with sinful behviour. In Reformed churches the dichotomy is weakened to some extent when the law is usually read in their liturgy in some form on Sunday in the morning. Following Paul, the apostle, this is followed up by a pronouncement of grace. In more than one instance the Hellenist upbringing of the prodigious Paul comes through. Greek philosophic thinking loved the 'either... or' sentence construction. Coming from his personal experience during which the legalist interpretation of the Torah - against which our Lord also protested vehemently - he would proclaim the law to be an educator to bring one to faith in Christ. Hebrew thinking is more inclusive, wary of false alternatives. Under this influence Paul wrote to the Galatians (3:5) along similar lines with regard to the gift of the Holy Spirit: ‘... by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith.’ (Elsewhere we examine the false alternatives of works and faith.) The incorrect legal and forensic interpretation of Torah – preferably with negative connotations – in contrast to the Jewish understanding of loving and protective teaching, led to a caricature. The sad part of this is that this construction even found its way into Bible translations. The King James version – generally regarded as one of the best English translations - thus fell into the trap by translating John 1:17, incorrectly translating the Greek word kai (and) with but, thereby indirectly implying that there is a contradiction between the law given by Moses and the grace and truth which came through Christ. If one considers how inclusive Count Zinzendorf and his Moravians were – and how the count viewed grace - we understand why they were possibly the most successful ever in the outreach to Jews. The abounding grace that went ahead of the emissaries to the ‘heathen’ nations enabled him to be bold enough to see the same grace at work in the christening of infants, not getting involved in divisive debates about the mode of baptism. In America they put so much grace in practice to accommodate the Sabbatharian habits of the indigenous population that they practised two days of rest. The celebration of the Singstunde (singing hour) on Saturday evening was a tradition adapted from the Jews, where the Sabbath celebration starts on Friday evening. Mutual Support of Victims But we can also learn from the lessons of the past. The suppression by the authorities of this country in the apartheid era was effectively opposed by the cohesion and mutual support of the victims. Even children played a part, for example through collections at schools for the families of workers who had been retrenched after they had been striking. The Bible teaches us to bear each other’s burden (Galatians 6:2). However, solidarity which causes undue and unloving pressure and friction is not in line with biblical identification with the victim, which has love as its motive and driving force.59 In fact, the ethical problem with strikes and the like is that the original meaning of the word protest – to testify positively to something - is often completely lacking. Pro-testare signifies a positive testimony of what one stands for. Striking workers sometimes have no alternative on offer. All too often the modern-day protest only comes up with negative criticism and demands. (This may however not be interpreted as support for exploiting and oppressive employers, who need to be challenged and opposed.) The Christian knows what to do with his own burden and that of the heavy-laden: to drop them in prayer at the Cross of Calvary, and attempt to alleviate suffering if he is in the position to do so. A prominent characteristic of the early Christians was their mutual love. The cohesion and mutual support, yes the loving solidarity of Christians would make great inroads in every materialistic and individualistic society. It could become a major factor in the spreading of the Gospel, as it has defi­nitely been the case with Kwasiza Bantu. At this time of large-scale unemployment, practical solidarity of Christians which leaves human dignity intact, will tell a tale of its own. Meaningful Dialogue What could happen in missionary terms if the peoples of South Africa would engage in meaningful dialogue? Yes, it may mean for many wealthy Christians to step down and being pre­pared to become servant-like. The economic sacrifice might perhaps prove to be less difficult than the attitudinal aspect. In South Africa, some Christians have been quite generous in their giving for mission work, but too often it was not accompanied by the attitude of a servant. If it had been the case, the Muslims of South Africa would most probably not have remained an unreached group in terms of the Gospel.60 The challenge is thus directed to ordinary men to listen carefully to the inner voice. It may lead to unusual, almost humiliating tasks, but it should at all times be done in the attitude of a servant. The question might be asked: what can the ‘lower class’ people do to meet the ‘upper class’? Or is it only a one-sided issue? Indeed, ‘stepping down’ is the ball game; the premise is a situation of siblings, brothers and sisters in Christ. But once the servant attitude is evident and equality assured - the responsibility is equally with those who may be socially on a lower level, to share whatever they have to offer. Fortunately, a new spirit has already slowly started to sweep over parts of the country. Since 1994 new positive measures have been introduced, which would have been unheard of in earlier days. It has become quite possible that affluent Chris­tians may still become involved with the homeless and drug addicts on a significant scale on another level than the condescending habits. The latter attitude was of course better than nothing, but biblically it is not good enough. Thankfully, groups like Habitat for Humanity and a group operating on behalf of Church-led restitution has already made a tentative start in this regard. If the biblical servant spirit takes off, a substantial flow of missionaries to other parts of the world becomes a distinct possibility. The Lack of loving open-minded Dialogue Just like the Roman Catholic Church before Vatican II (1962-5) prohibited their members to search the Scriptures for themselves, Muslim adherents were discouraged (and still are) to read the Bible. Even stronger, Muslim fundamentalists are harshly persecuting those Christians who have left Islam, notably in the Middle East. A next step would then logically have to be discouragement of the study of the Qur’an (as opposed to the mere reciting and superficial reading of it). The reticence with regard to the reading of the Bible can be understood if one considers how an anonymous convert from Islam has put it: ‘Faith in Christ as the Qur’an represents him, is the logical introduction to Christ as the Gospels portray him. Open-minded dialogue goes down the drain if Muslims are kept from reading the Bible themselves!’ Christians are nevertheless also guilty of similar perpetrations. Intolerance was not only the practice long ago through the Inquisition and later with regard to Anabaptists and other non-conformists. Right into the present age modern forms of persecution have been inflicted on theologians who have held differing views than those prescribed by their respective churches. In the Roman Catholic Church action was taken against Hans Küng and Edward Schillebeeckx, who had been major movers at Vatican II. Also in Protestant churches many ministers who had divergent views, for example on the christening of infants, were forced to leave the ministry or at least leave the respective denomination.61 In similar vein, we must add that sacrificial love as a central teaching of Jesus somehow never broke through significantly at any stage of Church History - apart from localized revival-type situations. It was probably not taught clearly as well. Even to-day so many self-confessed followers of the man of Nazareth often appear to be guided more by self-centredness and selfishness. That was camouflaged with nice-sounding words like self-determination and self-realization, pushing through their own will rather than by an attitude in the spirit which Jesus had pioneered, namely that of ‘thy will be done’. More than ever there is a need for concrete steps to break down the walls rather than pious inter-faith talk without any visible results. Last not least, with regard to loving open-minded dialogue, we need to highlight that the dependency syndrome killed honest sharing of ideas like few other measures in mission history. Fearing to offend the ‘generous’ givers from the rich Western nations not only stifled initiative on the part of the receivers, but it also stimulated and perpetuated a beggar attitude among the bulk of the churches of the third world. The call from Africa for a moratorium of money and missionaries in the early 1970s may have sounded very uncharitable. Possibly this was inspired by a reaction against the bossy attitude of Western missionaries who all too often have been giving the impression that they always know it better. One wonders why 2 Corinthians 8 is still unknown by and large, namely how the poor Macedonians begged to be given the opportunity to bless the mother church in Jerusalem? How often is it taught that poor believers have much to give? Was this not what Jesus also demonstrated with the gift of the widow’s mite? The Church world-wide will possibly only really only come into its own if the unity of the Body of Christ in all its diversity is restored across all man-made barriers, thus displaying the multi-coloured wisdom of God (Ephesians 3:10). The verses following that and the next chapter of Ephesians give us an extraordinary glimpse of the universal Body of Christ, the whole family in heaven and earth (3:14) as Paul prayed for the believers – together with all the saints - to be empowered by the four-dimensional love of Christ (3:14-19). Food for thought: Am I prepared to ‘step down’, to get into missionary dialogue and serve those who have been placed under me? Alternately, am I free from negative servility, have I come to respect my Christian boss as a brother/sister in Christ, who is sometimes also in need of loving fraternal encouragement and/or correction? And some ideas: Organize outdoor worship/singing services with local churches from other racial groups and foreigners. Include ‘foot washing’ in the programme of a combined service. (This should not be outdoors.) How about organising servant evangelism as a multi-racial group, which includes foreigners, for example cleaning the toilets of bars and restaurants of the city in residential areas with doubtful repute? 7. Jesus, the special Warrior: a fighter for real Peace An important facet of warfare is to know enough about the tactics and strengths of the enemy. ‘Intelligence agencies’ are used to gather information about the enemy. The classic biblical precedent is the 12 spies who were sent out to Canaan (Numbers 13). Thereafter Joshua sent out two spies to the city of Jericho (Joshua 2). Many victories have been won in the spiritual realm the last two decades as Christians became more aware that we are involved in ‘spiri­tual warfare’. Of course, this should have been nothing new. The apostle Paul had already written in the first century about ‘the devil’s schemes’ and that our struggle is ‘not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers... against the powers of the dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms’ (Ephesians 6:11f). Somehow the enemy has succeeded in blinding the eyes of the church for many centuries to scriptural lessons which seem so obvious to us now. Many ‘types’ of Christ can be found in Scrip­ture, but there are also quite a few of the devil. With regard to the latter, the Pharaoh, with whom Moses had to contend, easily comes to mind (Exodus 5-14). The traditions around Nimrod, who is said to have master-minded the tower of Babel, also comes into the frame. The scheming and plotting of Haman to kill all Joys shows every sign of the work of the master planner of evil (Ester 3). In our day and age HAMAS and the leaders of Iran. (One wonders whether it is mere co-incidence that this is again the Persians, the country of Haman?) No place for Vengeance Some Christians give the impression that leaving the revenge over to God (Romans 12:19; Hebrews 10:30) is solely a 'New Testament' trait. Not only are these verses a quotation of Deuteronomy 32:35, but there are also quite a few other Hebrew Scriptures verses (for example 1 Samuel 24:13; 2 Chronicles 24:22; Jeremiah 15:15) with the same message. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that the spirit of revenge, which is sometimes ascribed to the Jews (and from there possibly emulated by the Muslims), is actually a distortion of God’s plan with His people. Of course, revenge was ordered when His name was at stake. More than once the Israelites incurred God’s wrath, when they were following other gods (for example Judges 6:1; Jeremiah 5:4-9). Some Christians believe fallaciously that Jesus departed from Hebrew Scriptural thinking by refraining from revenge. His correction of the one-sided oral notion of ‘eye for an eye’ and hating the enemy blurred our perception, thinking that such an attitude is consistent with Mosaic Law. A comparison of Luke 4 with Isaiah 61 where Jesus actually stopped short of quoting ‘the day of vengeance of our God’ (Isaiah 61:2), this perception may even be enhanced. We can regard Peter, the apostle who walked the earth with our Lord for around three years, to have been a good judge of the Master’s motives. He summarised His life as follows, as part of an example to follow: ‘When they hurled insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats’ (1 Peter 2:23). We are actually taught in the Hebrew Scriptures: ‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbour as yourself. I am the Lord’ (Leviticus 19:18). Furthermore, though God sometimes has to punish, He is also ‘forgiving and merciful unto those who love Him and keep his commandments’ (Deuteronomy 5:9, 10; Psalm 99:8). With his example of enemy love, Jesus simply stepped in the footsteps of King David. Feed rather than fight your Opponents One of the most profound examples of the principle of feeding rather than fighting your opponents is found in 2 Kings 6:8ff. Elisha the prophet was given special insight into the spiritual realms when the Syrians sought to thrash and invade Israel. The one moment he asked God to open the eyes of his servant to discern the unseen army protecting them, but the next moment he prayed to the Almighty to close the eyes of the enemy forces. When the invading Syrian army was blinded and thus rendered powerless at the mercy of the Israelites - Elisha advised the king not to kill them but to feed them and sent them home. Because some of his Psalms call for divine revenge on his enemies, Christians tend to forget that David had also refrained from it more than once. When he had the chance to kill King Saul, he only cut off a piece of his robe (1 Samuel 24) and on another occasion he spared the king at a time when Saul was once again after his scalp. David refused to practise revenge because he had respect for God’s anointed. Even more dramatically, 1 Samuel 25 narrates how David was prevented from taking revenge. After he had already vowed to kill Nabal and his men, Abigail - Nabal’s wife - was divinely used to intervene. Nabal dies after a heart attack, with the message emerging clear as crystal that vengeance is to be left to God. It is significant that this narrative is recorded just before the next opportunity for vengeance on Saul in 1 Samuel 26. It is almost as if God had reminded David once again of the divine principle, lest he succumb to the new temptation. This is so much in line with what Paul taught, that God will enable us to withstand temptation victoriously (1 Corinthians 10:13). The Nature of the Battle Few Christians today are aware that Paul was basically paraphrasing Isaiah for the Gentile Ephesians, adding a few more items of the armour. In Isaiah 59:17 the breastplate of righteousness and the helm of salvation are mentioned. It has hardly been noted how Paul proceeded - just like Jesus had done by citing from Isaiah 61 - to delete vengeance in his version of (spiritual) weapons. Vengeance would fit to the darker side of things. The follower of Jesus walks in the light, detesting anything which belongs to the kingdom of darkness. It is striking what Paul added to the armour. To buckle yourself with truth is saying in another way: ‘I get ready for battle’. We remind ourselves that Jesus is the way the truth and the life (John 14:6). It also highlights the fight against the real enemy who is a liar from the beginning, whose ‘native language’ (John 8:44, NIV) is lying and deceit. What is especially important is how the ‘NT’ sees the nature of the battle. Paul summarised spiritual warfare aptly: ‘not against flesh and blood’. In the same vein the aged John wrote on the island of Patmos how the victory will be finally clinched in the spiritual ‘war’. The ‘general’ of the army is the meek Lamb. The Unitas Fratrum and Zinzendorf adopted the symbolism, using a lamb with the banner: ‘Our Lamb has conquered. Let us follow Him!’ (Two centuries before him Luther was also very much aware of the real presence of the devil - so much so that he has gone on record as having thrown his ink-pot at the accuser.) It is interesting how the Talmud saw Moses as a Lamb, and thus a precursor of the one of whom Isaiah 53 prophesied, the sheep who wouldn’t open his mouth as he is being taken to be slaughtered, the Lamb to whom John the Baptist referred: In a dream about the boy Moses, the Pharaoh sees the lamb outweighing the might of Egypt on a pair of balances. On the other hand, Jesus is also the Lion of Judah. No wonder that the adversary tries to emulate him, going around like a roaring lion (1 Peter 5:8). But this lion is a bad copy of the real one. Basically he only makes a lot of noise, his teeth have been extracted on the Cross of Calvary. On the issue of ancestral veneration the ‘New Testament’ is not ambiguous. Even for the practice of funerals Jesus would sound harsh in the ear of many an African: ‘let the dead bury their dead.’ The inference is clear: when there is a conflict of loyalty, following Jesus must have the priority. Also Paul emphasized that you cannot worship Christ and other religious powers at the same time (1 Corinthians 10:14-22). God’s Wrath incurred Repeatedly it is stressed in the Scriptures that God’s ‘revenge’ is caused by the estrangement and disobedience of his people. They incurred God’s wrath by running away from him (compare for example Isaiah 63 and 64). The strict words of the prophets were intended to bring them to repentance - back to God. His wrath has the same purpose. He sometimes even used other agents to carry out punishments, especially when his people persevered with idolatry. Idolatry is equated by Jeremiah (2:13) with leaking cisterns. Jeremiah 3 similarly referred to the idolatry which caused the nation to ‘have the brazen look of a prostitute’ (v. 3), but the prophet included this in a moving plea on God’s behalf: "Return, faithless people," declares the Lord, "for I am your husband" (v.14). Throughout the Bible the writers’ intention is to get the wayward people reconciled to God, but on His terms: holiness and righteousness. Ezekiel 16 is an account of how God took special care of the despised Jerusalem, nurturing her until she became ‘the most beautiful of jewels’ (v.6). But she turned out to become a prostitute of the worst kind through her idolatry. God hates idolatry. Jeremiah (4:3) advised not to sow seed on unploughed ground and among thorns. Jesus explained the effect of seed sown among thorns: but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful (Mark 4:19). We should never try to either give someone else the blame or belittle sin, for example by calling greed or covetousness materialism. Paul, the apostle, equated this to idolatry (Colossians 3:5). In stead, we must uproot the thorns. Our love of money and possessions makes our hearts like rocky ground and full of 'thorns' (compare Luke 8:14 ‘The seed among the thorns represents those ... whose faith is choked out by worry and riches and the responsibilities and pleasures of life.) No wonder we become cool, hard and hurting if these issues are not brought to the Cross. Confession and repentance is needed, for individual and for collective sin. Moses confessed the sins of his people after they had worshiped the golden calf, even though he was not involved himself. In the process he became a type of Christ, willing to be blotted out from the divine book of life, willing to bear the consequence of the idolatry of his people (Exodus 32:32). Confession of materialism as idolatry should be the logical conclusion. Sharing meaningfully with the poor would be the proof that we are serious about restitution. Jesus toned down Revenge That Jesus clearly toned down revenge, made him extremely unpopular. The author Luke especially picked up this facet of His ministry. The absence of revenge runs like a golden thread throughout the Gospel of Luke. Bosch suggests that this - perhaps more than anything else apart from nationalism - was a major reason for the change of atmosphere during Jesus’ address in the synagogue of Nazareth (Luke 4:18). By quoting Isaiah 61, the Lord Jesus stopped just short of the reference to ‘the wrath of our God.’ Jesus surely did not endear himself to His Jewish com­patriots by quoting Leviticus 19:18 ‘love your neighbour as your­self’ when he narrated the parable of the Good Samaritan. (Jews traditionally despised Samaritans who mixed pure worship of Yahweh with elements of the Baal cult). This parable is only recorded in the Gospel according to Luke. It is very clearly a teaching on ‘enemy love.’ What caused the complete change of mood that day in the Nazareth synagogue ultimately? Was Jesus’ implied opposition to vengeance the only cause or are there other reasons? I suggest that the positive reference of our Lord to foreigners above all else rubbed his townsmen up the wrong way. This obviously angered them xenophobically, so that they wanted to throw him down the cliff. Turning the other Cheek The reaction of Jesus to the possibly angry or at least indignant exclamation of the Samaritan woman of John 4 - that he as a Jew dared to ask her for a drink - could be interpreted as an example of ‘turning the other cheek’. Instead of retaliating, the Master initiated a discussion on water. In the radical suggestion by Jesus to ‘turn the other cheek’, one finds an excellent example of a crooked misconception that developed out of the elevation of the ‘New Testament’ (in respect of the ‘OT’). Theologians have misled so many of us as Christians to regard the Hebrew Scriptures as inferior! The Bible is a unit. Hebrew Scriptures and ‘NT’ belong together, even though well over 90% of sermons in churches are taken from the ‘NT’. For many years I thought that Jesus’ instruction to ‘turn the other cheek’ was new and innovative. How big was my surprise to discover that Jesus was actually only quoting the Hebrew Scriptures, and not even fully at that. In Lamentations - of all places - Jeremiah identifies himself fully with the sins, the idolatry of his people, which resulted in the exile. Then he writes: ‘Let him offer his cheek to one who would strike him and let him be filled with disgrace’ (Lamentations 3:30). The suffering servant of Isaiah, who is widely accepted as a prophetic foreshadowing, a type of the Messiah, likewise displays these characters: ‘I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I hid not my face from shame and spitting’ (Isaiah 50:5-6). No Door-mat There is however another fallacy. Because Jesus taught his followers to turn the other cheek, to go the second mile, some people deduced that Christians should be ready to be trampled upon, to be a sort of door-mat. Far from it! In John 4 it is reported how a rumour was brought to the Master that John was baptizing more converts. What the motives of those people were who came to Him with the rumour is not clear, but the dynamite contained in it is quite evident. His clashes with the religious estab­lish­ment, equating the leaders with white-washed tombs that contain dead bones along with His overturning the tables in the temple, are all well-known. They demonstrate that Jesus was nowhere the softy some people want to suggest. Matthew (Chapter 23) high­lighted his criticism of the Pharisees, influential religious leaders of the synagogues in a whole chapter. In our dealings with people from other faiths some loving straight talk might be necessary. Senseless debating should be avoided, but they must also hear the truth spoken in love. It is however not always easy to discern whether the conversational partner in religious matters is a sincere seeker after truth. Anno 2015 xenophobia is still very much present in South Africa. Resentment towards Muslims among Christians runs a close second. If we dare to oppose the mood, we should not be surprised to be castigated or side-lined. We should not expect any support from the rank and file Christian. And yet, we have no option if we take following Jesus seriously. It is my conviction that confession is one of the most important biblical mandates in countering any guilt incurred in respect of Muslims (and Jews). Next to that, forgiveness always plays an important part to set parties free who have lived or are living through any form of strife or conflict. Wherever restitution is needed, we should not hesitate to rectify wherever possible for our part of the guilt. Can we take our day to day interaction as human beings as a point of reference? How does one handle conflict in a biblical way? Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 18 is the valid paradigm in this regard. The salient points from this teaching are: a) It is futile to wait on the other party to offer an apology in the case of hurt. If you know there is something between you and a brother or sister, you just make the start to get the air cleared, staring with an apology from your side and be willing to offer forgiveness even before the other party apologized. This is also the route to take even if your own part in the development of the rift is minimal and the other party’s guilt is gross. The biblical route is always to be the least, to serve rather than expect to be served. If there are things to be set right, we have to do it promptly and generously. (Zaccheus was ready to return the fourfold of what he had taken from some people!!) Two Examples from History. The same principles can be applied if guilt of greater magnitude has been incurred, even that between nations. I want to give two examples from history. France and Germany have been enemies for centuries. They were still fighting each other fiercely in the Second World War. Albeit not quite in the same vein, Nazi-led Germany and America were certainly not allies in the first half of 1945. Four great nations – Great Britain, France, West Germany and the USA – formed the core of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which kept the expansionist Communist Block at bay for decades. How did the change come about? I believe that it started in the spiritual realm with the Stuttgart confession by German Christians for the atrocities perpetrated against the Jews. That set the platform for the reconciliation between France and Germany. Their respective presidents Adenauer and De Gaulle became the founders of the powerful economic unit which today is called the European Union. America was ostensibly willing to forgive Germany, taking responsibility for the destruction of the German infrastructure during the war by responding with the Marshall Plan. Generous aid was given to help rebuild a devastated West Germany after the War, in stead of harbouring revenge towards the former enemy. This was of mutual benefit to the two nations and to many other countries as well in its aftermath. The second example is taken from our country: In the 1980s Southern Africa was heading for a major racial war. The oppressive apartheid regime under President P.W. Botha seemed to be bent on rather seeing the subcontinent go up in flames than being ready to make meaningful concessions towards racial equality. The confession of Dutch Reformed Clergy in 1982 started a process which ultimately resulted in the Rustenburg confession of November 1990 which ushered in the new democracy. The magnanimous gesture of Nelson Mandela to offer forgiveness – even before the apartheid ideologists were willing to apologize – set the platform for an unprecedented unity across the racial divide.62 Strategies of the Arch Enemy The Pharaoh of Moses' day as well as Herod at the time of Jesus’ infanthood tried to nip the spread of God’s Kingdom in the bud, killing all babies to prevent God’s plan to be fulfilled. A modern version is sexual perversion with abortion and gay ‘marriages’ as sprouts from this tree. Fewer babies are born in Western countries from Christian parents while Islam started taking over their crèches, kindergartens and primary schools. HIV/Aids, which started among gay men in the 1970s next to teenage pregnancies with all its social ramifications, are bad fruit of the demonic deception. We discern how prayer turned the tide in biblical times. Israel was liberated from the yoke of Pharaoh after the prayer groans and agonizing of God’s people (Exodus 2:23). This was also the case at the birth of arch fathers and other biblical men of God, after their mothers had been barren (Genesis 30:6; 1 Samuel 1:11). In recent decades the person of Nehemiah became important to the church universal. The way Israel’s pious enemies - Sanballat and Tobiah - operated gives import­ant insights into the strategies of the arch enemy (Nehemiah 4-6). The negative run-up, the pushing aside of the Samaritans by Ezra and Serubbabel because of their nationalist bigotry at the building of the second temple was possibly not the best response. In the case of Ezra, he was intensely shattered by the moral degradation which developed in Jerusalem through miscegenation, idolatry and complete disregard of God’s laws. In the ‘New Testament’ we can read how Jesus attempted to rectify the prejudice towards Samaritans, notably in the gospels of Luke and John. Satan masquerading as an Angel of Light The way how the enemies of Israel tried to infiltrate, is typical for New Age thinking. The im­pression is often spread that we are all wor­shiping the same God in different religions. Even some evangelical believers have been misled to think that the God of the Bible and Allâh of the Qur’an are ident­ical. The latter book clearly teaches that God has no son. In fact, Allâh is aloof and distant. He has 99 attributes but no paternal or maternal qualities figure among them. The Hebrew Scriptures in general and Judaism in particular do not only see the Almighty as ‘Our Father in heaven’, but He also has a Son, although the name is not spelled out there (Psalm 2:7, 12); Proverbs 30:4)). In the ‘NT’ this happens when the Angel Gabriel comes to Mary, instructing her to name the son to be born – and who will be called Son of the Most high – Yeshuah. He would save His people. Twice the divine voice from heaven proclaimed Jesus to be ‘My beloved Son’ (Matthew 3:17 and 17:5). Paul, the apostle, taught how deceptive the arch enemy is, that he is masquerading as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14), often operating as a wolf in the garb of a sheep. Satan is the father of lies from the beginning (John 8:44). In Galatians 1:8 we find the possibility inferred to that a different gospel can be brought by an angel. The consistent omission of everything alluding to the Cross in the Qur’an is thus no coincidence. In fact, a close comparative study of the angel Gabriel in the Bible and the Islamic Jibril points to ‘another mighty angel’ (Revelation 10:1). This sounds very much like the supernatural figure that Muhammad encountered after his experience in the cave of Mount Hira. The real nature of Jibril also becomes clear when one notes that the mighty angel of Revelation 10 will be roaring like a lion (Revelation 10:2). 1 Peter 5:8 defines the roaring lion as satan. The effect of this supernatural experience63 on Muhammad is more in line with demonic phenomena than when biblical personalities have been visited by an angel. With the differing anti-life expressions of Islam in recent years – suicide attacks and calls to kill all infidels have become quite common - we have enough reason to say that this is a distorted gospel, indeed the work of a masquerading angel (Galatians 1:6-8). We must pray for discernment to see how idolatry and occultism can be cleverly mixed in worship. In the run-up to the pogrom that transpires under king Ahasveros, the scheming of Haman shows every sign of the work of the master planner of evil (Ester 3). Less known among Christians is how Ben-Hadad, the king of Aram, tried to restrict God in his operation against Israel (1 Kings 20:23): Yahweh is not the god of either the hills or of the valley. He is omnipotent and the Almighty. He does not want to be put into any box or compart­ment. Occasional Need of Confrontation In no way should we condone an airy-fairy covering up of differences. Jesus used the prime weapon against the devil, God’s Word, when he was attacked in the desert. But also the assistants of the enemy had to be opposed. Because he had observed their ways meticulously and listened carefully to what they were saying, Jesus could venture into enemy territory, telling his religious opponents to their face that they were hypocritical. The Master furthermore spoke of ‘binding the strongman’(Matthew 12:29). Paul wrote about ‘taking captive every thought’ (2 Corinthians 10:5), about ‘strongholds’ (2 Corinthians 10:4) and ‘weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left’ (2 Corin­thians 5:7). The full ‘armour’ of the believer (Ephesians 6:11ff) belongs of course to the very well-known portions of Scripture which have even been taught to children in Sunday school. In traditional theology these warlike terms have possibly been over-spiritualised. (This probably happened when the superficial impression could be gained that it might clash with the reign of the Prince of Peace.)64 We note that division is the paramount strategy of satan. Through the ages the enemy has succeeded to sow division in churches and in society at large. The ‘flesh’ in some Christians who wanted to assert themselves saw to that. The first Jerusalem Apostolic Church seems to have handled the supernatural gifts of the spirit in a more balanced way (see Acts 2:42-47). Both Peter and Paul did not shun confrontation. When principles were at stake they were no slow coaches in heated debate. Acts 6 and 15 reflect conflict-laden situations. In both cases the end result was a sharing of responsibilities and a doubling of the work. If conflict is handled well, it has the potential to spread the Gospel even more widely and the work load can be delegated among more people. After Peter had been taught by God that he should cease despising those nations which he had regarded as ritually impure, he was prepared not only to act upon it by going to Cornelius (Acts 10), but also to defend his action before his colleagues. The end result of the delicate situation in Acts 6 was the appointment of deacons. The heated debate in Acts 15 resulted in church planting where the best men were sent (Verse 22). Calling a spade a spade might sometimes also be necessary. In Galatians 2:11-15 it is reported how Paul criticized Peter to his face in the presence of others when he sensed hypocrisy. If the actions of fellow brothers and sisters confuse young believers it might be necessary to do the unusual thing to reprimand them publicly. Paul had been taught at the feet of the renowned Gamaliel. As a Pharisee, he thus had a head-start. But, like the Master, he dared to confront his opponents on their own turf. In every town he went to the syna­gogues. In Athens he challenged the learned Greeks who were constantly debating, for example on the Areopagus (Acts 17:16ff). The presence of him and Silas caused a furore in Thessaloniki, especially when Paul spoke about Jesus as the Christ (Acts 17:1-9). In the same vein, the apostle did not beat about the bush in his condemnation of hand-made gods as idols. This made the Ephesians very nervous, causing an uproar in the process. At a time when it has become fashionable to be a 'revolutionary',65 by just quitely leaving the church, there is more than ever need for healthy confrontation. Every pastor should know why people are leaving his ship. Before leaving, church members should pray for a good opportunity to share their frustrations and/or disappointments in a mature and loving way. Following the Master’s Example The disciples grasped full well that they had to follow the Lord’s example - to serve rather than retaliate. Peter put it on paper that we should follow in the footsteps of the Master (1 Peter 2:21). He also taught this with regard to the pastors who should be an example to the flock and not lord over them (1 Peter 5:3). Paul likewise taught to the various congregations the importance of behaviour that would be emulated, which was worthy of the high calling of a follower of our Master (Colossians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:12). Paul’s preach­ing got its weight through his convincing life. Our lives should be open letters, which could be read with pleasure. Nobody should have the opportunity to take exception when looking at our life-style (2 Corinthians 6:3). In fact, he chal­lenged the church in Corinth to ‘follow my example as I follow the example which Jesus gave us’ (1 Corinthians 11:1). The Thessalonians evidently heeded this advice: ‘You followed my example and thus the example of our Lord’ (1 Thessalonians 1:6). This is very strategic. We thus have to question seriously the tendency of many theological institutions to employ lecturers who may have good academic qualifications in Evangelism and Missions on paper, but who have hardly (or have even never) been involved in the practical side of missionary outreach them­selves and who never intend to do that. Flexibility The flexibility which Jesus displayed was actually taught by Paul as strategy. In 1 Corinthians 9:19ff the missionary apostle stressed how he adapted to the various groups of Jews and Greeks ‘in order to win at least some of them.’ Zinzendorf discerned the importance of this principle. He saw on the one hand the ‘untiring will to reform’ of the ‘children of the world’, but on the other hand he discerned ‘sleeping churches and their inactive congrega­tions’ (Beyreuther, 1962:190).’ Not much has changed since then. Influenced by the principle of the eccle­siola’s of the Pietists, the Count organized the Herrnhut commun­ity in small ‘bands’ and ‘choirs’. This would of course not only be easier to handle than big churches with many meetings and little outreach, but even more important was the ‘innere Einheit’ (internal unity) that they wanted to maintain at all costs. The Herrnhut community sensed the need that everyone could put his gifts into the service of the whole church. For this purpose they had no hesitation to create new offices, but if such a new function would not be effective or if they could not find a suitable person to take it over when someone left for missionary service, it was changed or scrapped (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:31). Brethren and sisters were specially appointed for the care of the poor and the sick. Also young people and children were involved because the Moravians wanted them to learn early to serve the Lord and His Church. Out of flexibility the 24-hour prayer watch evolved. Around 22 August 1727 the congregation considered how to counter the fact that the enemy was not sleeping day and night. Taking their cue from the altar of the ark, which was always burning (Leviticus 6:12f), they decided to ignite a voluntary sacrifice of intercession that would burn day and night (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:35). Proper Timing In terms of warfare strategy we should furthermore note the timing of things. The Bible makes a point to state that Jesus came to the earth at the kairos, at God’s appointed time (see for example Ephesians 1:10). A closely related issue is the relation­ship between waiting and going. Jesus, with his divine nature, obviously understood this perfectly. Already as a child He knew that He had to be in the ‘house of His father’ (Luke 2:49). But for His public ministry he also knew that He had to wait for the divine approval. The Gospel of John reports how Jesus had to rectify his mother, who evidently expected some miracle from Him: His time had not come (John 2:4). With regard to the timing of ministry, we see this principle at work with Paul who had to wait at least 3 years, perhaps even 14 years (Galatians 1:17f, 2:1) before he could use his evident gifts fully. This is also the case with other strategic people in the Hebrew Scriptures. Joseph seemed to be God’s appointed vessel from the start. After his life had been wonderfully saved, God was with him as he displayed true mettle in the service of Potiphar. Yet, he had to languish in jail after grave injustice. Nevertheless, it looked as if his faith and obedi­ence to God was vindicated when the butler promised to bring his innocence to the attention of the Pharaoh. But God in his own complete­ly incomprehen­sible sovereignty deemed it necessary to keep Joseph in jail for another two years. One way to explain this seems to be that it was not God’s appointed time for his release. Waiting and Delay Delay is evidently part of divine moulding, even if it means postponing plans for a long time. But it has a definite purpose. Moses had to learn patience, Joseph and David humil­ity. Lessons like these are not easily learned. Even after an extended period of ‘school­ing’, Joseph still seemed to battle with his bitterness against his brothers when he saw them for the first time. It is not clear from the biblical report whether his initial dealings were meant as revenge, but in Genesis 42:7 it is recorded that he addressed his brothers harshly. God’s Spirit continued to minister to him until he broke down, weeping hysterically (45:2). Although Moses had been thoroughly taught in the top ‘university’ of his time (see Acts 7:22), he still needed forty years of preparation in the desert before he had the required humility to lead God’s people out of Egypt. Through­out the Bible God puts a very high premium on obedience in humility. Disobedi­ence and impatience cause delay at best. But if one persists, one may lose out completely. Elijah had to flee and wait on the Lord for approxi­mately three years (1 Kings 18:1) ahead of the major confrontation with the Baal priests on Mount Carmel. David had to wait for many years before he was enthroned, after he had been anointed as King while he was still a juvenile. The Bible also gives negative examples of the principle. The most tragic case is possibly Saul who lost the kingship because of his impatience (1 Samuel 13:9ff) and disobedi­ence. Although we know Jesus is the King of Kings, we still have to wait on the consummation of this fact. After the ascension of Jesus, the fearful disciples waited prayerfully on the fulfillment of the Lord’s promise that they would be endowed with power from on high (Acts 1:14). There is evidently a special blessing on corporate waiting on the Lord, especially when it is around the related issue of waiting on ‘doors’ to open up. Thus a rich harvest followed when the doors to the Middle East and North Korea started to open up after many years of prayerful waiting by believers. In this light the prophecy of Isaiah 19:23-25 may sound very unlikely with Iraq, Egypt and Israel together in an alliance, but it is not so out of bounds anymore, with the highway between Baghdad and Cairo already a fact. In history Jan Amos Comenius probably goes down as one of the most profound examples of someone who was willing to wait on the Lord. He uttered a remarkable prophecy that the ‘hidden seed’ sown through the martyr’s death of Jan Hus would finally sprout another hundred years thereafter. Very patiently the Moravian exiles developed a long term strategy and vision ‘that made possible some of the greatest contributions to the church and civilization’ (Rick Joyner, Three Witnesses, 1999:11). An interesting modern day variation of the principle is the strategy of South Korean students. They have been praying for years for the opening up of the Communist North Korea, but they are also ready to sacrifice a year of their studies to ‘invade’ the north, to spread the Gospel as short-term mission­aries as soon as the atheist country opens up for missionary work. This may happen soon. Families that have been separated since 1948 have now been allowed to visit each other. On the Look-out for divinely prepared People! In the same vein the ‘New Testament’ seems to teach that the apostles knew that they had to look for those persons who had been prepared by God. An interesting aspect in this regard is the relationship between waiting and moving. Philip was called from the action in Sama­ria to 'wait' at the desert road of Gaza. At the right moment we see him ‘running’, after the Holy Spirit had nudged Him to go towards the vehicle of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26-30). Martha had to get her priorities straight: not the waiting on the Lord in practical service but waiting at His feet is required (Luke 10:41)! Awaiting the hour of the Lord became second nature to Count Zinzendorf. He ‘would not rush souls into a quick decision or push them, but left it over to the Lord... and thus he suc­ceeded with many’ (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 [1971]:1338). Zinzendorf radicalized the principle to such an extent that he taught: ‘... the Gospel may not be preached whenever it enters a person’s head to do so; rather, it too has its appropriate time’ (Forell, 1973:25).’ To substantiate this statement, which almost contradicts the Pauline injunction to preach at all times (2 Corinthians 4:2), Zinzendorf used no less than four different Bible verses: Galatians 4:4, ‘When the time had fully come’; Mark 1:15, ‘The time is fulfilled’, Luke 19:42, ‘At this your time’ and Luke 14:17 ‘He sent them out at supper-time.’ Of course, this is no real contradiction. The word should be preached in and out of season, (2 Timothy 4:2; Colossians 4:5+6), but discernment is also called for. In fact, Jesus warned us not to throw pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6) in a similar con­text. Herrnhut embraced Waiting on the Lord66 The Herrnhut congregation obviously grasped the principle of waiting on the Lord. This is especially interesting in respect of the famous revival which broke out on the 13th August 1727. About the run-up to this event we read: ‘but all through the summer, the people seemed to be waiting and preparing for a still more signal visitation and commandment from the Lord.’ They knew that biblical waiting is an active process of getting prepared for the anointing of God’s Spirit. We read of night-long vigils of prayer and meditation during this time and a covenant of ten single brothers on 22 July 1727 to meet frequently ‘to pour out their hearts in prayer and sing­ing and mutual exhortation.’ On 5 August Count Zinzendorf and 14 brethren spent the whole night in ‘religious conversation and prayer’. Finally the whole congrega­tion continued praying after the afternoon service on August 10 until midnight, coven­anting with one another under tears to dwell together in unity and love. Thus the reconciled community could go to the Commu­nion service of Wednesday, the 13th of August. The waiting on the Lord continued even as they walked in small groups from Herrnhut to the neighbouring town of Berthelsdorf where the communion service would be held in the village church. ‘All seemed to be awaiting an extraordinary visitation at the church’ (Lewis, 1962:58). At a later stage, following the example of the disciples (for example Acts 1:26), the Herrnhut congregation used the lot extensively in this process of waiting. Thus Tobias Leopold, who had initially been preparing to go with Leonhard Dober to St Thomas, was turned down by the lot. Two years later, after patiently waiting on further instructions - but working as diligently on the home front while preparing for the Lord’s ‘green light’ - Leupold led a team of fourteen brothers and four sisters to the neighbouring island of St. Croix, only to die there half a year later. The same principle was applied whenever problems arose. Thus Zinzendorf instructed his diaspora workers: ‘When impediments are thus laid in our way, either by clergymen or magistrates, it is our duty to lay the case in prayer before the Saviour, and wait His time for removing them’ (Lewis, 1962:122). Marriage as Warfare Taking their cue from Jesus and Paul who were not married, the Church down the ages took the celibate as a model. Herrnhut Moravians wanted to be ready for service at all times. Marriage was delayed on pur­pose as part of the strategy. They were clearly following the apostle Paul’s advice in this regard. Zinzendorf himself had to go through the moulding crucible after two disappointments in romance. The end result was for him the ‘Streiter-ehe’, according to which marriage primarily had to serve the cause of the Gospel. He was of course adhering to the principles Paul had laid down in 1 Corinthians 7:29. According to the warrior marriage concept, matrimony had to serve the extension of the Kingdom. Therefore marriage was not encour­aged, but neither was celibacy. In fact, marriage was consciously delayed and only single men were initially sent out to the mission field. However, also the single sisters were prepared for mission service. Celibacy was not a Moravian ideal, but both men and women pledged themselves to put marriage secondary to service for Christ. Most Moravians eventually married but postponed this step until it fitted in with the assignments the Lord had for them. Zinzendorf entered his own marriage more out of rational considerations than romantic feelings. When he proposed to Erdmuth, she was challenged to get married to him ‘as if she had no husband.’ The Count was very serious about the issue, often leaving his wife behind for many months as he left on his extended trips to further the Kingdom. Erdmuth, the countess, took the dual role of father and mother bravely in her stride. In fact, she was getting ready for poverty. When they married she was disappointed, surprised to get a luxurious suite and servants at the beginning of their marriage. On her deathbed however, she was blessed when her husband returned after an extended absence just before she finally closed her eyes. (However, remorse befell Zinzendorf after the death of Erdmuth in 1756, because of his extended visits away from home.) A similar story, albeit not tragic, can be told of the other great 18th century Moravian, Bishop August Spangenberg. He and his wife were wedded for the ministry, standing at the helm of the American work, equally involved next to each other ‘like two artisans who joined for the solving of a task’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:127). Visitations to the various congregations and mission stations as well as negotiations with the government required frequent absence, sometimes for many months at a time. Yet, we should not romanticize the warrior concept of marriage in any way. (The separation of CT and Priscilla Studd, the founders of WEC International, at a time when she was terminally ill, caused tremendous strain on their relationship.) A Warrior Mentality The Church has already been called in ancient days an ecclesia militans, a fighting church. The worst interpretation of the concept was the Crusaders who took it upon themselves to take Jerusalem back from the Muslims and calling the Jews murderers of Christ. Centuries before them Church leaders like Augustine - who operated in the early 5th century - have given the cue to rank and file Christians to use coercion in stead of persuasion to bring the erring back to the faith or to bowl doubting people over. Before Augustine, the Emperor Constantine subjected big geographical areas, ‘christianised’ many people groups by military force. This he had definitely not learnt from the Jews. The predominant hope of the people of Israel had never been ‘to convert the whole world to Judaism but to convert the whole world to God.’ Muhammad and his Saracen successors ably used the Constantine precedent – aided by Christians bickering in a petty way over doctrinal issues – to subdue and islamise the bulk of the Middle East, using the military version of jihad, holy war. A warrior mentality – a biblically sound one - was definitely evident in Herrnhut where Count Zinzendorf was regarded as a real general of Christ. The ‘general’, known for his special ability and gift of extempore poetry, came on board with songs, enriching religious spirituality with a new ‘Gattung’ (genre) called Streiterlieder, warrior hymns. Their King was of course the Lamb. Accordingly, they boldly sported the old motto on their banner: the Lamb has conquered, let us follow him. (The Lamb carrying such a banner is the international emblem of the denomination.) I have not been able to discern any connection between William Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army and the Moravians. The imagery was similar, taken even further, with ranks and all, in the Salvation Army. CT Studd was clearly influenced by William Booth and his Salvation Army. Typical of the spirit of the new English warriors songs were hymns like ‘Fight the good fight with all thy might’ and ‘Onward Christian soldiers ...going as to war.’ That Studd also spoke of ‘prayer batteries’ was nearer to biblical truth. The idea was that the little prayer groups should operate as canon batteries, either preparing the areas where the ‘infantry’ can move in or to provide cover and prayer support for the missionaries on the field. That everybody can be involved, and that not only special courageous people are fit to be used by God, is of course very scriptural. In the story of Gideon, it is especially precious how God could use the cowardly Israelite because he was willing and obedient, albeit very hesitantly. Exemplary was also how Gideon gave due to those who were not initially involved in the battle, but who did play a part in the mopping-up operation (Judges 8:2,3). Examples of good and bad Timing An ancient idiomatic expression states that ‘the pen is mightier than the sword.’ This has been proved again and again, such as when a booklet by the Portuguese General Spinola ushered in the demise of the dictatorships not only in his own country and that of neighbouring Spain, but which also led to the liberation of the Portuguese African colonies. This exerted pressure on the former Rhodesia and South Africa to also release their grip, seeing Zimbabwe, Namibia and finally South Africa becoming democratic. In a similar way, the booklet of the Dutch theologian Breek de Muren af in 1973, appears to have been seminal in setting Afrikaner theologians thinking deeply about the roots of the racist ideology that was spiralling towards the precipice of civil war of massive dimensions, albeit that it was not so dramatic. Eight Reformed theologians were ready to make a public statement on Reformation Day (31 October) in 1980. Two years later their stand had snowballed when eighty from the same church background wrote in an open letter that they were mede-aandadig, that they were accomplices to the upholding of the wicked apartheid system. The 1986 Synod general synod of the denomination prepared the road for the Rustenburg Confession of 1990, which brought the ultimate breakthrough, which made it almost impossible for the politicians to go back to a compromise of half backed White domination. The timing of saying and writing the right thing is just as important. A divine element can be easily discerned when Mark Gabriel, a former Egyptian scholar and lecturer from Al Azhar University in Cairo, had to flee his country in 1994 after he had become a Christian. Witnessing the PAGAD (People against Gangsterism and Drugs) excesses in Cape Town on 4 August 1996 on TV, when Rashaad Staggie was publicly executed by burning, this was the cue for him to start his research on jihad in Islamic literature. Shortly after the New York twin tower tragedy of September 11 in 2001 he was approached by one of the directors of Strang Communications in the USA, where he had subsequently settled, whether he knew of someone who could write on the topic. Affirmatively he mentioned that the manuscript merely had to be translated into English. The publication of Islam and Terrorism in 2002, and translated into over fifty languages subsequently, became in due course an instrument to assist in the ushering in of the ideological demise of Islamism. One of the most recent expressions of a biblically responsible application of a warrior mentality is the brave but loving exposure of the true nature of Islam by Mark Gabriel in his latest book Culture Clash (Strang Communications, Lake Mary, Florida, 2007). One senses his compassion for the co-religionists in which he was born and bred when he still proceeds to conclude that the culture clash can still be resolved by a reform of Islam, by a new interpretation of the Qur’an and Hadith (p.176). (He reminds me of my own naïve hopes many decades ago that apartheid could be broken down by gradual removal of oppressive laws.) And yet, such an effort by Muslim theologians could be the beginning, just as apartheid theologians first saw the light. The whole world can nevertheless be grateful that Mark Gabriel possibly prevented a world war by advising President Bush to refrain from intervening militarily in Turkey or Iran.67 He was very charitable in not highlighting the abuse and high-jacking of his exposure of jihad (the President gave a copy of Islam and Terrorism to every member of the national Congress in Washington) for the less fortunate military intervention in Iraq, but Mark Gabriel was honest and bold in not only highlighting the wording but also the bad timing of a White House move: ‘It didn’t help when President George W. Bush made the semantic blunder of declaring a ‘crusade’ against terrorism shortly after 9/11’ (Culture Clash, p. 154). May Dr Gabriel's bold stand and invitation have a similar positive emulation among Muslim theologians as it occurred with the apartheid regime. But this will not be easy. The bold witness of people like Mark Gabriel and Nonie Darwish, another brave follower of Jesus, only came to pass after dumping the all-pervasive fear in Islam, to let it be substituted by the love of Christ. Perfected agape love drives out all fear (1 John 4:18). This is redemptive and powerful to liberate millions who are still gripped by fear of standing out for the truth, which could set them free. Ultimately the darkness of the lie cannot stand against the light of the truth which will only get bigger as more and more Muslims find salvation through faith in Christ in different parts of the world Praise, Worship, Fasting and Weeping A text which is rightly quoted quite often is Zechariah 4:6, ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my spirit, says the Lord Almighty’. This is basic to spiritual warfare, but it is unfortunate that the context is usually not considered when the text is quoted. Other basic principles are contained in this prophesy of Zechariah 4, namely that of the power of the weak and the ‘few’ in building the temple. ‘Shouts of thank­s­gi­ving’ declare that ‘all was done by grace alone’ (v.6-8). Praise is used in the Tenach68 a few times in the attacks of God’s enemies. The most well-known of them is probably Joshua and the seven trumpets whose marching as the group around Jericho was augmented by the united shout after the sev­enth time on the seventh day. (We note the repetition of the number seven, the biblical number for completion and perfection.) Some­times fasting and praise occur in close proximity, for example Nehemiah 9:1+4. The enemy apparently attempted to let fasting lose its initial purpose as a tool in spiritual war­fare. In the church at large it was either com­pletely neg­lected, or it became a ‘work’ to earn God’s favour, for example the fasting during lent. Jesus himself fasted and prayed for forty days and nights before he started his ministry (Matthew 4:2). When His opponents pointed to the fact that His disciples were not fasting, he did not play down the feasibility of it. He merely stated that the disciples would be doing it when he, ‘the bridegroom’, would not be around (Matthew 9:15). He did however attack fasting as an outward show to impress others (Matthew 6:16; Luke 18:12). The Master was fully in line with Hebrew Scriptural teach­ing where we read for example that God rejects fasting when those who are fasting are practising evil pleas­ures and oppress (underpay?) their workers (Isaiah 58:3). But the Hebrew Scriptures teach just as clearly how fasting can be a sign of penitence (2 Chronicles 20:3; Ezra 8:21; Jonah 3:5; Daniel 6:18; Joel 2:15). It can also be used as a weapon in fight­ing the enemy (Esther 4:16). In recent years this has been prof­itably rediscovered. In South Africa Christians were chal­lenged to fast and pray in the 40 day period leading to the national day of prayer on July 7, 1996. The Germans developed a tradition which they called ‘Buß- und Bet­tag’. The original intention was obviously to encourage Christians to repent and pray. The celebration of the day deteriorated into empty insignificance. During the various revivals over the cen­turies many Christians became involved in com­mitted prayer. Usually a vision for the strategies of the enemy was lacking. In so many cases denomi­national splits and tensions followed periods of revival. Count Zinzendorf approached the idea very closely through the ‘Dank- und Fasttage’ (Days of thanks and fasting). On the first of two occasions on 10 February 1728, they started speaking about distant lands, about Turkey, Africa, Green- and Lapland. When some brethren indicated that it had to be regarded as imposs­ible to go to these places, the Count pro­nounced in faith that the Breth­ren would be given grace to go there. At the second day of thanks­giving and fasting two months later, trips were already decided upon to go to Stockholm and England. The foundation of the link between missions and prayer was thus laid. We are thankful that the Holy Spirit has illuminated the minds of believers in different parts of the world on ‘Spiri­tual Warfare’ independently of each other in recent decades. Terms like ‘spiri­tual mapping’, ‘territorial strongholds’ and ‘identificational repentance’ may not yet be household words in church circles. However, only a few years ago they would have been com­pletely unknown.69 The need of having prayer back­ing when any worker enters the spiritual strong­holds of the enemy is not only discerned more clearly, but it is also implemen­ted more and more. The terminology have however not always been handled carefully, causing disunity in many a case. Perseverance in spite of Rejection Even though His message was rejected - Jesus spoke to friend and foe alike, without evading or avoiding the likes of Pharisees and Scribes. In John 4 it is reported how he took the shortest route between Judea and the province of Galilee, without circumventing the disliked and despised Samaria.70 His claim to be the Son of God was the main reason why he was cru­cified. In similar vein, Paul moved on from the synagogues and towns where the message was rejected. In Acts 13:51 he symbolical­ly removed the dust from his feet. We note in this passage how the influential people of the town were instigated against the messengers of the Gospel. Through the ages the wealthy and the intelligentsia were usually the least responsive to the Gospel. If the other apostles at first did not grasp the message of the preponderance of outreach to Jews properly, this cannot be said of Paul. He made a habit of starting his outreach in cities with a visit to the synagogues (Acts 17:2), seeing the Jews as a priority. We find that Paul used the Hebrew Scriptures to demonstrate that Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ (for example Acts 17:2). Even after he had been rejected and shunned in the one town, he would nevertheless start in the synagogue of the next town as if nothing had happened. Paul thus also displayed tenacity and perseverance as part of his armour in conflict with the resistant Jews. Valuable strategic Lessons We could also learn valuable strategic lessons from Jesus in his approach, using geographically concentric circles. Acts 1:8 does point to the possibility of first getting active in one’s own city/town (Jerusalem), thereafter perhaps to your own prov­ince/region (Judea), to another culture or ethnic minor­ities (Samaria) before going to the ends of the earth. But it would stretch the text too far to deduce that this sequence should be strictly adhered to or that they are mutually ex­clus­ive. It is nevertheless valid that a missionary should ideally first prove himself in his home church, in his home town before getting involved cross-culturally. To see missionary trips merely as adventure is bound to be catastrophic for all parties. In recent mission history there are examples of how years of arduous toil by long-term mission­aries have been wrecked by the result-orientated holiday-spending helpers who did not comprehend the culture of the country concerned; often these ‘helpers’ had not been involved with evangelistic outreach in their home town before such trips. In the choosing of less-sophisticated Galileans, as well as the zealot Judas Iscariot as His disciples, Jesus displayed shrewd tactical insight, which we could also emulate. This sort of people is possibly much easier to mobilize for missions than the more educated and academic. But this does not imply that Peter easily left his nets to follow Jesus. To leave your profession to follow Jesus full-time is a decision which is never taken easily. , The Sins of anti-Semites It is not always very clear how some Christians got to the conclusion that we as gentile Christians have no right to present the Gospel to Jews. Even though Western Christianity stands guilty with its haughty ignoring of the missionary efforts of the first century (CE) Jewish enterprise, to spread the Gospel to places like India and China, it does not absolve us from the responsibility to challenge Jews. The rift caused between Jewry and Christianity by Emperor Constantine’s favouritism is something to confess corporately as Christian guilt. That could be a start. Yet, the sins of anti-Semites through the centuries do not remove or even diminish any part of the Great Commission. Of course, we must be very sensitive. As Paul has already told us, Gentile Christians are merely the grafted branches into God’s family tree, not the root (Romans 11:18-20). The Jews are the main stem of the olive tree, God’s chosen people. All our missionary efforts to them should be geared to that purpose: so that they might realize their full potential. A ministry of prayer is very much called for. Reaching out in love to the Jews with the Gospel of Jesus could make all the difference to world missions! Similarly, care should be practised in our dealings with Muslims. There is such a lot of guilt and shame involved, that the spread of Islam in the Western Cape could be described as a part of the unpaid debt of the Church. In this regard we mention the treatment and rejection of the slaves in colonial days and the role of apartheid, which was seen as the policy of a Christian government. These are only two of many examples of the debt incurred. But guilt does not absolve us from the responsi­bility to share the Gospel with our Muslim countrymen with sensitivity and love. The number of Jews and Muslims in South Africa might not be so impressive, but they might turn out quite significant if we consider the biblical prophecies with regard to these special people groups. Mission­aries to Israel, to the Jews of New York and to the Arab world might spark off a worldwide missionary movement! The missionary move from Antioch, Alexandria, Babylon and Baghdad in the first century CE may have been approached by Zinzendorf and his Herrnhut Moravians in the 18th and 19th centuries, but definitely not equalled! Food for Thought: Jews and Muslims have been neglected in missionary endeavour. In how far have our missionary efforts been guided by expedience? Has the resistance of these groups and our yearning for quick results not perhaps been too much of a guiding factor? And some Ideas: What can we do to rectify the mistakes of the past? Should it not be a priority to bring together believers from the three Abrahamic religions in cities like Cape Town and Johannesburg? What possibilities are there for the church to get involved in restitution, such as to serve the many Muslim families affected by drug addiction? How about starting up a prayer group directed at the conversion of Jews and/or Muslims? Alternately, why not include this as a regular feature in a normal prayer meeting? 8. Jesus, a Man of Sorrows: An Example of Preparedness to suffer Persecution Jesus declared us happy if we are persecuted and slandered because we are His followers (Matthew 5:8). He taught his disciples that they should not be surprised to be hated by the world (John 15:20). The reason for the persecution of Jesus, and hence of his followers, is not easily understood by the Western mind. The claim of the Sonship of God drew fierce opposition in His life-time. Those among us who have grown up with the concept of Jesus as the ‘only begotten Son’ can hardly comprehend the major problem that a Jew or Muslims have with such a notion. And the arch enemy has made sure that any possible way of a bridge to them has been blocked or destroyed. No other doctrine than this one - especially if it is brought in connection with the deity of Jesus (His being divine, that He is God) seems to enrage oriental people even more. The challenge to let Him be Lord of our lives has made people of all generations angry because it goes against the grain of human independence. The pride in natural man rebels against the idea that someone else should lord over you. The thought that we can get forgiveness of sins without doing something for it, opposes every human effort to earn the atonement for his sins on one’s own accord. Anyone of these doctrines could harvest opposition and even persecution of some sort. There exists no real love without sacrifice and there is no sacrifice without pain. Thus there is also no genuine love without suffering. Even God, whose character is marked by love, cannot love without great cost in terms of suffering. What a pain it must have cost Him to allow His Son Jesus to receive the full measure of His wrath to atone for the sins of the world (compare 2 Corinthians 5:21, God made the blameless Jesus to become sin to reconcile us unto Himself). The essence of pure love is the sacrificing of yourself, putting your own interests on the back seat to the advantage of the other person. This can even include your ‘enemy’. Because of our sinful, fallen nature - slaves of sin - we have become enemies of God. But exactly that is where God displayed agape in sending His Son who ‘...did not come to be served, but to serve’ and to pay us free from the bondage of sin, ‘...to give his life as a ransom for many’ (Matthew 20:28). Biblical Roots Throughout the Bible the atoning death of an innocent lamb or son can be traced. To cover the nakedness of Adam and Eve an animal had to be slaughtered. That Abel’s sacrifice was regarded acceptable to God rather than that of Cain would be completely in line with the biblical thought that there is no redemption of sin without the shedding of blood (Hebrews 9:22). And then there is of course the classic example: the Israelites had to slaughter a lamb without blemish as they left Egypt. The blood on the door-post saved the family from the wrath of the angel of death. The latter took the first-born males of every house-hold where the blood was not applied. That a son had to die (to atone for) sins is also depicted in 1 Samuel 12. David was destined to die after his adultery with Bathseba and the calculated killing of her husband. The prophet Nathan pronounced the divine ver­dict. However, because of David’s genuine repentance, the son who was born out of the adulterous intercourse, had to die in stead. In a sense this is another type of Jesus, as a Son of David, who had to die innocently. In 2 Kings 3:24-27 an interesting precedent of Golgotha in the negative is narrated when the King of Moab sacrificed his first-born son. The principle that a sacrifice releases spiritual power is enshrined. The Moabite looked down and out in the fight against the three-nation coalition when this happened. After his gruesome sacrifice the coalition was thwarted and he was saved. Thus the death of another Son of David, God’s one and only – his unique Son – is prefigured. Persecution at the Heart of the Gospel The world religions, the Jewish Faith and Islam even more specifically, have difficulty with the atoning death of Christ on the Cross. All religion which has ‘works’ as its base - the earning of one’s salvation in one or the other way - has hence opposed evangelical Christianity in one or other form. Persecution goes back to the heart of the Gospel. The persecution of the first generation of Christians however also caused the spread of the Gospel to the ends of the earth. From Jerusalem Jews and proselytes returned after Pentecost (Acts 2:8) – many of them to places in the Middle East that are Islamic today. From Antioch the ancestors from different nations and races formed a dynamic congregation with the Cypriot Barnabas and North Africans in leadership. The Samaritans and the Assyrians, the ancestors of many Muslims, were possibly part and parcel of the teams spreading the Gospel from places in Assyria, the present-day Iraq, together with Jews. Thomas and Peter (1 Peter 5:13) were probably at the helm of the churches that took the Gospel to India and as far afield as China. This phenomenal outreach was hardly discerned, let alone acclaimed in (Western) Church History although John Stewart, a British church historian described the work of the Assyrian-Nestorian Church already in 1928 as a Church on fire. This Church, that later had its centre in Baghdad, stemmed from believers, who returned to Asia after the first Pentecost. Stewart suggests that Jewish believers, of whom many ancestors had once been exiled to the rivers of Babylon, took the Gospel to Central Asia, for example to the Uigur people by 61 CE. Was it merely politically inexpedient to highlight that the ancestors of Jewish Christians and Muslims worked together to spread the Gospel? Or was the arch deceiver behind this move? The ancestors of this Muslim tribe in North West China would thus belong to the first century followers of Jesus. Recorded history has still not solved how the Christian female slave Marotta, whom the first Moravian missionaries found on St Thomas in 1732, had been influenced in the Guinea Coast of West Africa. The amount of biblical knowledge she possessed was just too much to be incidental. The possibility of African missionaries from either Egypt, Sudan or Ethiopia cannot be ruled out. Suffering as divine Preparation Throughout the Bible we see how God took hold of men or women during a time of crisis. Their struggles were written down for our benefit to help us discover the true nature of God. One of the most dramatic accounts in Scripture of coping with crises is the narrative of Job. He apparently exceeded all other biblical personalities in the amount and suddenness of calamity that befell him. It was reported about the ancient Job that ‘he was the most righteous man on the earth’ (Job 1:8). And yet he was afflicted beyond recognition, for no apparent reason other than that God allowed this suffering to bring Job in a closer relationship to Him. Through the ages this has been the irrational experience of many people, that physical suffering has the quality of bringing one closer to God, especially if one can get to the point of accepting it without murmuring. The most astonishing thing about the story is that it appears that God allowed these calamities to happen to Job as a test of his faithfulness and a witness to satan! Although it does not answer the question fully why his life was chosen as a battleground between God and satan, it does console the believer, when seemingly inexplicably one calamity after the other befalls him or when he or she sees it happening to a dear family member or friend. Though Job was baffled by the mystery of his suffering, he allowed it to refine his character. He never doubted the character of God. With all great leaders in the Bible there appears to have been a preparation and a calling. With both Moses and Paul this was the case although it was so vastly different. Moses was prepared at the Egyptian court and by Jochebed, his mother. Paul received teaching in Judaism at the feet of the prominent scholar Gamaliel. We have insufficient material in the Bible available to prove it, but I think that we can take for granted that in Jochebed’s teaching to the boy Moses suffering for your faith must have featured at least somehow. (Of course, this was chronologically long before Daniel was arrested and thrown into the lion’s den because of his custom of praying towards Jerusalem and defying the royal prohibition into which King Darius had been tricked!) The mere fact of the courageous two midwives at the birth of Moses along with his mother Jochebed who - challenging the Pharaoh’s instruction by hiding Moses as a baby - was protest in the best sense of the word. This was civil disobedience, defying the authority of the ruler! She was obedient to the divine ruler. If we consider that Jochebed surely was also the driving force behind Aaron and Miriam, two further Israelite leaders, we discern the importance of a prayerful home in the preparation of leaders. The book of Hebrews noted this connection in the following words: ‘Moses chose to be mistreated along with the people of God... regard(ing) disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value...’ We also discern a close relationship between persecution and prayer in the book of Acts. Thus the believers were at prayer when Peter was miraculously led out of prison. Paul was witness of the persecution of Stephen, who is accepted to be the first Christian martyr. This was an experience that must have moved the great apostle deeply, although he continued persecuting the young church. That would have haunted him, as it has been doing to so many persecutors right into the present time in places like Indonesia and Pakistan. More ‘NT’ Lessons of Persecution Somehow the Church in the West seems to have overlooked what value Jesus attached to persecution and innocent suffering. In the so-called beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-12) the whole latter part, a third of the pericope is devoted to related matters: ‘Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness... Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you...’ In the run-up to the crucifixion our Lord had to experience the terrible emotional suffering among the twelve special disciples of a lack of understanding of his passion (Luke 18:31-34; John 18:11), the sleepiness of the trusted three (Matthew 26:40) and lack of power in his greatest moment of testing. Thereafter the Lord also suffered under betrayal, denial and desertion (Matthew 26:56) of his disciples. As the Lamb of God, Jesus was slaughtered so to speak innocently for the sins of the world, crying out in agony ‘My God, why have you forsaken me. After taken down from his pedestal of arrogant self-confidence, Peter learned the lesson of innocent suffering thoroughly. Peter in his first letter (2:19, 21; 3:13, 18; 4:1, 2, 12-14 , 16) and James (1:2) go to some lengths to explain that Christians should regard it as an honour and privilege, that they should even rejoice when they are suffering from causes beyond their control, when they are persecuted for the sake of the Gospel. Paul likewise stated that it is a privilege for the Christian to suffer for Christ’s sake (Philippians 1:29). Years later, after the resurrection and ascension of our Lord, when Christians had been spread throughout the Roman Empire through fierce persecution, he encouraged believers with the following words: ‘Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ…’ (1 Peter 4:12, 13a). Not only Peter, but also the other disciples grasped the message very well. Ten of the first disciples died an unnatu­ral or ‘premature’ death and the eleventh, John, was banished to the island of Patmos. In their epistles (letters) to the early Church, there was hardly an apostle who did not mention or at least allude to persecution because of the Gospel. Paul writes for example to Timothy as if persecution is the most commonplace thing in the world: ‘...Yes, and suffering will come to all who decide to live godly lives to please Christ Jesus, from those who hate him’ (2 Timothy 3:12). Soon after he came to faith in Jesus, Paul himself was shown how much he had to suffer for the name of Jesus (Acts 9:16). To the Romans he wrote: ‘If someone mistreats you because you are a Christian, do not curse him; pray that God will bless him’ (Romans 12:14). In the first letter to the Corinthians he mentioned how ‘we have been kicked around without homes of our own’ (1 Corinthians 4:11). The church at Ephesus is reminded casually that he had been imprisoned because he served the Lord (Ephesians 4:1). Suffering and Persecution closely linked Suffering and persecution thus became closely linked. Paul hoped and prayed that Christ would be glorified in his body (Philippians 1:20), that he would get to know the ‘fel­lowship of sharing in His sufferings’ (Philippians 3:10). 1 Peter 5:9 speaks about satan prowling around like a roaring lion, but in the very next verse Peter reminds us about the suffering, which fellow believers have to experience throughout the world. In the same context (v.10) he reminds his readers that the persecution on this side of the grave is only for a short time. In the light of this, the believers are exhorted to stand firm. Also Paul pointed to the relativity of suffer­ing. In 2 Corin­thians 4:16 - 5:1 he does not only refer to the time factor, the short moment of suffer­ing compared to eternity, but also to the measure of eternal glory in the hereafter. In 2 Timothy 2:11f suffering for Christ and dying for Him is mentioned with the pros­pect of reigning with Him in the hereafter. Liberal theolo­gians have some­times referred to this aspect of suffering in a scoffing way as ‘pie in the sky when you die’. It is possible that Paul had to face similar notions, because in the same context he spoke of men whose words have been operating like cancer (2 Timothy 2:17). These learned men have poss­ibly been displaying little under­stand­ing of the real consola­tion which the believer experiences when he suffers for his faith in Christ. But also from another viewpoint the accusation is groundless. Paul definitely also referred to power, which the believer receives, to endure during this life. In 2 Corinthians 1:8ff he wrote about hardships, afflictions and great pressure of his team in Asia ‘far beyond our ability to endure’, from which God delivered them. And yet, he expects to have to be delivered again and again, amongst others through the inter­cession of the saints. The believer in Jesus is not afraid of suffering and persecution on this side of the grave, but he may expect that God would see to it that he is not required to endure more than he can bear (1 Corinthians 10:13). If it does occur occasionally - as Paul paradoxically testified - the believer will be carried on the strong eagle’s wings in a supernatural way. It is this which could inspire John on the island of Patmos to write about those who thrashed the accuser: ‘They defeated him by the blood of the Lamb and by their testimony; for they loved not their lives but laid it down for him’ (Revel­ations 12:11). Suffering turned into Blessing Jan Amos Comenius and Zinzendorf towers among historical personalities in whose lives suffering was turned into blessing. During the thirty years war in Europe (1618-48) Comenius lost his wife and only child, after he had refused to renounce his biblical convictions. Warfare repeatedly erupted around him, always in such a way as to destroy much of his work. Again and again he was driven from his home just when it seemed that the roots he was putting down were beginning to bear fruit. Each time calamity struck he would just formulate an even greater plan to be implemented. This would be the model for Moravians thereafter and also for Zinzendorf, who would not allow disappointments to ground them. Zinzendorf had to experience one child after the other die. The worst was possibly when his only son who survived childhood, Christian Renatus, also died as a young man in the prime of his life. The father went through deep pain when he realized that he himself was the cause of the depressions under which the devout ‘Christel’ suffered. The Count tackled his son very harshly after the erring ways of the sifting period at Herrnhaag in his absence.71 His remorse was great after losing his only son, but perhaps not quite comparable to David’s deep penitence after the exposure of his adultery and cool-blooded scheming to get Uria, the husband of Bathsheba out of the way after she had notified him that she was pregnant from him. Imprisonment and Banishment as a Blessing In the letter to the Hebrews (13:2f), we are exhorted to share the sorrow of the persecuted, to suffer with those who landed in prison because of their faith ‘as though you were there yourself.’ Through the ages believers drew courage from the fact that they were regarded as worthy to be attacked by the arch enemy. This is so to speak proof that you are still on track. Persecu­tion has been used by God to spread the Gospel ever since the first Jerusalem church was scattered after the death of Stephen (Acts 8:1). This seems to get people out of their cozy comfort zones. The fact that they dared to preach the Gospel in spite of legal prohibitions, made the Moravians criminals. Like in ‘New Testament’ times many Brethren were incarcerated, suffering severely through the effects of such imprisonment and quite a few of them even died because of that, some of them while in custody. South Africa in general and Cape Town in particular has had special stories in this regard. For two well known clergymen incarceration on Robben Island became a turning point in their life. As the son of an Anglican priest, Njongonkulu Ndugane was sentenced to three years imprisonment because of his political activities on behalf of the Pan African Congress of Azania (PAC). There he found himself wrestling with God: ‘How could a good God allow so much suffering in my country and now on the island? It was in the course of that wrestling with God that I found inner peace, as if God laid his hand on me. It was in a prison cell that I felt the call of God to serve him in the ordained ministry’ (Ndugane, 2003:5). In June 1996 he was elected as successor to Archbishop Desmond Tutu. He also made a statement, claiming the island to be ‘a place of pilgrimage and reconciliation. The island of incarceration has become an island of faith… It is part of that spirit of hope, that reconciling effect that people who were incarcerated on the island can bring to the world’(Ndugane, 2003:3). Stanley Mogoba was given a book called The Human Christ on Robben Island. It touched Mogoba very deeply to encounter the sorrow of Christ when he saw the young man of Matthew 19 leaving, unable to take the final step to true fulfilment. Mogoba was himself very unhappy, pondering what all that meant, considering whether he should serve Christ in a new way once he left the island. ‘But it was only when I said “I will follow you now, I am prepared to give my entire life to you and enter the ministry” that my sorrow left me and I experienced a sense of joy…’ After his release he became a Methodist pastor, later to be ordained as Bishop in the denomination. The Moulding of the Believer In Christian teaching it has often been neglected that suffer­ing and persecution is part and parcel of being a Chris­tian. The Bible teaches directly and indirectly that suffering prepares one for ministry. Jeremiah was taken to the house of the potter to receive a lesson (Jeremiah 18:2-4). The manufacturing of a precious jar is basically a painful process, for example when the initial product of toil is all but completely destroyed. In fact, sometimes this actually happens- that the potter has to start all over again. The Almighty had to start anew with them repeatedly. But jusst as the end result brings satisfaction and glory in the natural to the potter, this will also happen to the apple of His eye – when Israel will discover as a nation whom they have pierced (Zechariah 12:10). The gifted, but arrogant young Joseph could only become an instrument to be used by God to save His people after he had been afflicted by persecution, landing in prison innocently (Genesis 37:39ff). Moses was useless for God until he was humbled in the desert for forty years (Exodus 2:3). Paul was struck blind (Acts 9:8) and had to disap­pear from the scene for many years until Barnabas searched for him, finding him in his home town of Tarsus (Acts 11:25). Paul wrote about the hardship and troubles which the Thessalonians were going through: ‘God uses your sufferings to make you ready for the Kingdom’ (2 Thessalonians 1:5). Jesus Himself had to learn it: ‘During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him (Hebrews 5:8). To mould us into the image of Jesus, God often uses unpleasant circum­stances and hardship. It is special when one is taken above the storm like the eagle - when one can so to speak ‘smile at the storm’. To use another metaphor with this majestic bird as the example: Even when the baby eagle is cast out of the nest, the resulting initial feeling might be one of help­less­ness, but the mother is on hand to catch the chick before it can crash to the ground. The experience of suffering and persecu­tion makes the Christian stronger, helps him to get strong wings, to ‘fly’ even better. Just as the caterpil­lar gains strength as it breaks out of the cocoon, in order to get strong wings during its process of metamorpho­sis,72 diffi­culties are part of the transformation which the Christian needs in order to grow spiritually. Second century North African theologian Tertullian proclaimed that the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church. The truth of Tertullian’s adage can be easily verified when we take a quick look at the greatest Christian contri­butors through the centuries. One has to look very far indeed to find anyone who made a significant contri­bution, who did not experience hardship and/or persecution. On the contrary, a cursory view of special personalities like Raymond Lull, John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, John Bunyan, Jan Amos Comenius, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, Count Zinzendorf, William Carey, Watchman Nee and Festo Kivangere to discern that suffering and persecution helped to mould these men of God into mighty instruments of the Gospel. Accepting suffering and even persecution has been the soil of more than one revival. The event on 13 August 1727 in the East German village of Herrnhut, the prelude to the 24-hour Moravian prayer watch that started two weeks later and the preparation for an unrivaled missions venture, is often connected to Zinzendorf - not incorrectly at all. But it is generally overlooked that this was preceded by a revival in the Moravian towns of Zauchtental and Kunwald, from where so many refugees had been brought by the fearless Christian David. Steeped in the tradition of being prepared to go to prison or even to die for one’s faith, the Moravians and Bohemians thoroughly influenced the Germans. And the first years of Moravian missionary endeavour was accompanied by many deaths, so much so that Zinzendorf came up with a new variation of seed sown. Many new missionaries had died in 1834 in the West Indies. Of the eighteen missionaries who ventured out originally, only nine were left there at the end of that year. In his Mohrenkantate, (Negro Cantate) that was sung on 8 June 1835, the Count wrote as poet Es wurden viele ausgesät, Als wären sie verloren, auf ihrem Beeten aber steht „Das ist die Saat der Mohren73 More Scriptures pointing to the Lamb of God Innocent suffering, persecution because of a righteous life, is a characteristic that features throughout the Bible. Thus Abel is killed by his brother for no other obvious reason than because the former’s sacrifice was acceptable and that of Cain was rejected. Superfic­ially this looks very unfair, but the Scrip­tural principle - which does not make sense to the rational Western mind - is thus enshrined: ‘without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins’ (Hebrew 9:22).74 Similarly, the envy of Joseph’s brothers – called forth by the implied rejection via the multi-coloured robe given to him by their father – misguided them towards the wicked deed. Again, an innocent animal was slaughtered! Jewish tradition accentuates the voluntary character of Isaac when he was about to be sacrificed, prodding his father to be obedient to the divine demand. That prefigured the death of the innocent sinless Son of God probably more than any other Scripture. Likewise the ‘almost death’ of Joseph in the well and his subsequent ‘resurrection’ has been seen as a type of the Gospel message through the ages. Lot is a sad type of the person saved but smelling like smoke. The letter to the Hebrews saw a special dimension in the innocent suffering of Moses. He suffered ‘for the promised Christ’ (Hebrews 11:26), which he is stated to appreciate more than the riches in the palace of the Pharaoh’s daughter. All these Hebrew Scripture examples point to the innocent Lamb of God who was slain for our sins. Pointedly the purpose of His innocent suffering was prophesied by Isaiah, through the images of the suffering servant, especially in chapter 53. It is no co-incidence that John the Baptist pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Links between Trials and Temptations The three friends of Daniel concretely experienced the presence of God in the fire, when the heat was on (Daniel 3:25). We may compare their experience to that of Christians who try to go through life the easy way, who attempt to evade perse­cu­tion and suffering for the sake of the Gospel. It is recorded about the three friends as they came out of the fire - ‘They did not even smell of smoke’ (v.27). Lot was another ‘OT’ example who escaped the fire of Sodom and Gomorrah by a whisk, along with his family. In 1 Corin­thians 3:13ff Paul spoke of fire to be used in the judgment, as a test to the quality of our lives as believers. Of one type of Christian he wrote: ‘if the house he has built burns up, he will have a great loss. He himself will be saved, but like a man escaping through a wall of flames.’ Every follower of the Lord is treated like silver in the crucible. In Malachi 3:2 the Almighty is compared with a goldsmith who purifies the special metal from all impurities in the red-hot fire. In the first letter to the Corinthians (10:13), Paul reassures the believers that God does allow us to get tempted, but that he will also give us the strength to come through it with flying colours. The first chapter of James (1:2-17) alludes to an interesting link between trials and temptation: The same word (peirasmos) is used inter-changeably in the Greek original. The Afrikaans word beproewing (meaning affliction) has something of this where the stem of the word proef means test. But also in the chemistry laboratory we see fire in the form of the bunsen burner - used in many a proef, in many an experiment. Indeed, the diffi­culties in life are a test and a temptation at the same time. In the negative we can give in to temptation or give up after affliction. If we come through it however - with God’s help - we are spiritually strengthened. The opponents of Daniel could not find anything on the moral level of which they could accuse him (Daniel 6:5). Yet, Daniel landed in the lion’s den. Not all believers who have been persecuted unjustly were saved like Daniel. The Psalmist (109:2-4) had the experience that his love and prayers for the ungodly people who accused him with lies and slander, were answered with animosity. David experienced innocent persecu­tion as Saul tried to hunt him down. He displayed the spirit of Jesus when he refrained from killing Saul, retorting with the moving monologues in which he called on God to be his lawyer and the judge (1 Samuel 24:10-17). The Principle enacted in the Early Church The principle can easily be detected in the Early Church. It had been prepared centuries ago with the exile to Babylon and other places. The story of Daniel and the three young friends is well known. God brought Jews from all directions to Jerusalem supernaturally at the special Pentecost of Acts 2. If the great persecution of Christians had not taken place, with Saul of Tarsus prominent in an attempt to destroy the church (Acts 8.1-3), many of them might have been tempted to remain in the Holy City. I take it that many not only preferred to go back from where they came originally, not only to Rome and Damascus, but also to places known today as Baghdad and Alexandria. Churches were started in Turkey and Libya. Via the revival in Samaria the finance minister of Ethiopia was impacted (Acts 8:26ff). The interaction and exchange of people between Samaria and Assyria is quite interesting. (In Samaria one finds today the Palestinians and the descendants of the Assyrians). From the small town of Babylon on the Euphrates Peter wrote his first epistle that refers to persecution and suffering so much. Tradition holds that Thomas, another apostle, was in the region that we today call Iraq, before moving on to India. Relativity of Experiences of Suffering Paul has taught us that experiences of suffering should be nothing special. In 2 Corin­thians 6 he starts off in verse four: ‘We patiently endure suffering and hardship and trouble of every kind.’ Then he lists them: ‘We have been beaten, put in jail, faced angry mobs, worked to exhaustion, stayed awake through sleepless nights of watching, and gone without food’ (2 Corin­thians 6:5). There­after Paul derives that through all this ‘we have proved ourselves to be what we claim to be by our wholesome lives and by our understanding of the Gospel and by our patience.’ He also taught how relative all human suffering becomes if one compares and weighs it in the light of the glory awaiting the faithful believer (Romans 8:18). In conclusion he gives God the honour when he mentions the role of being filled with the Holy Spirit: ‘We have been truth­ful, with God’s power helping us in all we do.’ A clear rejection is applicable with regard to a martyr complex. Martyrdom is not something one aspires. If it comes your way, you may expect to be enabled to carry it in a supernatural way, for God will see to it that you can bear it (1 Corinthians 10:13). Suffering as a Weapon of the Believer An interest­ing feature is that Paul continues to speak in the context of suffering about the spiritual weapons of the righteous man. The inference is that suffering and persecution are weapons in the arsenal of the believer, because the suffering of the believer for the sake of the Gospel contains the seed of resurrection: ‘We always carry in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body’ (2 Corinthians 4:10). Accepting innocent suffering and persecution with joy, is one of the strongest weapons in the armour of the Christian. Indeed, it is one of the best weapons of the believer when he patiently endures suffering/persecution and then experiences how the ‘wings of the eagle’ (Exodus 19:4; Isaiah 40:31) undergird and sustain him. It is a weapon against which the enemy has no counter. We may be perse­cuted, but God never abandons us (2 Corinthians 4:9). In 2 Corinthians 6:5 Paul states ‘We pa­tiently endure suffering and hardship and trouble of every kind’ and he then proceeds to list a plethora of different ways of persecu­tion (see above). In chapter 11 of the same letter Paul gave a similar list of the sufferings and persecu­tion which he experi­enced as he set out to bravely preach the Gospel. The book of Revelations gives us a glance of the martyrs at the end of the times and of their victory over the enemy: ‘They defeated him by the blood of the Lamb, and by their testimony...’ (Revelations 12:11).75 Stephen became the first martyr of the ‘New Testament’ Church for his bold witness of the crucified and resurrected Jesus. To the early church to be a witness (in Greek martus) meant to be prepared for persecution and suffering. Many were to follow Stephen through the ages. An excellent Representative of the Principle Let us have a closer look at the life of Comenius as an excellent representative of the principle. Starting as an orphan in Moravia and attending the schools of the Church of the Brethren, he was impacted at the universities of Herborn and Heidelberg in Germany, expecting the speedy return of Jesus and the 1000 year reign of peace under the Messiah as ruler. However, in stead of experiencing the reign of Jesus, the ‘sun of righteousness’, 30 years of war - starting in 1618 - would throw big shadows over his life. All around him people were fleeing after the Catholic legions had defeated the Protestants in 1620. The Church of the Brethren had to go underground. In Fulnek, where he had been minister, all his writings were burned. There he also lost his wife and children through the pest epidemic. He remarried but went into exile in February 1628 to Lessno in Poland, where he was soon the minister of an emigrant congregation. Here he wrote many books that earned him an invitation to come and lecture at the new Harvard College in North America. He however felt called to operate from Europe, teaching in England, the Netherlands, Sweden and Hungary. Comenius did perceive a task of becoming a teacher to the nations - also on behalf of the oppressed (North American Indians, Asians and Africans), doing it from Europe. In 1656 war and fire ravaged once again. In Lessno he lost his house, his library and a part of his writings. On his 64th birthday he had to look for a new home. He chose Amsterdam, a city from where ships went to the whole wide world. He foresaw what that could mean in terms of the exploitation of Africa, Asia and America and warned against it. But he also had the vision that the ships could take emissaries of the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Comenius became known as the teacher of nations, especially through his writing on education. He blessed believers of all time even more through the way he handled adversity and his teaching in that regard. As someone for whom pansophism, a wide general knowledge was dear, he saw in his lifetime a lot of war, destruction, fire and tyranny in Central Europe; division and enmity was widespread in the churches and quarrels in science was rife. Already after the burning of his writings in 1624 on the church plain of Fulnek, Comenius reacted not only with hiding, but also with the writing of material to comfort others. The most famous book at this time was The labyrinth of the World and the paradise of the heart. Van der Linde (1980:48) described the following as the gist of his writings at this time: the World - life without God - is a labyrinth, but a heart committed to God through Christ is paradise. Furthermore, Comenius always looked for positive solutions and peace in science, in the churches and in politics (Van der Linde, 1980:48). He believed that followers of Jesus should not passively await the return of the Lord and his sovereign rule of peace, but that Christians are called to erect signs to usher in that reign. Persecution Reaping Blessings The persecution of the Quakers in England and Protestants in France was directly responsible for blessings in North America and other parts of the world. Significantly, the ship that took the British religious refugees to New England was named The Pilgrim Fathers. At the Cape the persecuted French Huguenot refugees brought with them spiritual correction at a time when corruption and immorality was rife amongst the Dutch and early German opportunists. When everything looked completely hopeless, John Amos Comenius, the last Bishop of the Church of the Brethren in Bohemia and Moravia, wrote in 1660: ‘Experience clearly teaches that particular churches are sometimes destroyed by the hand of God stretched out in wrath. Yet, sometimes other churches are either planted in their stead, or the same churches rise in other places. Whether God will deem her worthy to be revived...or... resuscitate her elsewhere, we know not...According to His own promise, the Gospel will be brought by those Christians who have been justly chastened, to the remaining peoples of the earth; and thus, as of old, our fall will be the riches of the world.’ How pro­phetic these words have become: the church was revived in Herrnhut a few decades later with Bohemian refugees spear-heading the movement, along with Count Zinzendorf. Failure Regarded as Hidden Seed The profound writings of Comenius himself remained hidden seed for centuries, only really discovered in the late 19th century. The beginnings of the Moravian Church 550 years ago were marked by persecution and suffering. While they had to worship the Lord in secret as the ‘hidden seed’, they had a good grasp of the truth which Jesus Himself expounded: ‘...unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it produces many seeds’ (John 12:24). In the case of Raymond Lull, the martyr seed has only just started to bring fruit among the Kabyle of Northern Africa, i.e. after many centuries. Some ‘watering’ was done among the people group and in Algeria in general by dedicated missionaries like Lillias Trotter, Charles Marsh and his wife in the 19th and 20th centuries as well their daughter Daisy, for many decades. Only now in our time the seed appears to germinate. Very fittingly, Andrew Murray summarized the motivation for mission work by the Herrnhut Moravians: ‘...making our Lord’s suffering the spur to all their activity’ (Murray, 1901 (1979):44). Count Zinzendorf was still a secondary school scholar when he practised the missionary principle of being prepared to suffer for the Gospel. Other learners treated him with scorn and disdain because of his faith (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:3). He responded by praying for them. Also teachers punished him disproportionately for the least of offences. When one of them commented on his being put on the street with donkey years so often, he replied in Latin: ‘This punishment will not suppress me but uplift me.’ Zinzendorf conceded that he was not an angel between his 12th and 19th year, but he was carried through by the prayers of the saints. The result of this is that more than once he succeeded in praying with those who wanted to tempt him into mischief and ‘win them for my Lord’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:4). Slander and False Accusations as Gospel Seed Count Zinzendorf encouraged his followers to see the slander which they were subjected to as Gospel seed. The seed germinated on the short term. He taught the fellowship that they should not defend themselves but leave their defence over to the Lord when they were falsely accused. The persecuted believers had to regard slander and false accusations gladly as fire through which they are cleansed, purified and glor­ified (Spangenberg, 1773-75 (1971):1280). Hartmut Beck, who had been a Moravian missionary in East Africa and the Eastern Cape before his return to Germany in the late 1970s, refers to the ‘vielfaches Leiden’ (manifold suffering) of the Christians who had come to Herrnhut from Moravia (Beck, 1981:24). He notes that the suffering for their faith made these church members prepared to persevere under extreme circumstances (Beck, 1981:22). The Herrnhut congregation remembered their origins as persecuted Christians. It is reported how they prayed ‘for their brethren still living under persecution’ at the occasion of the memorable communion service of 13 August 1727, when the revival broke out (Lewis, 1962:58). Persecuted like the first Jerusalem church, people from the area were disallowed to have contact with them from the outset. However, they were not to be deterred by this. When two brethren were arrested on 17 August 1727 for preaching in a house in one of the surrounding towns, they simply continued the sermon in the prison (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:42). When brethren from that town came to report the matter, there was ‘herzliche Freude’ (great joy) in Herrnhut. That sort of joy was still prevalent on 26 December 1730 when they celebrated a love feast in Herrnhut after it had become known that 56 brethren and sisters had suffered persecution and prison (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:37). They also ‘...set out to preach to the Buddhist Calmucks and beyond them to the Chinese.’ But at St Petersburg in Russia they were denounced as spies and thrown into prison for five years. At their trial the judge declared that ‘their behaviour and manner would convert the heathen. Such was their spirit of utter trust in the Lamb that they called their prison a ‘Hall of Grace’...’ Slander, which was not completely without ground because of some excesses that occurred during the Count’s absence at Herrnhaag after their banishment from Saxony in1736 - but also quite a few false accusations - was the cause once again to move on. The Pilgrim Church made no attempt to defend themselves. In stead, they saw this as another stepping stone for missions. A new party set off for the ‘new world’. The principle of the seed of slander and false accusations applied throughout church and mission history. The mission agency OM came into being after George Verwer, its founder, was shattered because he had been accused of spying. During a spiritual retreat in the mountains near Vienna God met with him giving him the vision that led to the birth of OM.76 Similar stories could be told of other missions, which came into being after so-called failure. The founder of Open Doors, Brother Andrew, had been turned down because of health reasons at a mission agency after his Bible school training and later he became persona non grata in many Communist Countries by the mid-1970s. The Nitschmann Clan: Witnesses and Martyrs Christian David’s teaching and example during his itinerant ministry, that included forays into Moravia must have included profound guidance that suffering and martyrdom was part and parcel of the follower of Jesus. The Nitschmann clan surely got the message. One of those with the name David Nitschmann was imprisoned in 1729 when he visited his father in Bohemia. There he died in prison as a faithful martyr for his faith. Not a powerful preacher at all, he had a very concise theology. The Lord Jesus meant to him ‘Love, love and more love’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:21). Nitschmann conveyed the message to the church from prison: be so restful and contented when you are imprisoned because there is such a power in it that you can be a free man in chains. The love he radiated was so powerful, his nature so friendly and full of joy that even his enemies typfied him as a holy man. They wished to be like him. A second David Nitschmann, a carpenter, was one of the first two missionaries who went to St Thomas in 1732. Three years later he was ordained as a bishop of the Unitas Fratrum by Daniel Jablonsky, a grandson of Comenius. Taking his cue from Isaiah 53:11 as well as from the book of Revelations, Zinzendorf challenged the believers in Herrnhut. They were called to win souls for the Lamb as a reward for the suffering of the Lord. When Melchior Nitschmann was nominated to become one of the four chief elders of the church, Zinzendorf had reservations. He thought that they should not have included the teenager into the lot because of his age. The Count apparently did not even know Melchior Nitschmann that well. The bare-footed youngster evidently had the trust of the congregants, however, demonstrating a steadfast attitude that soon enough impressed Zinzendorf (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:95). When Melchior wanted to visit Moravia with Georg Schmidt, but the rest of the fellowship objected. The other elders hereafter celebrated an agape meal with him, pointing out the dangers of such a trip. His final words were: ‘Even if they burn me or let me languish in prison, I am sure of my calling.’ Thereafter the elders kneeled down, blessing him for the proposed trip. In 1728 Melchior Nitschmann went to Moravia with Georg Schmidt where they were arrested as they were fellowshipping with believers. Melchior Nitschmann died in prison the next year. He had also been God’s instrument to challenge Susanna, the 11 year-old daughter of the elder Kühnel, who witnessed all this. Before Melchior Nitschmann left, he asked her: ‘Susel, don’t you also want to become the Lord’s?’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:29). Along with Anna Nitschmann, Susanna Kühnel would become a special channel that God used in the revival among the children in August 1727. Suffering as a Spur to missionary Activity In 1728 revived young men from Herrnhut moved into 8 loft rooms of the guest house, which in no time became a school for missionaries. They were not only taught in medicine, geography and languages but also about ‘the glory of the martyr’s death and the liberty of the apostles in witness’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:32). This was surely their strength, so that by 1737 already 56 of them were already in missionary service abroad. They grasped the message, because after 1732 generations of Moravian missionaries went out to the various mission fields, prepared to die there. It soon became customary to take your own coffin to the mission field. Many of them never returned. The Moravian missionaries who set out after 1732, suffered ‘a thousand hardships’. Avred Gradin, who was imprisoned in St Petersburg, wrote in 1743: ‘imprisonment, persecution, shipwreck, plague, privation, death... only increased the zeal and fervour of our Brethren, whose firm resolution it was, rather to die, than to go away without fruit’ (cited by Murray, 1901:48). Their experiences read like excerpts from the Acts of the apostles.77 About two missionaries, a surgeon and a doctor - in their attempt in 1747 to reach out to the Kurds in Persia - we read: ‘Near Baghdad they were robbed and left for dead by the bandits. At Isaphan they were well received but the civil wars crushed any hopes of an immediate mission in Persia.’ One of them, Dr Hocker, proceeded like an apostle Paul of old, to learn Arabic in Cairo and then attempted to reach the Copts of Abyssinia (today called Ethiopia). The Coptic Patriarch accepted the letter that Hocker had brought from Zinzendorf which he called ‘a piece of his love to all Chris­tians’. Spangenberg wrote how - because of the persecution of the missionaries in Surinam - ‘the Negroes came to the knowledge that they should not look at the example of those called Christians78 but at the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ’ (Spangenberg, 1773-75 (1971):1173). Death as a Prelude to Resurrection In America Zinzen­dorf’s enemies tried to kill him thrice: once through scalping, once through poisoning by puff adders and a third time he almost drowned when the girth of his saddle broke. ‘None of these perils were acciden­tal’ (Lewis, 1962:150). In all fair­­­ness to the Indians, it must be mentioned that Zinzendorf had become a victim to culture shock himself. He did not live up to the principles he himself had set for mission­aries when he lived among the indigenous ‘Indians’. He put up his tent hundreds of yards away from the village. Furthermore, he ‘regarded the Indians as crude and made no effort to hide his feelings’ (Weinlick, 1956:176). By way of contrast, our own Georg Schmidt could be mentioned. He put up his hired tent next to the Khoi hut of the indigenous Africo. On purpose he chose to move away from the residential area of the Dutch Company colon­ists. This - and especially how Schmidt assisted the Khoikoi with agriculture - helped to convince them that he was ‘not like the other Europeans who only wanted to get some cattle and sheep from them.’79 Of course, Schmidt’s fraternalizing with the ‘Hotten­­tots’ did not endear him to the colonists. When he baptized Africo and four other Khoikoi in 1742, this was just the handle they were looking for, the reason the Church at the Cape needed to get the smear cam­paign into top gear. This eventually led to the semi-deport­ation of Schmidt. His enemies thus succeeded to separate him from Herrnhut and to get him removed. Fifty years later the gospel seed that he had sown with tears, had germinated. The three new Moravian missionaries could see how it had brought forth fruit richly at Baviaanskloof where Schmidt had laboured. In Herrnhaag Kriegsrat (Martial Council) was held constantly to discuss new ventures. On one of these forays Zinzendorf and his son Christian Renatus were imprisoned in Riga - albeit only for a short time. The lot was often consulted. Thus it was determined that the Count should go to Latvia for a month to make the Lord known there. Going back via Berlin where he discussed matters with King Friedrich Wilhelm I, he rushed home to be at the Ronneburg to be in time for the birthday of his wife. However, there was nobody to welcome him there. The Pilgrim Church had been evicted from Ronneburg after instigation of Zinzendorf’s enemies. Suffering under the Church? Dr Andrew Murray exemplified how death as a prelude to resurrection can operate practically, in both positive and negative ways. In the letter sense the disunity of the body of Christ caused him a lot of sorrow. In the middle years of his life it seems as if discussions and negotiations played too big a role when the gifted young man was catapulted as translator between the British and the Boers of the new republics in the 1950s and after he was elected as moderator of the Dutch Reformed Synod. I get the impression – perhaps incorrectly – that he temporarily depended too much on his skills and gifts. I surmise that the church splits of that period in the Reformed camp – which were clearly demonically orchestrated around semantics – could have been averted if the Church had been called for more urgent prayer. He suffered trials and tribulations in the Transorange from 1850 to 1860, especially with what was happening in the church there. His skills and talks with many pastors could not prevent the establishment of the Hervormde Kerk (1853) and Gereformeerde Kerk (1859) on petty grounds. It grieved him profoundly. His battles on the theological front as church moderator to ward off liberalism brought him into court cases against other clergymen, which he surely would not have enjoyed. He and his Dutch Reformed colleagues – along with the Anglican Bishop Gray would have achieved a significant breakthrough in the spiritual realm in the negotiations on church unity in 1870. A wonderful opportunity was however missed to influence the Body of Christ world-wide. Some modern German theologian coined a nice-sounding phrase ‘Leiden an der Kirche’, (suffering because of things pertaining to the Church), which was still resounding in the 1990s. To suffer because of the Church (under its structures and people), is however not biblical. Although the pain inflicted by fellow-Christians is experienced very severely, this can never be raised to a norm, it may never become a matter of course. The issue gets an awful smell when a bossy pastor requires of his church members to suffer patiently when the attitude of the leadership of the congregation is the real cause of the affliction. At most this sort of suffering could become an instrument used by God to ‘prune’ believers so that they can bear more and last­ing fruit (John 15:2+3). Prophetically, our Lord must have suffered some of this pain already, for example when he prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane that his followers ‘may be brought to complete unity’ (John 17:23). Discernment of Dangers On the other hand, Dr Andrew Murray did discern spiritual needs which had not been taught in the Church at large, and which the Herrnhut Moravians had practised. Thus he wrote the booklet Blijf in Jezus (1864) when it became apparent that many of those impacted by the remarkable revival of the early 1960s were waning in fervour. Abide in Christ was the first of many books to be translated into English. From Jesus’ lessons about the vine, Andrew Murray emphasized the central word in. There is no more profound word in Scripture, he averred. His life philosophy – next to prayer, prayer and yet more prayer – can be aptly summarised with a verse (From his Collected Works, VII,200): “No struggle will help you abide, No worry to bear your fruit Be one with Jesus and fruit will come, It is sure to grow from the root After being silenced for two years because of illness, and thereafter supernaturally healed, Andrew Murray was God’s instrument to bring the work of the Holy Spirit in general, along with faith healing back into the scope of the global Church. The enlightenment and rationalism had pushed the human intellect and skills to the front at the cost of the supernatural. In chapter 1 we highlighted how Andrew Murray rectified the errors of the big conference of New York (1900) through his booklet: The Key to the Missionary Problem and its emphasis on prayer, even though the Alliance Movement at large did not take up his suggestion to have a week of prayer for missions at the beginning of the year. A similar correction happened after the global conference in Edinburgh (1910), albeit with less of a global impact. This time his booklet received the title The State of the Church – a Plea for more Prayer. At the Cape, there followed a prayer conference in 1912, organised by Professor de Vos of Stellenbosch with significant ramifications. Andrew Murray’s ‘Leiden an der Kirche’ (suffering in the Church) when he was over 80 years of age thus proved to be quite significant, a blessing to the Church. His pain at the disunity of the Church became for him a first step in the direction of closer union (Du Plessis, 1919:366). His warnings against nationalism were not heeded, at great peril to the country. Afrikaner nationalism – piously calling it Christian Nationalism - later led to apartheid. Students from this country had listened more to Adolf Hitler and his Nationalist Socialism. The danger of African nationalism has still not been properly discerned on the black continent, albeit that a significant correction occurred when the term African Renaissance started to be used in stead. The crucified Christ Like few others before him, Zinzendorf discerned the importance of having the crucified Christ central in all teach­ing. He stressed that even the most primitive peoples know about the existence of God in some way or another. What they needed to know was that His Son died for their sins. That had to be shared lovingly. In a parable in his Fetter Lane sermon in London on September 4, the Count showed how the arch enemy dislikes the idea of the wounded Christ, how the enemy emulated Jesus in a vision. ‘...there was a bishop named Mar­tin... (who) had the experience that Satan appeared to him with heavenly glory...’ Martin: ‘If you are Christ, where are your wounds?’ The reply was that he did not come to him as the wounded, as one from the cross, but rather he came from heaven; he wanted to show himself to him in his glory, as he sits at the right hand of the Father. To this Martin answered, ‘You are the devil; a Saviour who is without wounds, who does not have the mark of his sufferings, I do not acknowl­edge.’80 In our day and age dreams and visions have become popular. The discernment of the crucified Jesus has attained a new actuality. It should be a sobering thought that the devil can even emulate Jesus in dreams and visions. Many believers have become followers of ‘prosperity’ theology, where the suffering Christ is pushed aside. The suffering of Jesus and his innocent death on the Cross has influenced many devout men of God. ‘When I survey the wondrous cross...’ became the inspiration of many to commit their life, their all to His service. This was also the inspiration to C.T. Studd, the founder of WEC International, who stated that no sacrifice could be too great in the light of what Jesus has done for us on the Cross of Calvary. The same Breed of Missionaries in Genadendal South Africa has also ‘imported’ the same breed of Moravian missionaries. It has been reported how a missionary at Genadendal spoke about one of his prede­cessors as he took a group of visitors around the mission graveyard: ‘And that... is the grave of Pieter Leitner, who worked amongst the lepers of Hemel en Aarde and died as he was baptizing a woman.’81 The suffering of parents and children can hardly be fathomed, when the missionary kids were sent back to Germany from the fields to the Moravian hostels of Niesky and Kleinwelka. This was the practice until deep into the previous century. Very often parents and children never saw each other again. We could debate from our ivory towers about the wisdom of these decisions, but the willingness of these believers to suffer for the Gospel remains a challenge to us. It should also be remembered that these children were the responsibility of the whole community. The parents on the mission field knew that the sprouts ‘were being loved and cared for with that same love in the fellowship of the Lamb as they themselves would have given them’ (Lewis, 1962:69). Their preparedness to risk all puts those modern missionaries to shame who major on soft targets. During the rule of Adolf Hitler, the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer,82 who suffered under the wicked Nazi regime, warned against ‘cheap grace’. Bonhoeffer evidently also saw that suffering was a prerequisite of being spiritually fruitful - part and parcel of true discipleship. The biblical truth of suffering (with the poor) is dawning with the church universal. In the book Praying through the 100 gateway cities..., which was widely distrib­uted at the occasion of the month of prayer in October 1995, Viv Grigg (1995:26) wrote: ‘Out of our sufferings God gives us a level of authority for a part of the warfare in a city. Jesus gave an absolute principle that ‘unless the grain of wheat dies it does not bear fruit. ... Incarnation among the poor releases the power of the Spirit. To choose suffering with the poor produces the character of the Spirit, enabling an outflow of his power.’ Fallacies about Suffering Some fallacies have however crept in with regard to persecution and suffering. Amongst other things there is confusion about what biblical persecution entails. Sometimes suffering occurring as a result of provocation - yes, due to a mistake or sin of some sort - has been confused with suffering for the sake of the Gospel. Biblical suffering happens. It is never the result of sinful provocation. Similarly, if one suffers through stupidity and carnal bravery, it cannot be called suffering for the sake of the Gospel. A related fallacy is a sort of masochist enjoyment of persecution. According to this pattern, the occasional believer would appear to enjoy narrating how the enemy has trapped and tricked him or her. With such a rendering, the enemy of souls gets undue recognition. The Germinating of the Seed of Martyrs The seed of the martyrs of which Tertullian wrote, has been germinating in many parts of the world. Nowhere has it been more spectacular than in China. At the beginning of the 20th century 130 foreign missionaries and 3000 Chinese Christians were massacred in the Boxer revolution in the city of Taiyan. ‘Gospel Seed’sown much further back in history, has in recent years started coming up in the Muslim world, for example in the village of Bugia, where Raymond Lull, the first missionary to the Muslims of North Africa, was killed in the 1300s. In fact, thousands turned to Christ among the Kabyle in recent years, the people group among which Lull toiled.83 In a sense this had already started to happen in the 19th century when Lavigerie, another French Catholic missionary, was called to work amongst the Kabyle. He went to Algiers in 1867. Also this time the message was not accepted. Learning the hard way, Lavigerie concluded that if the Algerians did not want to become Europeans, the missionaries should become like the Algerians. His followers, the movement of the ‘white fathers’, earned the respect of Algerians to this day. Protestant missionaries have been profiting from the goodwill which the ‘white fathers’ earned. In recent times more seed was plowed into the Algerian soil when missionaries were killed by fundamentalists. Also in other countries of the Middle East the seed is germinating. Gerald Derstine recorded some supernatural divine interventions among the Palestine Muslims, but he also not­ed some harsh persecution.84 In an autobiogra­phy published in 1996, Mark Gabriel, a for­mer lecturer in Islamic History of Al Azhar University, Cairo, wrote how he escaped death more than once because of his decision to follow Jesus.85 For years Samuel Doctorian has been toiling in various countries of the Middle East. In the 1990s the Lord used him to lead many to Christ. Joy Magazine (July 1996) reports in an interview with him how he refused to stop prea­ching, in peril of his life. The guns of sol­diers were already pointing at him. Suffer with Dignity The apartheid past has given South African ‘Blacks’ a special faculty: to suffer with dignity. At the same time it left many ‘Whites’ with a guilt complex, even though many tried to camouflage it in one way or the other. The rotten side of recent South African history is that some of us have become conditioned to accept suffering, when others are on the receiving end. That is exactly the opposite of what Christ did. He, the innocent, without any sin, died on our behalf. If meaningful solidarity and sharing with the poor and afflicted take place, it is quite possible that persecution could follow from it, for example from those who get money through injustice, corruption and greed. Alternately, hatred and enmity could evince from those who feel their riches and privi­leges threatened when they see believers sharing meaningfully and sacrificial­ly with the poor. It becomes just as rotten when it is too easily being taken for granted that Muslims, who have come to believe in Christ, are isolated and/or persecuted. We should not accept this as normal, not even if it takes place in other parts of the world. When for example we hear of Christians suffering because of their stand for Christ in Pakistan, this should ideally spur a reflex reaction on our part: to meet with others for prayer on their behalf. Christians in the West should however also give serious thought, about what we can do to demonstrate our solidarity in a practical way: not only to alleviate the suffering of these brothers and sisters, but we should also become more prepared to suffer for Christ’s sake, to get out of our own comfort zones.86 It is no compliment that new believers from Islam have not always been warmly welcomed into the church community. We should not make a fuss out of them, but it must be stressed that new believers should experience fellowship and receive mentoring. After having left the Islamic ummah, the close Islamic fellow­ship, they really need this. As a rule Muslims experience extreme pressure from their family and Muslim friends when they decide to follow Jesus. In South Africa, persecution of Chris­tians sometimes take the form of hatred and resentment by those who detest the unity and fellowship of all races in Christ, for example from those who dislike followers of Jesus becoming friends to Muslims and Hindu’s. (On no account do I suggest a cheap compromise of one’s faith. I firmly believe that one can be a committed Christian and still have friends among adherents of other faiths.) The African continent boasts many stories of hardship and sacrifice which resulted in whole tribes and even whole nations south of the Sahara having been transformed. The name of C T Studd has been mentioned a few times. In addition to this the Cape’s Dr John Philip could be listed. He played a major role in the outlawing of slavery in the British Empire. The name of David Livingstone should also be added. The latter’s incessant call to Christianity to put an end to the wicked trade in humans was heard, striking a double blow in the process. He exposed the greed of scrupulous European colonizers while at the same time the Arabian dealing in slaves was knocked almost fatally. (A resurrection of the slave trade occurred in our days in Sudan in the last decades of the 20th century. In South Africa domestic workers are still fetched from the rural areas and abused as little more than modern slaves. East European females have been coming to the country under false pretenses and then exploited. Euphemistically they are called sex workers or exotic dancers.) Doubtful Practices The sufferings of Jesus have sometimes led to excesses. Zinzendorf and the Herrnhut believers entered a sift­ing period when they were ban­ished from Saxony. Their cause was seriously harmed when some believers - during an extended absence of the Count - seemed to loose sight of the lost. They turned inward­ly to themselves and were constantly celebrating the blood and the wounds of Jesus. The Moravian Church had great difficulty to recover its initial missionary drive after this period of an inflated emotionalism at Herrnhaag. In the 1990s the arch enemy also succeeded to deceive Chris­tians who had previously been concerned for reaching the lost. Laughing and weeping in the Spirit have for example took over in services, with the result that (the preaching of) God’s Word was sometimes neglected. For hours Christians could be found celebrating, while the vision for the lost evaporated. That splitting of churches sometimes resulted, demonstrates how the enemy can creep in. He is the ‘diabolos’, the separator. However, we dare not allow any excesses to cloud the biblical truth that God invariably uses suffering to get to His sover­eign purposes. Two opposite positions - with poss­ible vari­ations - can be distinguished: a) A complete chaotic situation where experience becomes paramount. b) A dogmatic clinging to traditional beliefs. The danger in the second position is that we could close ourselves complete­ly to anything new that God would like to bring into His church. The Word has given us the litmus test: we must test the spirits (1 Thessalonians 5:21; 1 John 4:1). If the new practices are not in line with the Word, they can have only one source: from the arch enemy. The Triumph of Tragedy On 25 July 1993 PAC (Pan African Congress) activists stormed into the St James Church in Kenilworth, Cape Town, during the evening service. The two men threw a grenade into the auditorium and started shooting with a machine gun. Many worshippers were killed in the process. A much bigger carnage was prevented when one of the worshippers shot back, forcing the rebels to flee. It is sad that the massacre at the St James Church and many PAGAD (People against Gangsterism and Drugs) bombings from 1996 to November 2004 was needed to bring Capetonian believers to serious prayer. Bishop Frank Retief, the spiritual leader of the St James Church, who became known world-wide after the massacre, wrote a book in which he reflected on the events around that tragedy. He gave it the title Tragedy to Triumph. In this powerful book on human tragedy and suffering, he quotes from a Chris­tian classic A lifting up from the Downcast. I gladly use a part of this quote, especially from the point of view that this country could be regarded as a gold­mine for future missionaries: ‘Affliction is a bag of gold given to the people of God: though it seems like nothing more than a leather bag on the outside, there is gold with­in...’ Referring to Isaiah 43:2, Bishop Retief says elsewhere: ‘God’s presence is with us in a special way when we pass through the water and walk through the fire. We cannot expect the same measure of grace on a day-to day basis for we walk by faith - not by sight - but in times of great stress the Good Shepherd of the sheep draws near.’ A similar reaction of loving attitude towards them by some Americans – different to a general resentment and panic after 11 September - surprised many people. It is no co-incidence that every human being has a natural tendency to evade suffering and persecution. The natural man does not appreciate suffering, but prefers to be loved, honoured and adored. Frank Retief gives a good summary of what suffering for our Lord’s sake might look like in a Western setting: ‘...the more covert kind of family ostracism or displeasure, domestic break-up or job discrimination. But it is true that sometimes we are called to walk a lonely road because we believe in Christ and for no other reason’ (Retief, 1994:75). The St James Church was the centre of media attraction for many days. This made the impact of the teaching of Christ all the more powerful when it seemed as if all the mourners were given the grace to forgive the brutal misled perpetrators. This may have helped many others in the months to come. During the TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission) hearings many a parent offered forgiveness to the assassins of their children. Food for thought: What suffering have I experienced (lately) because of my stand for Christ, because of my stand for justice, because of my interven­tion on behalf of the weak and the lost? What specific forms of persecution do we find in our society? If the road has been very rosy for some length of time, soul searching might be appropriate. Where have I tried to evade suffering because of the Gospel? What person is, which group of people is being discriminated against by my (peer) group? What could I do to alleviate the suffering or hurt which has been (or is being) caused? And some ideas: How about combining with other churches, to rent/buy a house where persecuted Christians can be accommodated, for example ex-Muslims or messianic Jews who had to leave their homes? Get concrete information for example from Open Doors, so that you can pray intelligently for the persecuted. An email or a card on behalf of a persecuted Christian to an embassy or country might just be the instrument in God’s hands to alleviate his/her suffering. What could we do to alleviate the suffering of brothers and sisters in the faith: a) in other cultures locally b) in other countries? 9. Jesus delivered People from all Forms of Bondage Jesus was prepared and willing to take suffering and the sins of men upon himself, yes even to the extent of being prepared to become a curse, by allowing himself to be cru­cified. Yet, His whole life was a rebellion against illness, disease and bondage of all sorts, especially the bondage of sin. An objective reading of the Gospels will make it abso­lutely clear that prayer for the sick and a deliver­ance minis­try in the name of Jesus should be part and parcel of the teaching of any church. God paid a costly ransom to set us free from the bondage of sin: the blood of His Son, the per­fect Lamb of God (1 Peter 1:18f). The prophet Zechariah foretold the ramifications of the liberation, which would come through the fountain flowing from the house of David: it will cleanse from every sin and impurity in the last days (Zechariah 13:1f). One immediately thinks of the living water, the abundant life of which Jesus spoke (John 7:38). Jesus clearly rebelled against a legalistic approach with regard to the law. In no uncertain terms He attacked religious leaders who put a burden on their followers which they are not prepared to carry themselves (Matthew 23:4). In fact, Jesus also said that tradi­tions can nullify the power of the Word of God (Mark 7:13). In his healing practice Jesus came up time and again against the guardians of the law because he healed on the Sabbath (for example Luke 13:14; John 5:18; John 7:22; John 7:22). In fact, our Lord’s attitude in this regard was the proof to the religious establishment of His day that He could not have come from God (John 9:16). Through faith, by accepting Jesus as your Saviour and deliverer, a relationship results, one becomes a child of God (John 1:12). The believer in Jesus is no more slave, but son/daughter (Gala­tians 4:7). Paradoxically, we are exhorted to become slaves of another kind, servants of Christ who do God’s will (Ephesians 6:6). Faith in Christ sets free, brings one into a relation­ship with God; mere religion enslaves. This is the basic difference between the believer who experienced deliverance through the atoning death of Christ and that of any other religious person. Bondage of pseudo-religious Activity Pseudo-religious activity has brought many in bondage. Because of ignorance many a Christian has inadvertently come under the spell of the enemy through the use of horoscope and ‘white magic’. Many people have come under occult bondage through healing practices which sound religious. Thus a so-called alterna­tive healer without a personal relationship to God may even speak of ‘the Lord’. He may use ‘laying on of hands’, but basi­cally he would be only interested in getting money out of patients. There are psychiatrists who carry the tag of ‘Chri­stian’, without daring to use sin and repentance in their vocabulary. It has become the vogue to play down genuine feelings of guilt in stead of simply doing what the Bible teaches: to confess your sins and get cleansed from all impur­ity (1 John 1:9). Instead of healing, bondage is the result. A related issue is the bondage of lies. Jesus did not call the enemy the father of the lie by chance (John 8:44). Right from the very first distortion of God’s Word in Genesis 3:1, satan has kept people in bondage of all sorts. It is no sur­prise that sects and religions distort biblical truths - for example by citing Scripture out of context. Conversely, Jesus said ‘I am the truth...’ (John 14:6) and somewhere else ‘the truth will set you free’ (John 8:32). Even if the doctrine of the Holy Trin­ity is not expli­citly taught in the Bible, it is interesting to note that John said that the Holy Spirit is the truth (1 John 5:6) and Jesus described the same as the ‘Spirit of truth’ (for example John 14:17). There is also the teaching that the Spirit will lead us into the full truth (John 16:13). It goes of course without saying that God is light, God is truth (Isaiah 65:16). There are quite a few qualities like these which are attributed to the different persons of the God-head. The principle of the first among equals is also included in the concept. Jesus said for example on the one hand ‘I and the father are one’ (John 10:30), but also that the Father is greater. Because Jesus made the abso­lute claim that He is the truth and the (only) way; nobody can come to God by any other means (John 14:6). Therefore the deceiver must come up with lies to bring people in bondage. It is thus not surpris­ing that many Muslims believe for example that the promised paraclete, the com­forter of John 16:7, is Muhammad.87 This should give all of us as believers in Jesus Christ an even greater sense of urgency to pray for a lifting of the veil in all religions where the spirit of the lie rules. We should realize that this is really a demonic spiritual stronghold. Worship on high Places It is typical that people flee into religion when they are cornered by the truth. When Jesus confronted the Samaritan woman in John 4 with her sinful living, she seems to have first tried to flatter Him: ‘I see you are a prophet.’ Then she reverts to her own religion: ‘Our fathers worshipped...on this mountain.’ It is typical of the strategy of the enemy to distort or emulate what God had started. Abraham took his son up to Mount Moriah, which points to God allowing His Son to die on the hill of Golgotha. According to a Jewish Targum (the Aramaic traditions which were initially primarily passed on orally), Isaac carried the wood like someone would carry a cross. This was nullified by another tradition, viz. that only the blood of an animal - contrasted to human blood - can atone for sin. Of course, if one is prepared to be less academic or legalistic, the fact that Jesus was described as the Lamb of God - thus an ‘animal’ - it might help many a Jew to discover in Him the Messiah. Simi­larly, it is not surpris­ing that Islamic Hadith traditions - those sayings of Muhammad which were not included in the Qur’an - made Ishmael into the son taken to be sacrificed on Moriah.88 The law was given on Mount Sinai. Its 'New Testament' coun­ter­part, the law of true worship, was started by Jesus in his days of fasting when the enemy tried to tempt him from a high moun­tain. The accuser attempted Jesus twice to abuse the fact that He was the Son of God (Matthew 4:3, 5). The death of Jesus on the Cross and His being the Son of God are main issues, which are anathema to Jews and Muslims alike. The battle against the Amalekites was fought out on Mount Horeb when Hur and Aaron supported Moses (Exodus 17:10f). This has become a model of spiritual warfare for Christians, to support the ‘soldiers’ who face the brunt of the battle. In the light of these examples, it is completely in character for the enemy to emulate prayer on the heights. This happened with the Baal cult worship, when Israel­ites were tempted time and again. Therefore it was very appropriate that Elijah had to inflict the Baal worshippers a defeat on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:19ff). Here in South Africa, satan took over Ekuphakame­ni, ‘the high and elevated place’, where worship was nowhere chris­to­centric. In fact, in so many words Jesus Isaiah Shembe (1870-1935) was regarded as ‘God for us Black people.’89 This also still happens when Cape Muslims go and pray at the Kra­mats (shrines), which are situated on the heights in the form of a crescent around the Cape Penin­sula, from Robben Island to Macassar. The Christian equivalent is the visits to cemeteries, which sometimes come very close to ancestor veneration. God used Caux, situated high in the Swiss Alps, to challenge many people to godly living with the four moral absolutes of the sermon on the Mount, but the arch enemy high-jacked the Moral Re-armament movement to become a fore-runner to New Age ideology, where the uniqueness of Jesus was seriously impeded and compromised. Inculturation At this point the issue of inculturation should be addressed, to adapt your life-style to the relevant culture. It is surely a very healthy matter that the African Church is coming of age in thrusting off the shackles of cultural colo­nialism. Many mainline churches only woke up when the young people started leaving the church in droves. Even in the Moravian Church that should have been the leader in the field of inculturation, a major crisis developed in the early 1990s in some congregations, albeit in this case there was conflict between tradi­tionalists and charismatics, notably in Ravensmead at the Cape. Zinzendorf had taught his missionaries not to apply the Herrnhut yard-stick wherever they went. It is a good thing that African Christians are claiming for themselves the right to interpret the Bible as they under­stand it. A major problem in this country is that the occult is so often mixed up with cultural patterns. The pioneer of inculturation in South Africa is the above-mentioned Isaiah Shembe. It is typical that he was initially challenged in dreams and visions to get rid of sinful ways that belonged to the normal practices of Zulu culture. Struggling with this inner conflict he went to pray and fast for 14 days at the Nhlangakazi Mountain. He developed a system of ‘strict adherence to Zulu socio-cul­tural thought patterns and an adaptation of the Bible to fit the Zulu way of living’.90 Ek­upha­kame­ni became the headquar­ters of the church of the AmaNazaretha. This denoomination surely led the way of blending Christian beliefs with Zulu traditions and prac­tices, but the problem seems to be the priorities. If the cul­tural pattern becomes the norm in stead of the Bible, a bad compro­mise is apt to follow. Nobody will probably have major qualms when someone suggests: ‘The rituals we value - initi­ation, marriage, burial - must be examined and incorporated into our celebration of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.’ But when the author goes on to say ‘the Gospel does not ask us to live separated from the dead of our families and with no possibility of contacting them in times of illness, famine, homelessness and senseless killings’, it becomes prob­lematic. This is not biblical anymore. The problem is of course that the Lordship of Jesus has not been taught and lived out sufficiently. The practice of another Gospel, a distorted Gospel, misled many Africans to revert to witch doctors and Spiritism. This would never have happened if every new believer was taught clearly that the faith in Jesus as Lord gives one power to face adversity. Communion and not Communication with Saints In a sense we cannot blame Africans who feel themselves tricked on the issue of ancestral worship. Many of them feel that they should have the right to call on their ancestors because the so-called Apostolic Creed91speak of ‘communion of saints’. There is however a significant difference between communion with saints and communication with saints. Another problem is that theologians have included the clause in the creed on very scanty grounds. When the ‘New Testa­ment’ speaks about saints, it refers to living people and not to the dead. The Bible actual­ly forbids com­munication with the dead (Deuteronomy 18:19; Isaiah 8:19). Saul was clearly bashed because he consulted a spiritist to call up the spirit of Samuel (1 Samuel 28:7ff). Many people react with "I’ve got my church, I’ve got my religion" when they are challenged by the absolute claim of Jesus as the truth, the way and the life. Even within the confines of the traditional church, some theologians are not so happy by this ‘intolerant’ claim of Jesus. Jesus also spoke about a broad way. ‘The highway to hell is broad, and its gate is wide enough for the multitudes who choose its easy way’ (Matthew 7:13). If this is the real option, it should be clear why we might accept the fact of different avenues to God - every person is unique - but they must lead to the one way, to the one door: Jesus. Any other way ends up in the broad road and event­ually to eternal damnation. That may sound very intoler­ant, but that is the basic ‘New Testament’ position. Bondage of Denominationalism Bondage can also come in by the back-door. Paul clearly taught that religious practice can develop into bondage, into slav­ery. In stead of a guideline, God’s laws then become a choking legalism. In this context the letter of the law kills (2 Corinthians 3:6). Coming from the background of a Pharisee, the apostle discerned how the law can blind (2 Corinthians 3:14ff): ‘the same veil remains when the old covenant is read’. He had to become blind first, so that his spiritual eyes could be opened. That is why Jews and Muslims find it so hard to break through into living faith. The saddest thing with regard to bond­age is that there are many Christians who got bound through religious practices. This does not only occur in the Roman Catholic Church where traditions with an occult back­ground have been passed on from generation to generation. Also in Protestant-evangelical circles certain practices have brought legalism in by the back-door, keeping Christians in bondage, without them even realizing it. The best example is probably those traditions which were given the name sacra­ments. The practice in churches often deviates considerably from the obvious scrip­tural tradi­tion. The un­scrip­tural usage spawned a lot of unnecess­ary ‘theology’ to justify the prac­tice of certain ‘sacraments’, causing church splits in its wake. A case in point may be baptism. On the one hand the followers of Luther and Calvin often became legalistic on the issue of ‘re-bap­tism.’ Baptists on the other hand, have often refused church membership to those believers who have not been immersed, but doing it with an unloving doctrinalism. (In Scripture itself, there is an instance (Acts 19,1-5) where the believers were baptized a second time. It seems rather semantic to stress that they have previously been baptized with the baptism of John.92 What should Christians do in countries where there is an absolute water shortage and/or drought? The legalism and arro­gance of Baptists and Pentecostals (ab)using Scripture to convince others that christen­ing of infants and confirmation are unscrip­tural, have so often been very uncharitable. This is possibly a case of applying truth without grace and love. On the other hand, sound doctrine has been abused to bind people denominationally. Even a virtue like humility can become a negative tenet if the person in question boasts about it. Under the guise of the expectation of submiss­iveness by wives or congregants, church leaders sometimes become guilty. The Christian should display humility, but he is no door-mat. Humble submission is a virtue, but slavish subservience is sinful. The believer in Jesus may assert his authority in humility, but he does not have to allow anybody to abuse him as a slave (2 Corinthians 11:20). If we have been liberated by the Son of God, we are free indeed (John 8:36). There is thus a subtle difference between biblical submission and bondage of subser­vience. Those who are trampled upon in this way are however not blameless either, because we should not allow ourselves to be brought under a yoke of slavery, under a new bond­age (Galatians 5:1). After all, believers may invoke the anointing of the Holy Spirit to break every yoke of bondage (compare Isaiah 10:27). A good check in every denominational situation is whether there is a good balance with regard to freedom. Where the Spirit of the Lord reigns there is freedom (2 Corinthians 3:17). If there is a lack of freedom for adherents and members to associate with Christians from another Bible-based denomination, the red light should flicker. If unbliblical prohibition of any sort is present, like with Jehovah’s Witnesses or the New Apostolic Church, the lack of liberty is clear. But we should not allow it to come even near to that stage. On the other hand, the freedom to which Christ has liberated us, contains a healthy restraint, not to be brought into a new bondage. Bondage to strong personalities and their often one-sided interpretation of Scripture - in combination with their teach­ing of these interpretations - has also been another major cause for splits. This has especially been the case in Black churches. The bad Smell of Theology Zinzendorf’s views on these issues - to let love prevail in stead of doc­trine and the letter of the law - could have averted much pain if they had been taken seriously by the church universal. He detested the bad smell of theology. He stated that ‘all the essential theology can be written with large characters on one octavo sheet’ (Cited in Lewis, 1962:15). Thus he was very con­cerned at the development at the Herrnhut Seminary during his absence in America, fearing that ‘the brethren would move away from simplicity, that their bishops would start filling the young people with learnedness’ (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 [1971]:1492). In one of his Fetter Lane lec­tures in London, the Count made the astonish­ing remark that the philos­ophers and theolo­gians ‘have made that which was before obscure so pitch dark that, if earlier, before hearing it explained, one did understand a little bit; now after the explanation one no longer has the slightest idea what to make of it.’ In the sentence just before this remark, Zinzendorf offers the reason that was so typical of him: ‘they have been intent on hunting for expressions outside of Scripture in order to expound... those passages of Scripture which they found obscure.’93 The Count referred to the vain quest of academic theologizing as odium theologicum. To put the record straight: The Bible does not teach that intellect must not be appreciated. Paul sat under the feet of the famous Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), but he only became a spiritual giant after his mental capacity came under the rule of Christ. Thus the warning is possibly just as apt for our day and age as in by-gone times. Diminish the Differences between Churches Zinzendorf taught missionary candidates not only to refrain from getting involved in denominational disputes, but rather to try and diminish the differences between churches (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 [1971]:1272). By contrast, He himself set the concrete example. In an age of tremendous Protestant bigotry, he wrote: ‘I have been severely censured for not acknowledging the Pope to be the Antichrist, as I am sure he is not, and cannot be deemed so upon the authority of the Bible...’ In the same context the Count said ‘...Every church bearing the name of Christ... (is) to be (seen as) a congregation formed for his sake; more or less erroneous … I never will boast of it (my church) and despise others’ (Cited in Lewis, 1962:20). The people of Herrnhut caught the broad vision. They sought nothing for themselves, wanting only to be ‘used by the Lamb of God as a leaven of his unity wherever he might call them’ (Lewis, 1962:61). Zinzen­dorf fell into the enemy’s trap himself through his doctrinal bicker­ing with John Wesley and George Whitefield, God’s instruments in the great mid-18th century revival in Britain. The bickering appears to have started with Wesley.. In his journal he proudly recalls the interaction at Marienborn in the Wetteravia in 1738: ‘… the Count insisted that “to be justified is the same thing as to be born of God.” I take issue with this.’ (JOHN WESLEY, His life and theology, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1978:207). But there was no serious rift between the two as at that point in time. Quite positively Wesley reported a little later (p.209): ‘before leaving Marienborn I had opportunity to observe another intercession day. The ninety brethren from the next community (though gathered out of many nations) - together with many strangers (from different parts) - met for prayer and fellowship. I remember writing: “O how pleasant a thing it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!” The Methodists finally went their separate way. Of course, Zinzendorf was the one who had the vision that every denomination had a specific ‘tro­pos pai­deia’ (practise field), from where they should be linked into a common bond of mutual respect and com­munication. Jonathan Edwards, the great contemporary, also seems to have discerned the need of unity as a counte­rfoil to the attacks of the enemy.94 In a similar way, the great Dr Andrew Murray was caught in the web of doctrinal disputes, albeit not completely of his own volition. Having been elected as Dutch Reformed moderator for the first of a record seven times in 1862, he became involved in fierce theological polemics arising from the alleged liberal tendencies of two Western Cape clergy colleagues. Faith Healing neglected Western Theology has often made an unbiblical dichotomy between the suffering Christ and Jesus the healer/ deliverer. Sometimes the patient acceptance of illness - which of course does have limited validity95 - has sometimes almost been taught as a virtue. To suffer physically is sometimes equated with suffering and persecution for the sake of the Gospel. In the process, many a Western denomination has thus not only been impov­erished, but this castrated Gospel was sadly also exported through­out the world. Faith healing has often been neglected by mission­aries. After the Reformation, such a special emphasis was put on the proclamation of the Word, that sickness and healing were gradually pushed to the periphery of the theological interest. Hospitals became one of the hall-marks of missionary work around the world. At these institu­tions healing was of course - at least in theory - expected first and fore-most from our Healer Jesus. However, a subtle emphasis on the medical profession, technological know-how and human skill, came through. Supernatural faith healing, which is definitely a biblical tenet, was at a later stage not even expected any more at many a mission post. This happened even in health care institutions of faith missions. (The enemy often sees to it that Christian doctors and nurses are often overworked. Fre­quently they are so involved with the medical work that they neglect their walk with the Lord.) The mission hospital sometimes had (often still has in many countries) scant relation­ship to a local church or congregation. Holistic Teaching On the other hand, the healing ministry of Jesus has been part and parcel of the ministry of many churches in the South African townships. This generally occurred in Pentecostal denominations. Thus this country already has a rich tradition and many people have gone through the ‘school’ of holistic teaching. However, in many of these denominations the other dimension of healing - healthy human relationships - is often underdeveloped. Too often the peace of the soul is separated from justice and healthy human relations. When the apostles used the root of the word which we recognize in hygiene, they referred not only to physical hea­lth. Thus Paul wrote about ‘healthy words’ (2 Timothy 1:13) or healthy doctrine (2 Timothy 4:3) and John encouraged his reader, Gaius, praying that he might be ‘healthy’ all round, in body and soul (3 John 2). By way of contrast, we note the words of men that can work like cancer (2 Timothy 2:17). A comparative notion is the Hebrew ‘shalom’ - usually translated with peace - which means much more than only absence of strife. Healing is too often separ­ated from the broader minis­try of the church. This has espe­cially been a result of evan­geli­cal campaigns and superfi­cial scalp hunting where hardly any follow-up or disci­pling of converts is practised. Other Forms of Bondage Other forms of bondage have to be tackled before Black South African missionaries can stream forth in numbers of any magnitude. All sorts of magic, horoscope, witchcraft and ancestral worship have brought millions in bondage through the influence of the occult. Secret curses and spells have been put on Christians. Many Black pastors have made compromises with ancestral worship and hereditary occult forms, sometimes under the pressure of the family or their society. Even though the power of the blood of Jesus has protected them, it may still be that a ministry in power is effectively hampered through this occult influence of the past. As a rule, the people involved must first be liberated and the hered­itary effect of their ancestors’ wor­ship cut off in the name of Jesus. On the other hand, an over-emphasis on healing has also caused bond­age. Some Christians have been running from one faith healing service with prominent speakers to the next, becoming addicted to consumerism in the process. Even some gifted speakers have been deceived in this way, unwittingly encouraging superficial­ity in stead of encouraging believers to seek holistic liberation. It has often been overlooked that Jesus denounced the chronic sign-seeking attitude of people. We read that he ‘sighed deeply’ because of this (Mark 8:10-12). Could it be that his sigh was so deep because the religious leaders of his day, the Pharisees and Sadducees, were taking the lead in this sign seeking? We note that Jesus warned his disciples to beware ofthe ‘yeast’ of these people. The ‘yeast’ is still fermenting, operating unchecked. Churches often radiate a sour or morbid atmosphere rather than a sweet fragrance unto the Lord. Thus one often finds serious and sour faces singing ‘halleluja’, clearly not conveying the content of the hymns. Matthew 23 contains a stinging attack on the religious estab­lish­ment of his day. Much of this could be applied to present-day conditions in churches, where the words of men ferment like yeast, yes, like cancer that makes the Body very sickly indeed. The start of watering down the authority of Scripture at the ecumenical conference in 1910 at Edinburgh ushered in a fermenting process. Fairly big denominations have difficulties to define marriage for example in a biblical way, viz. as the union between one man and one female. A return to the unadulterated Word of God is absolutely necessary to stop the rot. Cape Muslims and Jews as potential Missionaries? Two religious groups should be strategically looked at for future mission work. Cape Muslims and Jews may be seen as potential missionaries to the Middle East when significant numbers start believing in Christ as their Lord - after they had been discipled and trained. Both groups have major traditional baggage: messianic Jews are often burdened with national pride and Muslims who have become followers of Jesus sometimes still feel that they owe it to their former religious peers to harbour resentment towards the Jews. If Chris­tian believers who have come from these two groups, can find each other in a city like Cape Town, which has significant communities of both, it could have a world-wide spin-off in terms of missionary outreach to the Middle East. There is often only a very thin divide between religiosity and occultism. This is especially seen in ancestor veneration and the worship of saints. It does not take much for the appreci­ation of the ministry of a ‘saint’ to deteriorate until the enemy uses his grave or his memory in an occult way to bring people in bondage. One finds examples across the board with different religions and throughout the world. The Cape Muslims still have those occult prac­tices in common with the most resistant present-day Indonesian tribes from which they stem predominantly (genealogically). These tribes have many roots in the occult. To this day some Cape Muslims frequently visit the ‘doekum’ (a sort of witch doctor) to have curses removed or placed. The fear of the unseen ‘tokolosh’ - which probably stems from African Black culture – used to be common in Cape Folk Islam. The religion itself is steeped in the occult, right from its roots when Muhammad declared Hubal, the main god of the Ka’aba, to be the only one to be worshipped, calling him Allâh (the god). For a spiritual breakthrough in the Muslim world, we need people who are not only aware of demonic powers which keep people in bondage, but who can also set them free in the name of Jesus. Possibly one could think in the direction of using teams with a deliverance ministry, including ideally at least one former Muslim. Drug addiction - as well as other forms of addiction - is another area where a deliverance ministry is very relevant. It is no co-incidence that the root of the word for practising witchcraft in ‘New Testament’ Greek is pharmakeia.96 It is significant that many satanists are also drug abusers. That people who have once been in such bondage can become missionaries - after their deliverance - is not only theory. The biggest evangelical church of Madrid is one which consists of former drug addicts and their families. Under the auspices of WEC International, evangelists (many of them former drug addicts) have gone out to such diverse parts of the world as Britain, India, Italy, North Africa and New York. Many of them have led others into the Kingdom before they died from AIDS.97 Temporarily the church in South Africa started to face the problem of gangsterism head-on. In May 1995 a task group of the Archdiocesan Pastoral Council of the Catholic Church came up with the question: What can the Church do to combat crime and violence? One of the suggestions put forward by the task force was promptly followed up, namely an appropriate pastoral letter by Archbishop Lawrence Henry. It appears however that not much happened with regard to the other two sugges­tions structurally, viz. that parishes support and seek repre­sentation on the community policing forums and that priests could act as go-betweens for people who are too scared to approach police directly about information they may have on crime and crimi­nals. Individually certain people, who have been doing stalwart work among prisoners throughout the country, have quietly been a blessing to many whose lives were changed through personal faith in Jesus Christ. However, individual efforts have had limited effect. What can happen when churches do something together was demon­strated through Operation Hanover Park in 1992 when crimi­nality was drasti­cally reduced temporarily in the township with that name, within two months after its inaugur­ation. At that stage not much more was done than to come together for prayer, with one person taking respon­sibility to mediate between gangs on behalf of the churches. Unfortunately internal bickering caused the oper­ation to disintegrate. Since then piecemeal and uncoordinated attempts were made, e.g. in Lavender Hill (Vrygrond), but there has been a dearth of sustained persevering efforts over some length of time The Holy Spirit as the Mother Figure On doctrinal issues Zinzendorf’s views of the Holy Spirit as the mother figure in the Trinity was truly innova­tive. If it had been taken seriously, much of the sharp edge of the prob­lem, which Muslims have with Jesus as the Son of God, could have been averted. The supposed one-sided father image of God has been a prime issue on which feminist theology was based. More recently, the New Age oppo­nents of traditional Biblical theol­ogy climbed onto this bandwagon. This would have been blunted if Zinzendorf’s ideas had been given appropriate consider­ation. Of course, the Count never really regarded himself as an academic theolo­gian. Thankfully, Floyd McClung reminded us in his booklet The Father Heart of God that the Bible depicts both male and female characteristics for God, that a full revelation of God is incomplete without the presence of both father and mother and that it was always His will that both parents are present. Only when they complement each other, it approaches the picture of the divine character. The progress of the gay movement in the new millennium caused a major setback in this regard. Taking Criticism of Critics seriously Zinzendorf nevertheless took the criticism of his critics seriously. He encouraged his followers to do constant self-examination, setting the personal example. When they found the criticism justified, they would leave no stone unturned to rectify the aberration. Thus he once sent a respected delega­tion to Halle to take along a letter of apology and correction from their synod (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 (1971):1252). On many an occasion Zinzendorf painstakingly invited inquiries into the activities of the church. When this was taken up, the Moravians were invariably cleared, often with a recommen­dation, for example after a commission of inquiry from the British parliament (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 (1971):1774). Various Approaches It was this rich variety and the varying approaches to the Lamb which led Zinzendorf to appreciate the various denominations: they were to him clear evidence of God’s providential care for the different temperaments and needs of His children. He thus clearly saw in this an expression of the Church radiating the multi-coloured wisdom of God (Ephesians 3:10). Nevertheless, Zinzendorf did not ride roughshod over the ecclesiasti­cal disunity, and we should not do so either. According to him the main ecumenical task was a deep sense of repentance and need of forgiveness because the holiness, the apostolicity and the unity of the Church had been broken by the narrowness, bigotry and pride of nominal Christian­ity (Lewis, 1962:108). To-day we fortunately tend to question denominationalism as such. The Bible definitely does not teach it. At most it can be seen as a concession to the flesh, a compromise for different tastes. But it is exactly therefore diabolic; almost all denominations started with a split of some sort, so often with dire consequences. The biblical counterpart is networking, working together towards a common goal. Probably the best example of this is the building of the Jerusalem wall under the leadership of Nehemiah (see below). A negative in the same context is how the exclusion of the Samaritans. On the surface the scribe Ezra’s views appear rather bigoted and nationalistic on this score. Some divine element can be detected on closer examination. A divisive element between Jews and Samaritans seem to have been present throughout history. This is seen not only in the instances mentioned in the era before Christ, but also thereafter. Jesus attempted to rectify the prejudice towards Samaritans in various ways, notably in the Gospels of Luke and John. Simon Magus, mentioned in Acts 8, was a Samaritan. After his disappointment with the apostles he has been described as an heresiarch, the founder of the Simonians. (Simon came from the Samaritan village of Gitta. The Simonians worshipped Simon like Zeus, a sort of God. Second century Justin Martyr has generally been hailed in Christian circles as a great apologist. Justin, called the Martyr, likewise had Samaritan ancestry. Few would regard him as heretical, but his haughty arrogant attitude towards Judaism possibly escalated into the gradual side-lining of Jews. He stands on record as the one who contributed in a big way to what became known as theology. Justin went overboard in his haughty intellectual arrogance, teaching that the Greek philosophers and the ‘barbarians’ such as Abraham... all who at any time ‘obeyed the same guidance, were really Christians’ (Walker, 1976:47). In due course the Church was seen as the new Israel that replaced the Jewish nation. Differences which could lead to splits should be addressed timely. Where separation has occurred, no stone should be left unturned to effect reconciliation and/or resto­ration. Two examples should suffice to illustrate the principle. The dispute in the church in the third century around the deity of Christ, caused the followers of Arius to be side-lined. Later this spawned the development of a teaching, which became one of the major problems that Islam had with biblical teaching. The question is in how far discussion between Arius and his bishop or a settlement on a personal level could have averted the rift. Similarly, we have to question the wisdom of Luther’s fiery confessional attitude of ‘Here I stand, I cannot help it’. In no way I would like to suggest that he should have diluted his confession. What I do maintain however is that a less dramatic stand could possibly have avoided the split, which played in the hands of the arch enemy, causing unnecessary separation between Christians up to this day. In addition to that Luther also engaged in petty arguments with Ulrich Zwingli. Was Count Zinzendorf too accom­mo­dat­ing Ephesians 4:4,5 shows that Zinzendorf was probably too accom­mo­dat­ing. Biblically, there is no such thing as unity at all costs, only unity on God’s terms. The issue of ‘one baptism’ to which Paul refers among others in the verse quoted, may bear out the above theory in the years to come. Without a dramatic ‘Here I stand’ position of Baptists and Pentecostals, the Holy Spirit has brought movement on this issue which was unthinkable a decade or two ago. The loving accept­ance of diver­gent views - allowing God to bring about the shifting of positions through his Holy Spirit - is apt to bring about more unity than heated synod discussions on doc­trinal issues. However, Nehemiah 3 does indicate that different (church) groups can work towards a common goal, the building of the wall. Various groups worked next to each other, each with a clearly defined ear-mark within the bigger purpose: the completion of the wall around Jerusalem. Thus the Bible under­lines unity in diver­sity. On the other hand, Zinzendorf’s desire for church unity was inspired by the tragedy of the fragmentation of the body. He referred to his own church as Secta Morava (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 [1971]:1230). And if he may still have erred in being too accommodating, he made up for it by going out of his way to take differing theological positions really seriously. He succeeded in a special way with a great balancing act, succumbing neither too engaging in bickering nor by offering cheap compromises. Yet, an even stronger stance is needed. Differences (such as in worship forms) should not be merely tolerated, so to speak condoned where they are unscriptural and not conducive to unity. Unbi­blical sec­tarian views and practices must be addressed and rec­tified, but at the same time the unity in the diversity must be stressed. The diversity should demonstrate ‘the mani­fold wisdom of God’ to the spiritual powers in the heavenlies (Ephesians 3:10). It is no optional, but part and parcel of being the church of Jesus Christ to make the unity of the body more visible. Co-operation on the missionary front is slowly coming into its own. The coming together for prayer across denomina­tional boundaries is apt to unleash a new power. Prayer can spawn a vision of what God can do and this will build mutual trust and sound relation­ships. The trend of ‘back to basics’ and ‘back to the Bible’ looked promising in the 1990s, but seems to have fizzled out since then. A radical honesty - to listen in humil­ity to what the Bible teaches - has often challenged followers of Jesus to go out to spread the Good News. It probably basically boils down to the question of how radical we are prepared to be. Are we prepared to take a critical look at the roots of our deno­mina­tional divisions in the light of the Word?98 Food for Thought: Have I been set free from every bondage? What about nice habits, treasured possessions, addiction to TV or sports? Is it not time that Christians should voice their disapproval loudly and clearly that millions of rands are being wasted for the spon­soring of sports? This happens while the same firms which sponsor so ‘generously’, under­pay their workers. Thousands in the country are hungry and unemployed, and many other objects which are ethically more sound for financial support, go a-beg­ging! Millions of Rands were spent on sports stadiums of whom the bulk are now more or less white elephants. In how far am I a prisoner of ease, luxury and comfort? And some Ideas: How could Christians in the area join together to do something to counter bondage of people to drugs, to alcohol? What can we do to counter the idolatry of sport in our coun­try? Little can be said against healthy practice for the body - Paul ascribed greater value to spiritual practice (1 Timothy 4:8) - but the sad fact is that many South Africans are addicted to TV sports entertain­ment. 10. Jesus, the great Missionary Strategist In 1963 Robert Coleman wrote a booklet that he called The Master Plan of Evangelism. In it he unfolds eight guid­ing principles of the Master’s plan as part of a clear strategy. Without referring to this booklet in depth, I do want to endorse it in the main. This ‘master plan’ reinforced my conviction that it is tantamount to the splitting of hair to search for differences between evangelism and mission. The missionary verse par excellence, John 3:16, speaks of God’s love for the whole world, which culminated in the sending of his unique Son. Christians should however be careful with their handl­ing of this verse. (It is repugnant to Jews and Muslims, the two world religions which are the closest to Christianity, because both of them cannot accept Jesus as the Son of God.) Yet, the context of John 3:16 gives us some idea of the inclusive missionary heart of God. It is placed between the narrative of the Lord’s ministry to Nicodemus, a high-ranking Pharisee (John 3:1-17) and that of His ministry to a Samaritan woman (John 4, see also chapter 11). The message is clear: the Gospel is meant for all social strata, for the influential people of His day and for the ethnic minorities like the Samaritans and for social outcasts of society. Discipling in Depth as a Priority From the gospel narratives we can safely surmise that Jesus was not interested at all to boast with an impressive number of followers. Thus, after‘many disciples turned back and no longer followed him’, Jesus said to the twelve in John 6:67 “You do not want to leave too, do you?’ On another occasion, when one of the disciples cried wolf after they had seen someone driving out demons in His name, the Master only responded coolly with ‘Don’t forbid him...Anyone who is not against us, is for us’ (Mark 9:38f). Without neglecting the masses, the Master sent away those who wanted to follow him for ulterior motives, for example because of signs and wonders. As we have just seen, He even offered this generously to the twelve disciples. (Compare this with Saul who became nervous and disobedient when His soldiers deserted him (1 Samuel 13:11). Our Lord invites us to follow him for what He is and not for what we hope to get out of the deal. Jesus taught the few, who had to become multipliers. In mission strategy, discipling in depth should always have the priority over evangelising in breadth. Jesus led by example rather than by precept. In so many words, servanthood - feet washing - became the example, which His disciples had to follow (John 13:15). The Master probably spent more time with His disciples than with everybody else put together. Whether He addressed the masses or whether He spoke to the Scribes and Pharisees, the disciples were close at hand to observe and to listen. Thus it was good missionary strategy by the Herrnhut Moravians to concentrate on a few dedicated believers who could work alongside the missionaries to evangelise their own people. In fact, Count Zinzendorf encouraged His missionaries to be especially on the lookout for those individuals whom the Holy Spirit had already prepared. In one of the Moravian litanies a prayer was included: ‘Save us from unholy growth.’ (Literally guard us from an unholy getting big99). Count Zinzendorf was one of the few people in Church history who really discerned the importance of this principle. He discerned on the one hand the untiring will to reform of the ‘children of the world’ but on the other hand the ‘sleeping churches and their inactive congregations.’ Not much has changed since then. Influenced by the principle of the ecclesiolas (small fellowships inside the big churches) of the Pietists, the Count organized the Herrnhut community in small ‘bands’ and ‘choirs’, which would of course be easier to handle. Therefore he also put much emphasis on young people. He guided and nurtured them, even during conferences so that they could grow into the church work, but he also used them for experimentation, because thus he could also stop any new endeavour more easily when it did not succeed. Following the Master, the vibrant Herrnhut church under Zinzendorf’s leadership openly discussed the success (or lack of it) of missionary ventures. In recent decades the house church movement has been making great strides, notably in different Asian countries. Will the lessons to be derived be heeded or are we just going to continue as we have or - just as bad - are we going to proceed with pouring new wine into old bags, wasting the precious wine? Quality rather than Quantity The Bible repeats the message time and again that God often uses a single committed, obedient believer to effect radical changes, even in nations. Abraham discovered that it is not so easy to find committed believers as he wrestled with God on behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:22ff). Jesus gave us the example that quality rather than quantity is the best strategy. He was quite happy to invest much time in only twelve men. But then the teaching must be done properly and in depth. It is not surprising that the Master concentrated on a few. It is not surprising that Jesus concentrated on teaching a few. He was a realist. Jesus knew that he could not possibly give masses of people the personal care which they needed. Thus he imbued a few men with His life who would carry the message forward on His behalf. He seems to have spent more time with the twelve than with everybody else. The Master invested much time in His dis­ciples. Whether He addressed the masses, spoke to the Scribes and Pharisees, they were close at hand to observe and to listen. An important advantage of working with a few is that one is more flexible to make changes on the spur of the moment. On more than one occasion Jesus withdrew from a particular area with his dis­ciples. Thus John 4:2 narrates how he left Galilee when the rumour of the Pharisees was brought to his attention. Comenius had some interesting suggestions with regard to books. Quoting the apostle, he notes that the judgment will show its quality (1 Corinthians 3:13). One should not be in a hurry with publication. What is pressed ripe, rots quickly. And may the plague of polemics die out (Van der Linde, 1979:128). Sowing with Tears The prophet Jeremiah’s calling can be typified with tears. The book of Lamentations stemmed from his pen. God used his sadness and tears to express the divine sorrow at the unfaithfulness, the idolatry, the spiritual adultery of his people. But this was part and parcel of the process of the restoration, of the healing of the nation. The sowing of the Gospel seed entails suffering of a different kind. The Psalmist wrote: ‘Those who sow in tears will reap with songs of joy. Yes, they go out weeping, carrying seed for sowing, and return singing, carrying their sheaves’ (Psalm 126:5). This is surely prophetic of the seed of the Gospel to be sown with the expectancy of a rich harvest. It comes to mind how Jesus wept over the city of Jerusalem. He encouraged his followers to pray for workers in the white harvest after he had displayed deep compassion over the shepherd-less mass of people. We should note that the quick-fix methods of evangelization - without tears and toil - become at least doubtful in the light of these references. In some circles there is such an emphasis on ‘decisions’ in ‘revival’ meetings that it is hardly emphasized that the hearer should also count the cost before deciding to follow Jesus. People are often manipulated to ‘raise their hand’ and ‘go forward’ at such events. Sometimes people follow the crowd without knowing clearly what they are doing. The high rate of backsli­ding in South Africa - perhaps also in many other Africancountries - might be attributed to these ‘still-born’ Chris­tians who sometimes bring more shame than honour to the name of the Lord. Their being born-again is a sham, which is not so much because of their own doing. The blame is often to be laid at the feet of result-seeking evangelists, who do not know what it is to travail in prayer, to pray people through into rad­ical birth. (Some of these ‘evangelists’ are semi-experts in manipulating, using mass psychology to coerce people into deci­sions.) Follow-up and discipling are often neglected or sometimes even non-existent. The result is Christian cripples or babies who have not grown spiritually. (The Bible however also relates how God has sovereignly helped those to grow spiritually where the evangelist had no apparent opportunity to disciple the new believer (see for example Acts 8:39). A lack of repentant remorse over sin and unfaithfulness can also be counted to this category. Forgiveness and restoration are available for those who recognize their failures and repent of them. The eyes of Jesus fell on Peter at the time of the disciple’s unfaithfulness, when he had denied the Lord thrice. Jesus’ eyes rested on him once again after his resurrection. Repentant Peter was forgiven, restored and commissioned by his Lord. Discipling in Depth as a Priority Without neglecting the masses, the Master was aware that some were following him for ulterior motives, for example because of signs and wonders. He was probably not surprised when many left when He spoke of himself as the bread of life (John 6:66). Earlier in the same chapter (John 6:15) we read how the multitude wanted to proclaim him as their king. Hereafter our Lord offered generously to the twelve disciples to leave him also if they found the word of the bread of life too hard (John 6:67).100 Jesus invites us to follow him for what he is and not what we hope to get out of the deal. Jesus taught the few who would become multipliers. In mission strategy, discipling in depth has the priority over evangeliz­ing in breadth. Jesus took a big risk in terms of his reputa­tion to be alone with a Samaritan woman, but she became an evangelist to her whole town (John 4). She made her towns­people inquisitive enough to want to meet the supposed Mess­iah. This led to their discovery which had universal ramifica­tions: ‘He is indeed the Saviour of the world’ (4:42). Jesus led by Example Jesus led by example rather than by precept. In so many words servitude – feet washing - became the example which His disciples had to follow (John 13:15). Although Jesus evidently concentrated his energy and teaching on the twelve, He simultaneously took the masses seriously. It is especially interesting how the Lord faced his critics. He was also a learner. Already as a twelve-year-old we find him in the temple at the feet of the Scribes listening and putting intelligent questions to them (Luke 2:46). As a young believer Timothy went with Paul on missionary journeys where he could see the power of God demonstrated. Although it soon became apparent that he was well qualified to lead them as a pastor, Paul continued his mentoring relationship by writing two letters to Timothy. Paul’s instructions to Timothy in the first letter (4:12,13) imparted five ways to set an example to believers. In an earlier chapter we saw how John Wesley was impacted on a trip to Georgia to propagate the Gospel. After August Spangenberg’s challenge about a close relationship to the Lord, the Anglican missionary realized that it was not enough to see people saved. They also had to be discipled. God led him to develop a ‘method’ by which new converts could be taught to live a spiritually fruitful life. He grouped believers for intimate fellowship as well as for moral and spiritual growth under a mature believer. After Wesley’s death a denomination was formally established called the Wesley Methodist Church. A major weakness of cell groups, home ministry groups or by whatever name these church structures are called, is that the leaders themselves have sometimes not been properly discipled before, thus being actually still babes in the faith. Concentration on the Jews With regard to missionary strategy we note that the Master concentrated on the Jews. In the Scriptural context of John 3:16 He made use of the account in Numbers 21, to show that His eventual death on the Cross has its precedent in Moses’ elevation of the serpent in the desert. Moses is a great prophet of the Jews (and the Muslims.) In the Gospel according to Matthew, Jesus constantly refers to His ministry as fulfillment of prophecy. This should be a pointer to our careful and sensitive using the Hebrew Scriptures in interaction with Jews. In fact, the use of the Word of God as such is a powerful tool. Jesus demonstrated it in His life, by quoting from the Scriptures time and again. The implication of our Lord’s last commission was that the spreading of the Gospel should start in Jerusalem, in the case of the Jews among the Jewry (Acts 1:8, also Luke 24:47). This would of course not remove the major problem which the two world religions, Judaism and Islam have with Jesus being the Son of God. Basically only the Holy Spirit can illuminate to adherents of these religions the loving Father-heart of God. If we practise sensitivity in our dealings with the followers of Judaism and Islam, the Lord could use a loving approach to weaken or even remove some of their prejudice against ‘offensive’ Christian doctrine. To some of them it is only a matter of understanding, for instance where many Muslims have a literal comprehension of Jesus as the physical son of God. Some of the sharpness of their hostility could be removed by showing for instance that ‘only begotten’ Son comes from the Greek monogenos. This word should be understood as the unique Son of God. A parallel is found in Genesis 22:1 where Isaac was to be sacrificed as such a unique son. Alternate­ly, the use of son as a metaphor - in this case for the divine charac­ter of Jesus - is not completely unknown. In mission work, our Lord’s concentration on the Jews has hardly been taken seriously. It is not completely clear why Jesus instructed the twelve to stick to the house of Israel in Matthew 10:5+6 and omitting this specific instruction to the seventy (Matthew 11:20-24). Or is here already the expansion - ultimately to the ends of the earth - implied?101 But it is clear that Jesus started with the Jews, and Paul followed him in this. It could be argued that our Lord’s involvement with the Jews was not missionary, not border-crossing at all; that He concentrated on his home culture. Don Richardson showed quite impressively how the disciples initially appeared very reluctant to obey the Great Commission, only staying in Jerusalem (Richardson, 1984:197ff). Right from his very first public appearance in Nazareth, Jesus showed the way to the acceptance of the other nations and the mission to them. In fact, this may have been one of the main reasons why the Nazareth congregation rejected him. According to the Gospel of Luke, the examples of Jesus with the Samaritans seem to have been intended to soften the nationalistic Jews up because of their nationalist pride and prejudice. There is a special anointing on the Jews as a people group. Whether one likes it or not, the Word teaches that Israel is the apple of God’s eye, the head, not the tail. (Deuteronomy 32:10; Zechariah 2:8)102. In stead of quarreling about it being repulsive/favouritist or not, we would do much better to use their anointing positively. Matthew 13:52 points to the possibility that the teacher of the (Jewish) law has a special faculty to bring out of the store-room of the Hebrew Scriptures those treasures which we gentile Christians could use profitably. Paul, undoubtedly the greatest missionary of all time, was a Jew. It just cannot be ignored that there is a blessing on the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob up to this day. Therefore it should be high on the list of our priorities to pray and work that the Jews’ eyes may be opened to the one who was pierced on the Cross of Calvary, that they may discover that He is really the promised Messiah (cf. Zechariah 12:10). It is very encouraging how Christians have started to use this source, notably via Jewesses. In Germany Ruth Lapide has been featured on television quite prominently and here at the Cape Edith Sher has a regular radio programme on Sunday afternoons via CCFM. The Gospel to the Jews first Paul practised what he preached, including the notion that the Gospel should be brought to the Jews, his nation, first. In every city he came on his missionary journeys, he first went to the synagogue. That Paul fought for the right to bring the Good News also to the Gentiles, sometimes clouds this sense of priority. Paul advised in Romans 11:25 that the Gentiles should not be conceited, reminding the Roman believers from Gentile stock that they are merely branches that had been grafted into the true olive, Israel. Precedents in Church History Jan Amos Comenius, the famous Czech educator and theologian, was a faithful scholar of Disiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam who taught: ‘teach first the Jews and the neighbours nearby, thereafter all the nations of the earth' (Van der Linde, God’s Wereldhuis, 1979:197). Contrary to the practice of his time, Comenius refrained from polemical writing. He suggestedhowever erroneously that the Church had to be reformed totally before the conversion of the Jews. The holy books of the Jews, the Law, Psalms and the Prophets need to be valued highly. He furthermore reminded that the Jews are collectively to be a light to the nations. Even though they have rejected the Messiah and the apostles, they must be allowed to keep their law and rituals until God will reveal the truth to them in his good time. The light of Moses (the Hebrew Scriptures and the light of Christ (the ‘New Testament’) form together the indelible light for all nations. As Christians, we have to respect them as our librarians, to expound the prophetic Word that had been entrusted to them. The resistance of Israel is merely temporary. Count Zinzendorf had a similar view, but he propagated that the Gospel must be preached to the Jews. Already as a teenager he was impressed by August Hermann Francke’s sermons that stressed our responsibility towards the people of the Old Covenant. In his teenage years ‘the conversion of the Jews’ can be found before ‘the conversion of the heathen’ in the hopes and expectations of the order of the Mustard Seed (Steinberg et al, 1960:25). Interest and Love for the Jews In general, the Jews and the Muslims have been neglected where mission work is concerned. The great exception was Count Zinzendorf (and his Moravians) who did have an eye for the Jews (and the Muslims). In fact, the Count had a special affinity for the Jews, because Jesus was also a Jew (Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1105). When he was still a student, Jews were included in Zinzendorf’s prayer lists (Beyreuther, 1957:187) and he included a prayer for the Jews in a church litany, which had to be used on Sundays. At the castle Ronneburg, the Jews who were living there, trusted the Count because he not only respected their religion, but he also vocalized it fearlessly. Many Jews of the area between Darmstadt and Giessen called him their great friend (Beyreuther, 1965:95). Yet, it was never his intention to wipe away differ­ences in inter-faith fashion. He strived for a good and harmonious living together between Christians and Jews, but simultaneously he chal­lenged the Jewish people to fulfill their divine calling to be a blessing to the nations. In order to do this, they had to bow before the Man of Nazareth who came from their ranks as the King of Kings. The Christians on the other hand were admonished not to forget Israel as their first-born brother (Beyreuther, 1965: 94). Zinzendorf took the evangelization of the Jews serious­ly. He gave a rule that once a year, on the Day of Atonement, the Moravian Church should pray for the conversion of Israel (Spangenberg, 1773-1775 [1971]:1105). Zinzendorf believed that the time for the conversion of nations had to await the conversion of the Jews (Weinlick, 1956:100). This high expectation from the converted Jews brought him to some special translations and paraphrases of Hebrew Scripture portions. Thus he would paraphrase the old father Jacob’s prophecy over Naphtali (Genesis 49:21, Naphtali is a doe set free that bears beautiful fawns). Highlighting that the northern land given to Naphtali is the region where the later Galilee would be situated, Zinzendorf interpreted the verse in the following way: ‘From Naphtali will come the flight-footed messengers, who will carry the Gospel to the ends of the world’ (Steinberg, 1960:39). Count Zinzendorf’s open interest and love for the Jews were not generally welcomed. At a conference in Berlin in 1738, the work among the Jews was seriously discussed (Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1100). The Moravians demonstrated the priority of the outreach to the Jews by calling one of their best men, Leonhard Dober. to pioneer this ministry. (He had been recalled from St Thomas to be the chief Elder after the sudden death of Martin Linner.) Dober promptly moved into the Jewish quarter of Amsterdam with his wife. When Dober was needed elsewhere, the very able Samuel Lieberkühn who had studied Hebrew thoroughly in Halle and Jena, was asked to lead this ministry. A Jew to the Jews Like very few others before or after him, Lieberkühn practiced the Pauline instruction to become a Jew to the Jews, refraining from all food which Jewish custom prohibited. He respected the views of Messianic Jews when they still preferred to follow Jewish law, as well as their expectation of a significant return of Jews to Palestine in the last days. Lieberkühn used the life and testimony of Jesus rather than Hebrew Scriptural quotations to prove the Messiah-ship of our Lord in his altercations with Jews. Many Jews came from Amsterdam to the Moravian congre­ga­tion in Zeist when Samuel Lieberkühn was the pastor there from 1751. Although the christo-centric Count Zinzendorf differed with Lieberkühn on some of his opinions and approach, he respected that. The Moravian Synod of 1764 endorsed the ministry of Samuel Lieberkühn. For both Comenius and Zinzendorf the Old and New Testaments belonged together. Thus the Count did not see the beginning of missions with the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19 or Mark 16:15), but rather where the ‘mission’ of the Saviour started, it is before the foundation of the earth (Ephesians 1:4). His wish to see a separate Jewish part of Moravian mission, was however never fulfilled, although various missionaries had a vision for it. The astounding Christian Richter, who pioneered work amongst slaves in Algiers wanted to see work started among the 8,000 Jews who were living in that city in 1740.103 In the modern era the priority of Jews in evangelistic work was clearly noted as part of the Jewish Evangelism track at Lausanne II in Manila in 1989. Moishe Rosen, the founder of Jews for Jesus. highlighted 'Jews first' from Romans 1:16. He opined 'God’s formula' for worldwide evangelization as the bringing of the Gospel to the Jew first. Highlighting the example of Paul: ‘I am not ashamed of the gospel for it is the power of God unto salvation to all who believe, to the Jew first and also to the Greek’ (Romans 1:16), Rosen proposed in his paper that ‘by not following God’s programme for worldwide evangelisation – that is, beginning with Jerusalem (Israel and the Jews) – we not only develop a bad theology because of weak foundations, but we also develop poor missiological practices.’ Using Research and Short-termers Moses was one of the first to discern what power there is in the divine name, a fact which young David exploited so pointedly in his fight against Goliath. Similarly, the 12 spies into Canaan (Numbers 13) and the use of 2 spies to prepare the invasion of Jericho (Joshua 2) are well-known stories. Joshua was the pioneer for ‘prayer walking’ and prayer marches, as the Israelites walked around the stronghold of Jericho. The concept of taking enemy territory was likewise practiced by Joshua in obedience to a divine promise, ‘I will give you every place where you set your foot’ (Joshua 1:3). Jesus sent his dis­ciples to prepare his ministry in towns and villages that he planned to visit later (Luke 9:52; Luke 10:1) and for practical ser­vice to fetch the colt on which he entered Jerusalem. They also had to reserve and prepare the upper room for the last supper. We note furthermore how Jesus followed Hebrew Scripture precedents. Jesus thus made use of ‘short-termers’. His using them highlights how they could be effectively utilized, notably for research. Much unnecessary work can be avoided through proper research beforehand. An added bonus of using short term workers is that many of them sense a calling while seeing needs and possibilities of which they were not aware, many getting deeper involved in mission work in various ways. Not sur­pris­ingly, Zinzendorf followed the Master also in the field of research. When the very first missionaries were sent out David Nitschmann was expected to return after a short stint to report back about the living and working conditions in St Thomas. We read about a visit of Count Zinzendorf to the Indians in North America with the following purpose: ‘to get a good insight in the condition of the heathen and the means to contribute to their salvation ... Also he wanted to see whether there was anyone among them where the word of Jesus, the Saviour of all men, has found entry’ (Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1438). Using Teams Also, Jesus utilized teams of missionaries (for example Luke 9:52, Luke 10:1). This is something to look at, especially in the light of His making use of less experienced people alongside ones who have already been in the crucible; call it on-the-job train­ing. But the require­ments are nevertheless not less daunt­ing. These short-termers are expected to be willing to suf­fer,104 and be prepared for a simple life­style.105 They are used in nearby towns and vil­lages, in contrast to the disciples who are sent as missionaries106 further away after they had been trained for three years by the Master himself. The Assyrian-Nestorian church with its centre in Baghdad utilized the principle of ministry teams in an exemplary way. Herrnhut under Count Zinzendorf also made use of the principle of teams. A team of three missionaries resumed the work in Baviaanskloof/Genadendal in 1792. In recent decades Greg Livingstone started the agency ‘Frontiers’ working with teams and in recent years Floyd McClung began with his All Nations International church planting initiatives. The major difference between the latter two agencies and other more traditional mission organizations is that individual initiative is given full scope: enterprising men/women can start up their own team and do their outreach in any form they feel led to after much prayer and guidance by the Holy Spirit. Zinzendorf, the ‘Architect of Missions’ Jesus was a missionary strategist - Zinzendorf was a worthy follower of His Master in this respect. The Count has been labelled quite rightly ‘The Architect of Missions’ (Lewis, 1962:27). In this regard it is worthwhile to note some of the points he made. Many of these aspects have been neglected in recent times to the peril of the Kingdom. Zinzendorf tested aspirant missionary intensely, often using discouragement and delay, ‘not because he was among the faint-hearted, but because he wished to give his volunteers full opportunity to count the cost’ (Weinlick, 1956:98). Even if a missionary was already on board ship, Zinzend­orf would tell him to disembark if he had any doubt at all about his ‘call’ (Lewis, 1962:89). It was obligatory for missio­n­ary candidates to ‘count the cost’ before they set out, rather than hinder the work later by faint-heartedness or disloyalty. Furthermore, Zinzendorf supervised the instruction of the missionary candidates in medicine, geography and languages. Special emphasis was given to the original languages of the Bible. Leonard Dober, a potter, who was one of the first two missionaries from Herrnhut, led Hebrew Scripture readings in Herrnhut, only using his Hebrew Bible (Lewis, 1962:90). Zinzendorf’s missionary candidates were not required to learn a lot of theology, but they had to know their Bible. Yet, he made clear what the main thrust of the message was that they had to preach: ‘Tell them about the Lamb of God until you can tell them no more.’107 In stead of philos­ophy and the ‘weapons of the mind’, pastors were encour­aged to preach the word of the Cross (Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1223). But Zinzendorf impressed on his candi­dates that they had to make an all-out effort to learn the indigenous languages. Thus Georg Schmidt set out to learn the Khoi language at the Cape and Dr Hocker learned Arabic in Cairo. Concentration on dedicated national Believers Zinzendorf’s ideal of getting ‘first fruits’ from all the nations of the earth was inspired by his eschatological hope ‘to hasten’ the coming of the Lord (2 Peter 3:12); to prepare the fulfillment of Revelation 14:4, ‘First fruits unto God and to the Lamb’. It seems that it has all too often been overlooked that it was good missionary strategy by the Moravians to concentrate on a few dedicated believers who could work along­side the missionaries to evangelize their own people. Jesus gave the paradigm to the world with the rejected Samaritan woman of John 4, who became the forerunner of the world-wide harvest of Muslims. Georg Schmidt was a worthy follower of our Lord when he consciously chose to minister to the Khoi of the Overberg, after experiencing relative success among the Dutch and German colonists at the Cape. His concentration on a few, including the five he baptized in 1742, (which led to his semi-deportation), paid off handsomely. Of the prayerful Magdalena, with whom he left a ‘New Testament’, it is known that she rose to the occasion to lead the faithful in the absence of any missionary. And the death of another convert impacted the Groote Kerk Dutch Reformed minister Ds. van Lier in a deep way, forty years after Schmidt’s departure. Zinzendorf encouraged his missionaries to be on the look-out for those individuals whom the Holy Spirit had already pre­pared, which is of course in line with 'New Testament' strategy. Already in April 1732 Zinzen­dorf expressed his strategy of missions along three lines: a) The missionary is never allowed to ‘lord over the heathen but to live humbly among them.’ b) The missionary has to come to the point quickly and preach the crucified Christ. c) The aim is not to convert whole nations but to look out for individual seekers after truth. Another issue - already mentioned - which also influenced his ‘first fruits’108 concept - was the Count’s convic­tion that the evangelization of the world can only really get off the ground when the Jewish nation has been evangelized. Zinzendorf would probably have opposed the notion that missionaries among Muslims of later generations would extract new followers of Jesus from their culture. This is definitely not what he meant when he taught those who were sent out to concentrate on discipling individuals. The ‘first fruits’ concept needs nevertheless to be rediscovered in missionary work without isolating and estranging new converts from tribes from their clans and people. The excitement of a new convert drove many a missionary to make this mistake, creating problems for further outreach to the family. The preaching of the crucified Christ without any frills was the example Paul had given in 1 Corinthians 2:2. Zin­zen­dorf showed in a parable in his Fetter Lane sermon in London, how the arch enemy dislikes this idea. Zinzendorf discerned that the enemy can emulate Jesus in a vision.) It could well be that the ‘frills’ of visions, dreams, slaying in the Spirit - none of which are central tenets of Scripture - are used by the enemy to detract believers from the crucified Christ. Along the same lines, Kenneth Cragg pointed to the suffering Christ as evidence of the greatness of God. He sees this as a much more feasible way in terms of strategy to converse for instance with Muslims about their creed Allahu akbar (God is the greatest).109 Use of Research and Team missionary Work The Dutchman Anne van der Bijl – much better known as Brother Andrew – took the issue of research seriously in an effort to bring Bibles into the communist countries of Eastern Europe from the early 1960s. Encouraged by the example of ‘Diakonessen’ of East Germany, nurses who threatened to quit their compassionate work when the communists wanted to stop them from praying and singing with their patients, he landed more or less in the middle of the erection of the notorious wall of Berlin in 1961. He hereafter refused to accept closed borders, in spite of being turned down for missionary purposes after Bible School graduation in 1955 on medical grounds.110 It all started with a slipped disk in 1953 when he had no money to go to Holland for the holidays, visiting Oswald Chambers and his wife Biddy. The reprimand by Stewart Dinnen, his Bible School director, became to him a challenge to do simply what was at hand. Constant excruciating pain in his back over a period of eighteen years could not stop him from entering countries that had declared themselves ‘closed’ to the Gospel. Open Doors, the organization he founded, bathes every operation in prayer, ‘but at the same time we were constantly brainstorming and trying out new ways to take the Good News across the closed borders’ (Brother Andrew, 1998:38). Comparing the spreading of the Gospel with farming, Brother Andrew (1998:43) noted that ‘every step from plowing to harvesting must be considered and adequately planned for.’ To this end he devised ten strategic steps, ten P’s (prophetic, planning, persistence, preparation, presence, penetration, profiling, permanence, proclamation and power) to which he linked a prayer apiece. Innovative was what he dubbed presence evangelism - using prayer walking where no form of evangelism was allowed in a country like Albania under Enver Hoxha. A prayer chain since 2006 resulted in major changes in that country. We must be realistic enough however, to see that satan can use things that had initially been given by God. A biblical example is how research - which had once been divinely commanded in the case of spies - became a negative thing, for example when David was tempted to conduct a census (2 Samuel 24:2ff). On the other hand, that should never bog us down because through Christ who gives us strength, we can do all things (Philippians 4:13). He makes us more than conquerors. Using ‘Tent-making’ for mission Work Even South Africans with minimal secondary schooling have some mastery of the English language. In fact, many countrymen could go for some training in TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) straight away.111 The certificate obtained would enable such people possible entry into many countries, some of which would be closed to missionaries in any other way. The country has an added advan­tage on the African continent, with regard to professional and occupational training, which could be used very well in ‘tent-making’ ministry. Greater use could be made of missionary teams. Three Moravian missionaries came in 1792 to Genadendal as a team of ‘tent-makers’, represent­ing three different professions. Paul was of course the classical tent-maker, giving us the example of working with and reaching out by using one’s profession (Acts 18:3). It is clear that he did not use this as a last resort. He deliberately used his profession to reach out to different groups. For those Christians who look down condescendingly on ‘tent­-makers’ as second-class missionaries, it should be a sober­ing thought that God allowed his only son to start off as a car­penter. We should guard ourselves against false alterna­tives and note in this regard that Paul evidently gave a place in the sun for both forms of service, full-time and part-time. For his own person he was happy and proud to be able to make a living from a secu­lar job (tent making), but he also encouraged the Chris­tians of Corinth to con­tribute towards the daily needs of those who spread the Gospel full-time (1 Corinthians 9:3-19). Cities as a Priority Two issues could be added at this point which cannot be detected from our Lord’s missionary strategy, but which can definitely be deduced from Pauline teaching. The visionary Paul seems to have discovered the strategic value of cities in outreach. A major precedent was of course the preaching of Jonah to the wicked city of Nineveh, but it is known that Jonah did not go there out of conviction or missionary zeal. In this he became the sad nationalist example of the apostles after Pentecost, when they had to be thrust out of Jerusalem because of persecution. Paul and his helpers were always open to the guidance and correc­tion by the Holy Spirit. They clear­ly got the vision to bring the Gospel to the stra­tegic centres of the Roman Empire. Cities like Rome, Corinth, Athens and Thessa­loniki were on the crossroads of the traffic of those days and therefore import­ant for the spreading of the Gospel to the sur­rounding regions. This happened very much at Thessaloniki (1 Thessalonians1:8). We should however not get the idea that Paul was going for soft targets. Like Nineveh of Jonah’s days, Corinth was a city where vice was the order of the day. Comenius had really travelled Europe when he decided to settle in Amsterdam - after he had to start his life anew for the umpteenth time. He had the vision that ships could take missionaries from there to far-away countries. Zinzendorf emphasized the ‘first fruit’ from those people groups which had not been reached by the Gospel. Yet, they did not seem to have the vision to reach the cities of their day. The Moravians did however work in London and Amsterdam - in the latter city also among the Jews - which were the capitals respectively of the Dutch and British empires. The reason for starting work at‘s Heerendijk (Holland) was to get an outpost in a country from where missionaries could spread the Gospel to Asia, Africa and the New World. Zinzendorf was impressed by the commercial life in the Dutch cities, but of more interest to him was the contact with persons of differing religions (Weinlick, 1956:42). However, also in Berlin, Zurich, Basel and Dresden the Moravians tried to get a foot-hold, although in these cases the emphasis was more on diaspora work, to start little congregations within the bigger state churches. Missionary work was however also attempted in Cairo. Christian Richter had the special vision to pioneer among the 8,000 Jews in 1740 as well as amongst slaves who lived in Algiers. The Moravians later also pioneered in Ramallah near Jerusalem on the Jordan’s West Bank among Arab speakers. A good example of a modern day protagonist and implementer of the principle is Floyd McClung. Using the cosmopolitan city of Amsterdam as base, he led many short term outreach teams into Communist countries. Coming to Cape Town with his wife Sally in 2006, it was a part of their vision to reach the unreached northern parts of the African continent. Training of prospective Missionaries Zinzendorf’s teaching, which was a most important part of his missionary strategy, can be best summarized by the way he imprinted on his people to have a Christ-like life-style: ‘Let the people see what sort of men you are and then they will be forced to ask: "Who makes such men as these?" (Lewis, 1962:91). The life of the worker was to be missionary in itself. Zinzen­dorf was centuries ahead of his time, when he stated in his instructions to missionaries that they should try to discover how God has already prepared so-called primitive peoples for the Gospel. In recent decades this was re-discovered by people like Don Richardson, as expounded in his book Peace Child.112 The quality of any teacher can be seen in the products. It was evident that the Moravian missionaries put into practice the holistic theory which they had learned. ‘The missionaries healed the sick; in their school the heathen first studied the geo­graphy of their land, learned the simple trades, and read the Scrip­tures in their native tongue. The converts were taught to care for the sick and aged, for the widow and the orphan. In Greenland old-age pensions were introduced. In St Thomas the Negroes were trained to give to the poor-box and buy their own candles for the evening meetings’ (Lewis, 1962:93). The Moravians were not seeking to again impressive numbers. Compare for instance Surinam where Friedrich Martin baptized only 30 odd of his 700 con­verts (Weinlick, 1956:199). ‘Sheep-stealing’ was actively countered. After a few hundred came to Christ in London in 1743 after the preaching of Zinzendorf, many requested to be discipled further in the faith. The Brethren consented, on condition that those who belonged to the Anglican Church should sign a written agree­ment that they would not leave their church (Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1473). Zinzendorf made an interesting deduction from the ques­tions of Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:20, 26: ‘Where are the rich? Where are the eminent?’ In his sermon at the Moravian fellow­ship of London on September 4, 1746 he said: ‘Thus Paul demon­strates to them how to proceed in preaching the Gospel, to avoid fruitless work and threshing empty straw. The rich and the eminent are not excluded; but they do not have the least prerogative. They have no privilege before others with respect to salvation, but rather a hundred difficulties which others do not have, and therefore one must not stay too long with them; one should not go to them first...it could result in a great loss of time.’113 In terms of missionary strategy, South Africa could become a springboard for world missions ‘to the ends of the earth’. South Africa was the skunk of the world because of the repugnant apartheid policies. This effectively hindered the spread of the Gospel from South African soil in the past. Education as a Tool in Missions Both Comenius and Zinzendorf had a great love for children. The pioneering work of the Czech educator is known world-wide, the first to use pictures in language learning. Comenius became known as the teacher of nations, especially through his writing on education. Zinzendorf can be said to have implemented the Czech educator’s teachings like no other before him. All of us would do well to take to heart Zinzendorf’s educational concept: ‘In Herrnhut we do not shape the children. We leave that to the Creator’ (cited in Lewis, 1962:173). Of course, in saying that, he took for granted that parents and teachers would display Christ-like lives. Zinzendorf utilized the zeal and enthusiasm of children and young people to the full for mission projects. Young single men, to whom single ladies were later sent by means of the lot, formed the bulk of the initial missionary force. When he was still at boarding school of Halle, he formed the order of the mustard seed with four other teenage learners. Amongst other things they committed themselves ‘to succour all those who are persecuted for their faith’ (Lewis, 1962:26). A few years later, near to his nine­teenth birthday, he was intensely chal­lenged by the painting of the head of Jesus crowned with thorns in a museum in Düsseldorf with the caption: ‘All this I have done for you, what have you done for me.’ There and then the young Zinzendorf asked the crucified Christ to draw him into ‘the fellowship of his sufferings’ and to open up a life of service to him. The start of their work in Holland was motivated by the need to have a post near to a port, but Christian David also helped building the institution‘s Heerendijk in Holland - to have a place where their children could be educated when it became tough in Saxony. In America, Moravian children participated joyfully in spinning and other appropriate activities to further the mission cause. Zinzendorf was surely very much of a revolutionary when he also sought to use education to create an ecumenical sensitiv­ity. The premise was the unity in Christ. Zinzendorf also saw the need of training and education when few people had a vision for it, starting schools and hostels not only in Germany but also in North America. Almost every­where the Moravians went, they were the pioneers of education to the native peoples. Also in South Africa, the teachers trained at the first teacher training institution for people of colour in Genadendal, served many denominations through the years. (This institution existed even before the White colonists had established any teacher training in the country.) Through the pioneering work in education, Genadendal contributed in no small way to the democratization of South Africa.114 The Moravian Press in the mission station printed not only the organ of the church for decades, but also the journal of the Teachers League of South Africa. This periodical was very clear in its oppo­sition to apartheid ideology. The Wessels clan which became synonymous to resistance to the repugnant regime among the ‘Coloured’ population, hailed from the first mission station of South Africa. When Beyers Naudé - known worldwide for his opposition to apartheid ideology - fetched his bride as the daughter of a Moravian missionary from Genadendal, the ‘Coloureds’ there served as a model to the church leader: He saw what education could do to uplift people (Ryan, 1990:33). This is only one of numerous examples of how the Mora­vians indirectly contributed significantly to the model democracy of Africa. Moravian educational Excellence around the World In due course Moravian mission stations and educational institutions displayed excellence around the world. A divine hand can be clearly detected. The theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher, who studied at the school of Niesky, would become a worldwide renowned product of Niesky, albeit that the Moravian Church had become too small for him at the end of the 18th century. Nevertheless, he fought valiantly against the new Aufklärung (Enlightenment), which despised religion. (In his book Über die Religion (On Religion) in 1799 Schleiermacher especially addressed the ‘Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern, the learned among their despisers). The Niesky church and institutions were suffering under the traditionalism, which was slowly encroaching on the denomination, probably only held alive by the 24/7 prayer that was still going strong in Herrnhut. Thus the pranks and bad behaviour of the boys in the Pädagogium of Niesky in 1832 and its hostel is on record. God used the diligent brother Kleinschmidt who emulated the example of the Count using individual spiritual counselling in stead of the cane. By 1836 there was still no change. His last offer to them - as he took all students individually – was whether they wanted his ‘Seelsorge’ or not. If they would not stop to oppose it, he was prepared to leave. God used ‘the most hated’ educator’ of the institution to prepare the soil for a revival in 1841 after the death of King Heinrich LXIII, whose sons were studying there. The revival at Niesky of November 1841 had effects around the world injecting new vigour into a church which had become very traditional, albeit that the devout Johann Baptist von Albertini could hold up the rot until his death in 1832. One of the products of the revival was Theobald Wunderling, who would influence a next generation of Moravians decisively. Already a century before this the brilliant Magdalena Tikkuie of Genadendal was one of a few indigenous believers who made their mark. Not only did she master reading in no time, but her exposition from the Dutch ‘New Testament’ along with the few believers that Georg Schmidt had left there, brought (one of) the first indigenous fellowships south of the Sahara into being. From Genadendal positive influences went out into the Cape Colony for many decades. At that time the Moravian missionary educational endeavour worldwide, the work among the Aborigines in Australia easily takes the cake. The school of Ramahyuk got a 100 % rating for four consecutive years, the only school in the state of Victoria – out of 1400 schools - to achieve this. The feat was made possible with the aid of two Black teachers, one of them a product of the school itself. The mission school of Ebenezer was not far behind (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:316).115 A Xhosa Female missionary Pioneer A special quality of the Moravian missionary endeavour was how it impacted indigenous people. One of the most striking examples occurred in Genadendal in the early 19th century. Wilhelmina Stompjes can be regarded as the equivalent of Magdalena Tikkuie of Genadendal. Wilhelmina Stompjes was an enterprising lady, who had a deep yearning to share the Gospel with her own people, the Xhosa. She succeeded to impart this to the children of the German missionaries for whom she cared in the Kindergarten there. She taught them Xhosa, while she learned Geman. Johann Adolph Bonatz, her most pronounced protégée, had exceptional educative talent. When he took over the leadership of the school at Shiloh in the Eastern Cape, the institution prospered. He himself went on to become the missionary among the Blacks par excellence, making various translations into Xhosa. Increasingly, Wilhelmina became ‘the advisor and support of the missionaries, besides having to act as the sole interpreter.’ Her translations were of a special order. She did not simply render the German words of the missionary into the corresponding Xhosa. Instead, she regarded his thoughts and words rather as being in the nature of an epigram, ‘which she then expanded to include what she considered would be suitable for the listeners and easily understood’ (Keagan, 2004:22). ‘She added picturesque illustrations and vigorous exhortations of her own and her private conversations proved a blessing to many’ (Krüger, 1966:174). The situation at Shiloh became so unsafe at some stage that Bishop Hallbeck seriously considered abandoning the mission enterprise there. In fact, an instance is told how the missionaries would have been killed in an attack if Wilhelmina Stompjes had not intervened resolutely: ‘She then violently berated Maphasa, who was so dumb-founded that he quietly retreated with his men’ (Keagan, 2004:22). Magdalena Tikkuie and Wilhelmina Stompjes ploughed the ground for equality of women by their involvement in ministry for which women would normally not have qualified. As the translator of missionaries, Wilhelmina Stompjes was perhaps one of the first women worldwide and as a female church planter, Magdalena Tikkuie was the first known indigenous one. A major Deficiency in theological Training A major deficiency in theological training, not only in South Africa, has been the theoretical emphasis. There are thousands of Hindu’s and Muslims living within the borders of the country. But as yet, these faiths, and a biblical answer to it, unfortunately are still on the periphery of the curricula of theological institutions. Efforts have been made to rectify this deficiency. Various courses in evangelism for lay workers are available to equip them, for example in preparation of outreach events at the Football World Cup of 2010. Increasingly, churches have started evening Bible Schools to equip their members. At the Johannesburg Correspondence Bible School and many similar institutions there has been an increase in interest. At the moment it does not seem however as if these efforts have led to an increase in evangelism; discipling and teaching are integral parts of the Great Commission, but they should also lead to border-crossing evangelism. We may not forget that there are still well over 3 billion people in the world who have not been reached by the Gospel. Missiology as a compulsory Subject On the positive side, Missiology has become a compulsory subject in some Bible schools. The best tribute we can pay to the late Prof. David Bosch, who has done more than anybody else in South Africa to put Missiology on the theological map, would be if this subject becomes compulsory at all theological institutions for at least two of their years of study. In fact, in his major work, Transforming Missions, Bosch demonstrated magnificently how the various theological disciplines are covered in missiology.116 Bible Schools and theological institutions could make use of tested and tried (former) missionaries and ministers in their area to assist pastors and their congregations to become mission-minded. Mission agencies could assist by compiling lists of such missionaries and ministers for the different metropolitan areas. (Perhaps something could also be worked out for rural Bible Schools.) In the weekly mission programme of Murray Louw on Radio Pulpit, interviews with various ministers and missionaries in different parts of the country have been taken place for many years. Karen Berry did the same in a weekly Sunday programme via CCFM in the Western Cape for years. Helen Philips has been doing this now already for quite a few years as well. Evaluation, Acknowledgment and Encouragement We note how Jesus expected the disciples to report back. After the twelve were sent out on their first assignment, they returned to tell ‘what things they had done’ (Mark 6:3; Luke 9:10). The Gospel of Luke suggests a marked improve­ment in their performance the next time round. When the seventy were called upon to report back after their return, they were amazed at the authority they had in Jesus name (Luke 10:17). However, the Master corrected them immediately, lest their success could go to their heads: ‘However, the important thing is not that demons obey you, but that your names are registered as citi­zens of heaven’. Triumphalism is definitely not part of the armour of the follower of Jesus. Thus Jesus has taught the important principle of evaluation of all missionary efforts. How many errors in Church and mission work are repeated, just because little or no evaluation is done. Acknowledgment of the efforts of His pupils and rejoicing with them in their success are two further lessons the master strategist imparted. Proper supervision is necessary in all mission work because the enemy will be quick at hand to counter and bring the work of the Lord in disrepute. Good supervision is however much more than criticism. Jesus acknowl­edged the contribution of His disciples for instance in the feeding of the five thousand (Mark 8:19). He rejoiced in the success of the mission of the seventy: ‘Then he was filled with joy of the Holy Spirit and said: "I praise you, O father, Lord of heaven and earth, for hiding these things from the intellectuals and worldly wise and for revealing them to those who are as trusting as little children"‘ (Luke 10:21, 21). Yet, he ‘rejoiced in their success, but nothing less than world conquest was His goal and to that end he always superin­tended their efforts’ (Coleman, 1963:99). Following the Master, the vibrant Herrnhut congregation discussed the success (or lack of it) of missionary ventures. The lot played a big part in their decisions to take on new challenges or change their course. Yet, they did not jump into new enterprise haphazardly. Thus they first gathered information about the missionary work of the Greek Orthodox Church. Thereafter they charged the Swedish academic Arved Gradin to write a treatise in Greek, in preparation for his audience with the Patriarch. But even then, some unconventional means had to be used to achieve their purpose of getting missionary openings. When it was pointed out to Gradin how dangerous it would be if he were seen and advised to come very early, Gradin got up at 3 a.m to visit the Archbishop. ‘I was back in my home by 5 or 6 for the latest’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:93). A problem with much of the traditional Church and mission work was that hardly ever present effort was (or is) evaluated with regard to its efficiency. It is for instance strange how so often much faith is still put in meetings or the length of it. Confidence is attached to the duration of training in stead of looking at the quality of it. Patrick Johnstone has been highlighting how research, in combination with new challenges, could revi­tal­ize the work of the mission agency WEC every half generation since its begin­nings.117 A challenge of recent decades was the remaining unreached peoples, which became a significant spur for the calling of new missionaries to Islamic peoples groups. Who should be sent? The church of Antioch sent their very best - Paul and Barnabas - on their missionary venture. This seems to be a far cry from some modern-day short-termers who practise a ‘ministry’ of fund-raising to go to far-off lands without sufficient mission prep­aration. The importance of proper orientation for mission service cannot be stressed enough. Missionary work is not for adventurers and misfits, but Jesus can transform such people into valuable workers in His Kingdom. After such people have been tested and tried on home soil, they should get sufficient training and orientation before getting involved in cross-cultural evangelization. When Paul and Barnabas set out on their first missionary journey, they took the inexperienced John Mark along as their assistant ­(Acts 12:25, 13:5). However, this was not without controversy. The presence of John Mark was eventually the cause of a rift between Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15:39). From this example we should however not deduce more than has been reported in Scripture. It does not imply a disqualification of inexperienced workers; in fact, one could also reverse the argument. The end result was a doubling of the work after the two great missionaries had parted. Many mission agencies were established because the vision of gifted individuals had been stifled in the agencies with which they initially started off. Some of the best positive examples are possibly Open Doors, ‘Frontiers’, and Floyd McClung with his All Nations International church planting initiatives. Less known ‘simple church’ planters like Gaylan Currah from the USA, who started off as a missionary in Senegal many years ago, has seen hundreds simple churches coming into being by emphasizing rabbit-like reproduction, a process of multiplication. Parting of ways after serious disagreement need not be a negative thing as such. The condition is however that the parting takes place in mutual agreement or at least that reconciliation will have taken place. In Colossians 4:10 Paul passed greetings from Mark, indicating that their relationship had been restored by that time. Making mistakes is part and parcel of this process. The disciples possibly for example had not noted how important detail of cross-cultural outreach can be. When Jesus entered Samaria - the lion’s den for the Jews - he went in a northern direction (John 4:3). When the disciples thought they could also go there - but this time coming from the opposite direction, heading for Jerusalem - they ran into problems (Luke 9:54). A great evangelistic Strategist In the modern era Dr Billy Graham and his team can be reckoned to the greatest evangelistic strategists. In 1970 the association utilized the latest technological advances to relay the evangelist’s messages from the German city of Dortmund in Westphalia to other European cities simultaneously. Four years before that, his team helped to break the deadlock between ‘Evangelicals’ and ‘Ecumenicals’ with a conference in Berlin, but a weakness of that conference was that it was very much an event of Western Europe and North America. This was rectified in 1974 when the Lausanne Committee was born in the Swiss city with that name. In a sense the YWAM base in Lausanne can be regarded as God’s instrument to overrule a demonic attack when Israeli athletes were killed at the Munich Olympic Games in 1972. That occasion was the first outreach of young people at an international event of great magnitude. Joy Dawson shared with a thousand young people in a tent just outside the city how ‘God is always Greater’. Landa Cope (The Old Testament Template, Burtigny (Switserland), 2006), one of those young people, wrote the following lines in Potchefstroom (South Africa) in August 2005, where she was addressing students: ‘From that one outreach and Youth with a Mission’s one base in Lausanne, Switzerland, our mission exploded to over a thousand bases in 150 countries and hundred of outreaches all over the world ... over the next 33 years. YWAM, OM, Campus Crusade and other Spirit-led youth missions launched what missiologists now refer to as the third wave of missions.’ The Lausanne conference of 1974 represented the greatest conduit and catalyst for the spread of the Gospel in mission history. The big evangelist conferences in Amsterdam of 1983, 1986 and 2000 saw evangelists from all parts of the globe converging on the Dutch capital. In some cases indigenous evangelists came from remote villages which one would not even find on a map. Almost all the major evangelistic and missionary evangelical movements of the last quarter of the 20th century had roots in the Lausanne movement. Quite a few of the principles which had been implemented by Zinzendorf and his fellowship like the pre-eminence of getting the Gospel message to the world’s unreached people groups and greater sensitivity when presenting the good news to other cultures, came to the fore at Lausanne 1974. Furthermore, Dr Graham asked that 60% of the participants be under forty-five years of age with an eye on the years ahead (Drummond, 2001:199). Significantly, an Argentinian, Dr Luis Bush, was the driving force in the 1990s of the AD2000 and Beyond Movement, which can be regarded as one of the sprouts of Lausanne. ... also to Muslims? Jesus demonstrated with the Samaritan woman how powerful the loving outreach to the ‘spiritual ancestors’ of the Muslims was. According to the report in the Gospel of John they recognized – before the Jews at large – that Jesus is the Saviour of the world (John 4:42). It should be remembered that the Muslims also have a special place in salvation history. Generally, it has been overlooked that the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 60:6+7 extends to the Muslims. The Medianites who were Ishmaelites (Judges 8:24), are likewise children of Abraham. In Messianic prophecy, for example Isaiah 19:23-25 and Isaiah 60:6+7, there seems to be a special role for Egypt, Assyria118 (which includes modern-day Iraq and Syria) and the descendants of the Midianites, Nebaioth and Kedar, the two oldest sons of Ishmael. Comenius challenged his contemporaries who proclaimed that mission work is not necessary any more because the apostles had purportedly already divided the work amongst themselves (Van der Linde, 1979:196). His expectation of the Lord’s imminent return was a stimulant to improve the state of affairs in school and church so that the Gospel could be brought to Jews, Muslims and pagan nations. Comenius noted that Western nations had become guilty because of the chaotic exploitation of raw material and goods that the nations abroad have been supplying to Europe. In exchange, they should be served with spiritual goods (Van der Linde, 1979:197). Comenius foresaw that evangelization and civilization could lead to colonization and subjection (Van der Linde, 1979:246). The Muslims soon got the attention of the missionaries sent from Herrnhut. A few were sent to the Arabian Peninsula and to Persia. The mission work among Palestinian children on Star Mountain in Ramallah, on the West Bank of the Jordan River, remained as a beacon of reconciliation down the years. In the person of David Nitschmann, who worked in Ceylon for three years from 1738, also the Hindu world was touched. (It seems that the Moravian missionary endeavour did not impact the Buddhist or Chinese religions, apart from their general prayers that the Gospel should be brought to the ends of the earth). For many Christians the idea that ex-Muslims and Messianic Jewish believers will one day operate together to spread the Gospel, may still not be politically sound. It is high time that we get used to this notion. Kevin Greeson blazed a trail of house churches in the Muslim world using the Camel Method, whereby the Qur’an was used extensively to evangelize South Asian Islamic adherents around the turn of the 21st century. Christian missionaries learned the Method from Muslim-background believers (Greeson, 2006:16). This is nevertheless not the ultimate or perfect tool. It is not more than a bridge to the heart of a Muslim. Food for Thought: Jews and Muslims have been neglected in missionary endeavour. In how far have our missionary efforts been guided by expedience? Has the resistance of these groups and our yearning for quick results not perhaps been too much of a guiding factor? What am I prepared to do (risk?), to bring about a freedom for the Holy Spirit to operate in my church? How radical - going to the root of any matter - am I prepared to be? Am I willing - with the help of the Lord - to uproot if necessary, anything which has grown as a habit or tradition; Are we prepared to eradicate structures that cannot stand the test of Scripture? And some Ideas: The theoretical emphasis of theological training should get urgent attention. Farming God’s way has been initiated by Pastor John Scholtz of Port Elizabeth and implemented with great success in a few African countries. Training in the use of the Camel Method should become a standard ingredient of all theological training. 11. Jesus’ View of Unity as a Priority The Church universal should learn to put the priorities where Jesus put them in His prayer life. Jesus deemed it fit to pray in His high priestly prayer for His disciples and for those who would believe in Him because of their message, ‘that they may be one’ (John 17:21). It is surely no exaggeration to state that all sorts of disunity in the body of Christ boils down to crucifying Him once more. We should take to heart that we have to be in unity ‘so that the world will believe’ that He was sent by God. Actually Jesus was only echoing what Psalm 133 had expounded so powerfully centuries before him, namely that God commands His blessing where there is unity, where brothers live in harmony. In that psalm the unity is depicted as an image for the anointing of the high priest, bridging hundreds of kilometers (From Mount Hermon near Damascus in Syria to Mount Zion, Jerusalem). Would it be too preposterous to suggest church unity as something which is so powerful that it can incur God’s special blessing, to unite Muslim background followers of Jesus and Messianic Jews? Jerusalem Believers acted in one Accord After our Lord’s ascension, his followers were united in prayer (Acts 1:14a). The word homo-thumadon, which has usually been translated as ‘of one mind’, indicates a common purpose, a common goal, an emotional and willful agreement. ‘Of one mind’ is a characteristic of ‘New Testament’ leadership. This unity in prayer formed the natural base for the revival at Pentecost. But also after Pentecost the Jerusalem believers acted in accord, ‘of one mind’ (see Acts 2:45, 46; 4:24; 5:12; 6:2; 15:25). The new-found unity was grounded in their trust in God, which minimized all possible differences - perhaps even cancelled some of them. Thus the meeting of pastors primarily for prayer to get God’s mind for their city or town should be a top priority. Lies and its accomplice dishonesty are the main contributors to disunity, also in the church. The enemy often succeeds to add misunderstanding to the mixture. If the disunity is not properly addressed, bondage ensues. It is no co-incidence that 10 of the 11 occurrences of the phrase ‘of one mind’ occur in the Acts of the apostles.119 If we consider how important unity was for the first church - no, how important it is in God’s eyes - we cannot stress it sufficiently. Consultation with the Church Leadership An issue which was forcefully demonstrated in the life of Paul was the relationship to the local church. Paul showed how valuable a healthy relationship to the church leadership can be. Even though God had already revealed it to him previously to bring the Gospel to the heathen nations, he did his mission work completely in consultation with the church leaders (Galatians 2:2ff). Initially they did not even share his vision and views. The end result of the consultation however, was a doubling of the outreach: Peter would concentrate on working with the Jews. Paul would pioneer the work among the Gentiles (v.7). Because he did not do his own thing, Paul and Barnabas eventually received the right hand of fellowship. Finally they were commissioned and sent out by the body, the church at Antioch (Acts 13:3). On the same score it is unfortunate that the other apostles had nobody to record their missionary journeys as Paul had in the physician Luke. A single verse, 1 Peter 5:13, gives indication of the rock-like apostle’s presence in Babylon; about the activities of Thomas in India and Mark in Alexandria we have to rely on scant oral traditions. On the issue of continuing consultation with the church leadership, this was part and parcel of missionary life in 18the century Herrnhut; in fact, it was the laborious writing of diaries and reports, which have enabled later generations to get such a good picture of church life there and of Moravian mission work. Unity in Diversity It is interesting that Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage in North Africa from 248-258, already saw the importance of the unity of the church, yet allowing for diversity. He wrote: ‘The church is a unity, yet by her fruitful increase she is extended far and wide to form a plurality; even as the sun has many rays, but one light; and a tree many boughs but one trunk, whose foundation is the deep-seated root... So also the Church, flooded with the light of the Lord, extends her rays over all the globe; yet it is one light which is diffused everywhere and the unity of the body is not broken up....yet, there is but one head, one source...’120 Comenius, the last bishop of the old Czech Unitas Fratrum (Unity of the Brethren) wisely discerned that there should be unity in essentials. Differences in minor issues should be allowed. Unity does however not imply uniformity. Count Zinzendorf took matters further, spelling it out that differences could even serve towards mutual enrichment. Sigurd Nielsen, a bishop of the Moravian Church in South Africa and a Danish national who served for many years in the Transkei, examined the idea of tolerance in Zinzendorf's theology. He summarized the tension with the word homopoikilie, a term which expresses the unifying in diversity and the diversity in unity (Nielsen I, 1951: 60). Winning Sectarians over through Love God commands his blessing where brethren live in love and harmony (compare Psalm 133:1,3). The enemy of souls is therefore always on the lookout to cause disruption and disunity. We are challenged to get believers to stop quarreling with each other over petty issues. It is no wonder that Herrnhut received its fair share of sectarians, who converged on the village from all geographic and spiritual directions. The practice of winning sectarians over through love initially won the day. The refugees from Moravia refused to be drawn into religious quarrels until a separatist with the name of Krüger came to Herrnhut in 1726. He typified Zinzendorf as the ‘beast from the Abyss’ and in his view the Lutheran pastor of the neighbouring town Berthelsdorf was a false apostle. Even the faithful Christian David was misled, so that ultimately only three brethren remained with Zinzendorf. When the Count discerned that the fiery Pastor Johann Rothe merely aggravated the situation with his sermons, he requested leave from his lawyer’s office in the city of Dresden to move to Herrnhut at Easter 1727. He hereafter spoke to the erring members individually with patience and love. In public he shed tears, heiße Tränen, because of the evident disunity. By Sunday 9 July 1727 the tide had almost turned, but Zinzendorf was not yet completely happy. Hereafter he endeavoured to meet every member of the community individually, sometimes with one other person who had their trust, discussing the respective spiritual condition of the person concerned. This developed into small cells of mutual trust. The big turn-about came when he called all the inhabitants of Herrnhut to a public meeting on May 12, 1727. There he taught them for three hours in the new statutes - the rules and regulations - that everybody had to sign who wanted to stay on his property. The general vibe of these statutes was significant. The brothers and sisters of Herrnhut were enjoined to live in love with the children of God in all churches. Internally, the mere critical judging of each other would be regarded as a ‘Greuel’, an abomination, to be fiercely resented. He ‘discoursed on the sole ground of salvation – without entering into the various notions which had caused confusion and division among them’ (Langton, 1956:72). One after the other the members agreed until only a few separatists were left. (On 12 May 1748, twenty one years later, the Count recalled how the village had been weighed. He used to call the 12th of May, 1727 the ‘critical day’, upon which Herrnhut would prove to be either a ‘nest of sects’ or a living congregation of Christ.) On 12 August the statutes were signed by all the inhabitants. The next day the congregants went to Berthelsdorf for the Lord’s Supper, where a ‘sea of tears’ - mutual love and forgiveness - drowned the occasion. It seems as if God was only waiting for the unity to let the revival break out in force! Taking Critics seriously A major problem in Church History has been that leaders often responded to critics inappropriately. All too often these critics were either not listened to properly or church leaders over-reacted. Count Zinzendorf was exemplary in listening even to critics of the Gospel. Although he was self-confessingly not an avid reader, he stayed a humble learner throughout his life. Beyreuther sees the greatness of Zinzendorf amongst other things how he even looked for help in his religious struggle at Pierre Bayle, an eminent 17th century harsh critic of the Church. Beyreuther shows quite convincingly how Zinzendorf understood Bayle much better than anyone before or after him, better even than the renowned philosopher Feuerbach (Beyreuther, 1965:201-234). Whereas Bayle kept on waiting and hoping for new revelations of faith in the churches, Zinzendorf surged forth towards the realization of it (Beyreuther, 1965:233). It testifies of special grace that Zinzendorf could throw ‘a concili­atory light on the tragic figure of Bayle’ after the lonely fighter had bravely put forward uncomfortable views (Beyreuther, 1965:233). That Zinzendorf openly confessed that he was reading Bayle’s works as a close second to the Bible, did however not earn him acclaim. Co-operation in missionary Endeavour A major contribution of Zinzendorf in missionary strategy - which has often been ignored by many ‘faith mission’ agencies at their own peril - was that he succeeded in getting other denominations to co-operate in the support of the Moravian missionary endeavours. Already in Germany he exploited the Moravian tradition of music to the full when their groups were invited to conduct ‘singstunden’ (singing services) in both Reformed and Lutheran congregations. His emphasis on the body of Christ was not appreciated everywhere, but in this way committed believers joined them from almost every denomination of the time. In England he could call on support from Anglicans, Methodist and Quakers. At the first Pennsylvania Synod of the Reformed Church the representatives of the denomination were called upon by one of their leaders to support the non-denominational Moravian work for the furtherance of the Gospel in the Americas and the West Indies. Little groups of contributors were organized in Philadelphia and New York and in the homes of many synod members (Lewis, 1962:149). Similarly, someone worked alongside the Lutherans. In the teaching of Zinzendorf to his missionaries he made it clear: ‘You must not enroll your converts as members of the Moravian Church, you must be content to enroll them as Christians’ (Lewis, 1962:95). At a church conference of the Moravians in ‘s Heerendijk (Holland), he stated emphatically: ‘I cannot ... confine myself to one denomination, for the whole earth is the Lord’s and all souls are His; I am debtor to all’ (Lewis, 1962:143). The reason for this activity The Count expressed himself thus in 1745: ‘For thirty years I have yearned that all may be one in the Lord’ (Nielsen I, 1951:44). The Republic of South Africa have no excuse any more to be hesitant about engaging in missions. Opportunities have opened up all over the world. Since the elections of 1994, South Afri­cans are welcome everywhere: in fact, we must pray to be able to remain humble, not to be carried away by pride. An abundance of untapped language talent still lies dormant in the Black townships. These South Africans have an almost unparalleled faculty for language learning. There is hardly a Black in the urban townships who does not speak three or four languages, and the mastery of six or seven is not such a big exception as in other parts of the world. I should think that these people could be ideal missionaries in pioneer areas where oral communication is required, where the Word should rather be translated on CD/DVD than in written form. Some form of over-arching unity – perhaps using a vehicle like the Consultation of Christian Churches (CCC) – would go a long way to achieve this goal. The Love of God as the only proper Motivation We should also not forget the repeated warning of Andrew Murray: ‘The missionary problem is a personal one.’ It is not the sheer effort which will get missionaries to the fields, but the love of God personified. He allowed His Son to die for our sins. After seeing the Ecce homo painting of Christ - the head with the crown of thorns with the challenging caption, the youthful Zinzendorf was deeply moved. He knelt before the painting, pleading that the Lord might ‘draw him forcefully into communion with his sufferings.’121 He surrendered his whole life to the Lord and the Cross: his name, rank, his fortune became relative. He was more determined than ever to give his everything in the service of the Lord. Andrew Murray took the cue from the Herrnhut Moravians: ‘Get this burning thought of personal love for the Saviour who redeemed me into the hearts of Christians, and you have the most powerful incentive that can be had for missionary effort’ (Murray, 1901[1979]:44). Or in different wording: ‘Missions was the automatic outflow and the overflow of their love for Christ. It was to satisfy Christ’s love and express their own love that they brought to Him souls that He had died for to save’ (Murray, 1901[1979]:158). This somehow also puts a question mark behind some modern-day worship services. All too often the love to Christ is expressed vocally, but the logical follow-up, outreach to the lost, is conspicuous by its absence. Potential Missionaries among other Faiths Until recently hardly any cognisance seems to have been taken in the churches of the fact that there are so many people of other faiths in this country, people who have not been clearly challenged with the possibility of a living faith in Jesus. What a chance has been missed to reach out to the Muslims in the Western Cape. There is probably no single ‘unreached people group’122 in the world, which has been exposed so well to the preaching of Jesus Christ than the Cape Muslims. Not only through various mass media, but also through commuter train evan­gelists, open air meetings and personal contact many Muslims in this area have heard the Gospel in one way or another. However, these evangelistic efforts were not always sensitive to the beliefs of the hearers. So often Muslims were crudely addressed and offended, sometimes even in their own homes. Animists, Buddhists, Hindu’s and Muslims in South Africa have had the opportunity to listen to evangelistic programmes via Radio Pulpit or see TV programmes with a similar slant. The work of SIM Life Challenge and WEC International among the Muslims has not gone unnoticed, especially in the Cape Peninsula but petered out in the new millennium. They deserved better support of the churches. Early 20th Century 'Black' Church Leaders in costly Reconciliation Generations of political leaders in South Africa, particularly within the ANC, drew on Christian values for the building of a broader political unity. Coming from the African background of a broad humanity, ubuntu, there was, they believed, an ethical imperative to move beyond narrow identities of family, clan and race. – The thinking of White and ‘Coloured’ churches was bedevilled by the neat separation of politics and religion. Long before White and ‘Coloured’ churches embraced the concept, Blacks already saw the importance of the unity in Christ. One of the pioneers at the Cape was Rev. Zaccheus Richard Mahabane, a Methodist minister, who was posted to Cape Town in 1916. He joined the Cape African Congress in 1917 after hearing political speeches by Charlotte Maxeke and her husband. In 1919 Rev. Zaccheus Richard Mahabane became president of the Cape African Congress. In 1924 he was elected president-general of the national ANC and again from 1937 to 1940. He maintained in 1925 that ‘the universal acknowledgement of Christ as common Lord and King break down the social, spiritual and intellectual barriers between the races’ (Cited in Elphick and Davenport, 1997:384). He propagated moderate conciliatory views of compromise, for instance he found a separate voters’ roll for Blacks acceptable if Whites found the prospect of a common roll too menacing. Not bearing the brunt of the hurts caused by apartheid, the White-led denominations were out of touch with the spiritual dynamics of the resistance against the heretical ideology which became government policy from 1948. Helen Joseph, a Jewish anti-apartheid campaigner bemoaned in respect of the Defiance Campaign of the 1950s: ‘The Church turned its back on the ANC, [but] the ANC never turned its back on the Church’ (Cited in Elphick and Davenport, 1997:386). The deep religiosity and prayerfulness of that campaign was described by Tom Lodge as a ‘mood of religious fervour [that] infused the resistance.’ He went on to note: ‘When the [Defiance] Campaign opened it was accompanied by days of prayer, and volunteers pledged themselves at prayer meetings to a code of love, discipline and cleanliness… and even at the tense climax of the Campaign in Port Elizabeth people were enjoined on the first day of the strike “to conduct a prayer and a fast in which each member of the family will have to be at home;” thereafter they attended nightly church services’ (Cited in Elphick and Davenport, 1997:386). An emerging Unity high-jacked The enemy of souls succeeded in high-jacking an emerging unity of believers in South Africa at the end of the 1950s. Professor G B.A Gerdener could still write in 1959: ’With thankfulness we observe signs to come together and work together. Also in our own Dutch Reformed Church’ (Gerdener, 1959:92).123Gerdener rightly saw exclusivism and isolation as a danger to mission work: ‘Nowhere is isolation and exclusivism so deadly and time-consuming than in the fight against the mighty heathendom and nowhere is co-operation and a unitary front so necessary and useful as here’124 Unfortunately, the issue of race was used by the arch enemy to send the Dutch Reformed Church on the path of isolation, causing a deep rift in the denomination. White theologians legitimized a biblical heresy of racial separation. On the other hand, the open letter which was signed by 123 Dutch Reformed ministers in 1982, stressed the unity of the church. This proved to be a major correction.125 Their counterparts of colour - especially the ‘Coloured’ dominees - responded by politicizing the Church. The Black, ‘Coloured’ and Indian sectors of the denomination drifted further and further away from the Moederkerk, linking up with other churches that propagated inter-faith. Danger signals however also started to surface, namely a bad compromise with inter-faith notions which undermine the unique position of Jesus as the Son of God. The concrete fear of civil war before the 1994 elections was a common goal that spawned prayer meetings which straddled the racial divide. Although much of the mutual distrust was overcome, Christians thereafter more or less lapsed back into traditional racial and denominational divisions. Though there were for example many prayer meetings in South Africa for the gateway cities since October 1995, they were all too often either confined to prayer within the own church - but this was already the big exception - or to prayer within the own racial grouping. Therefore Grigg’s recipe is very appropriate: ‘If there is not significant unity, the first step is to bring together the believers in prayer or in renewal and teaching until there is reconciliation and brokenness.’ At the Cape a correction took place with big citywide prayer events. A significant Correction On the global level, a similar pattern could be discerned. What had been intended as a practical solution within the predecessor of the World Council of Churches (WCC), developed into a rift. Basically it was the age-old problem of ‘faith’ versus ‘works’. Apartheid became one of the dividing lines between ‘evangelicals’ and ‘ecumenicals’. The decision by the world church body to support all agencies that fight racism brought matters to a head. This ultimately developed into a strange situation where many evangelicals in Europe hereafter thought they had to support the apartheid regime in South Africa because the WCC deemed it their duty to support the freedom fighters of Southern Africa almost indiscriminately. At a time when the schism between so-called ‘evangelicals’ and ‘ecumenicals’ appeared almost unbridgeable, when ‘faith’ versus ‘works’ seemed logical, God used Dr Billy Graham to initiate the Lausanne international conference on World Evangelization in 1974. At this occasion third world theologians were divinely used by God, showing that these two tenets of evangelical faith are not alternatives, that both are equally needed. Thus Fouad Assad, the Lebanese executive secretary, bridged the gap between liberation and the common Western evangelical theology during a devotional session. He pointed out that the apostle Philip broke through the taboo of the religious people of his time by communicating with a eunuch (Acts 8).126 Anthropologists were accusing evangelical missionaries of destroying indigenous cultures. At the above-mentioned congress in Lausanne the Korean Okhill Kim brought the evangelicals back to the best of their roots when he reminded participants how the missionary Mary Scranton started a school for girls in their country in 1886. She intended ‘not to force Koreans to give up their own ways’(From the official report Let the Earth hear his voice, 1975:657), but to show them new ways of being Koreans . Okhill Kim brought a new challenge to the West that was reeling under the threat of a moratorium of new Western missionaries. (Liberal African theologians had been suggesting that the West should send money rather than workers who had no feeling for the culture.) In Lausanne Kim highlighted the wrong alternatives, stating that it was the task of Christian evangelism to make the old new. He encouraged the Church ‘to cultivate the educational forms of our own cultural heritage in the arts, combining the arts of the West and the East’ (ibid, p.659). The Lausanne conference became the watershed for world evangelism during the last quarter of the 20th century. Many movements flowed from it, which aimed at reaching the unreached people groups before the end of the millennium. The DAWN (Discipling a whole Nation) and AD 2000 movements, along with the ‘Concerts of Prayer’ of Dave Bryant are a few of the catalysts of a resurgence of prayer. The role of South Korea has to be mentioned in this regard. It was fitting that a major prayer conference of the Lausanne committee was held in Seoul in 1984. The Koreans taught the Western world how to pray. Two Africans from different parts of the continent, contributed significantly to the bridging of the gap between evangelicals and ecumenicals, viz. Bishop Kivangere of Uganda and South Africa’s ‘Mr. Pentecost’ David Du Plessis. Bishop Kivangere, who had to flee the wrath of the dictator Idi Amin in the seventies, became a blessing to Christians around the world with his challenging message of love and forgiveness. Du Plessis assisted in the thawing of the relationship between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. Yet, in many quarters the denominational division, is still not recognised as a demonic stronghold. Other Options The establishment of an affordable language school in Cape Town where prospective missionaries can learn basics in foreign languages, and receive some cross-cultural orientation at the same time, has been mooted. Retired pensioners might also find it easier to enter so-called closed countries. Even if they do nothing else than being there prayerfully, it could go a long way towards bringing down strongholds for the Lord. But also for those Christians who stay ‘at home’, there is more than enough to do. First of all there is the all important prayer ministry. Tract distribution may not be everybody’s cup of tea. But on a practical level, Christians could use email to interact from their own homes to people in places all over the world Campus Crusade have been using many South African volunteers extensively in the distribution of material and through practical short-term service in the Middle East. As a result of such outreach in Afghanistan one of their workers was touched by the plight of young widows. This inspired her to write the script for a movie, Magdalena, which got well known across the Muslim World within a matter of months. The life of Jesus was depicted as seen through the eyes of the former demon-possessed prostitute who became such a devout follower of the Lord. Food for thought: In what way am I involved in spreading the Good News? Am I, is my church supporting any missionary (ies) regular­ly? Have I ever considered supporting someone from another church, from another culture? Has my church ever considered doing it together with other churches, for example with those in the nearby location/township(s)? With so many Black families affected by HIV/AIDS, the church has to take corporate responsibility and not only wait on the State. We are thankful for all initiatives TEASA (The Evangelical Alliance of South Africa) has taken in this regard. And some ideas: Write what strategy could be appropriate from your local area to a) get involved in local evangelization b) get the local churches interested in border-crossing missionary outreach. Break the idea up in smaller portions. List them in a possible order for implementation and go for it. 12. Jesus, the Homeless: a Refugee as a Baby and a Vagabond as an Adult Great biblical personalities as well as many prominent figures in Church History had all been out of their home country against their will for one or another reason. In the case of Joseph and Daniel they assumed high office in their countries. Daniel had the special distinction to have served with aplomb under three different rulers Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar and Darius. The refugee status of the baby Jesus and his parents should fill us with compassion towards all refugees. As an adult the Master replied to someone who wanted to follow him: ‘Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head’ (Luke 9:58). During his earthly life Jesus was so to speak only at home with his Father. In fact, already as a twelve year-old he referred to the temple as ‘my Father’s house’ (Luke 2:49). When traders defiled the temple, Jesus jealously guarded the sanctity of its precincts, a house of prayer, driving the traders out: ‘… but you are making it a den of robbers’ (Matthew 21:13). We should be quite aware that God can turn seemingly difficult circumstances to the good, to His end. I suggest that the presence of refugees should be regarded as a challenge and a chance. At any rate, they should definitely not be seen as a threat to our jobs and livelihood. Foreigners and Refugees in the Bible About Abraham it is specifically mentioned that he was a stranger in various places (Genesis 12:10; 17:8; 20:1). Likewise were Isaac (Genesis 26:3), Jacob (Genesis 32:4), Joseph (Genesis 37ff) - Moses (Exodus 2:15ff) and Nehemiah. In fact, it can be argued with some substance that in the case of David and Moses, their years as a refugee served as training ground for later service. The Israelites were strangers in Egypt. Repeatedly they were reminded of this fact. Exactly because they had been oppressed there, they were expected not only not to do this to foreigners, but Leviticus 19:33,34 includes the astounding verse Love the stranger as you love yourself. In fact, the Law commands them more than once to treat the stran­ger as an equal (for example Leviticus 24:16, 24). The Israelites were repeatedly admonished to be hospitable to strangers. If the foreigner/stranger is destitute, he should be supported and given hospitality (Leviticus 25:35). The Hebrew Scriptures furthermore depict clearly how foreigners became a blessing to the people of God. The prime example in this regard was Joseph who was an Egyptian in the eyes of his brothers when he reminded them of their God and the God of their forefathers. The Ethiopian servant Ebed-Melech rescued Jeremiah (Jeremiah 38:7-10) after he had been lowered into a cistern, where the prophet would have died. 7 ...Ebed-Melech, the Cushite man, an official in the royal palace, heard that they had put Jeremiah into the cistern. While the king was sitting in the Benjamin Gate, Ebed-Melech went out of the palace and said to him,  "My lord the king, these men have acted wickedly in all they have done to Jeremiah the prophet. They have thrown him into a cistern, where he will starve to death when there is no longer any bread in the city."  Then the king commanded Ebed-Melech the Cushite, "Take thirty men from here with you and lift Jeremiah the prophet out of the cistern before he dies."  Rahab, the prostitute (Joshua 2:1ff), is another example of quite a few ‘foreigners’ who are mentioned favourably in the Hebrew Scriptures. Both she and Ebed-Melech were rewarded when their lives were spared in the respective sacking of Jerusalem and Jericho. But God also used other nations to chastise the ‘apple of His eye’, the Israelites, when they strayed from Him. God wanted His people to be a blessing to the nations. The idea of the ‘New Testament’ Church as a replacement, a spiritual Israel, is nowhere clearly taught in the Bible, but the inference is nevertheless correct that Israel is the example to the Church. The body of Christ should also bless the nations. With the Moabite Ruth, the biblical condition becomes clear: faith in the God of Israel is the criterion. When Naomi returned to Israel with Ruth, they came to Bethlehem (the “House of Bread”). It was the beginning of the barley harvest. An Exile with a Mission The prophet Nehemiah was normal and yet special. Not quite an exile ‘by birth’ in the mould of Moses, his illustrious model – possibly coming to Babylon with his parents as a child, Nehemiah grew up in the foreign environment, without however losing the love and compassion for his Hebrew heritage. That may be normal for Jews down the centuries - with some exceptions – but it also thus becomes a challenge for any foreigner to be a blessing to his adopted country. The function Nehemiah performed as cup bearer of the King did not require any special training. But he had in this way set the pattern for any Christian to excel in his secular vocation, so to speak making his mark even with mundane work. The attitude in which Nehemiah performed his tasks was apparently quiet and inconspicuous as he joyfully did what was required of him. But he was honest enough not to hide his feelings. After his brother came to him, reporting the desolate state of Jerusalem, he was so saddened by it that the King soon noticed it. This was risky business. To be sad in the presence of the monarch was punishable by death. Nehemiah is a model for openness and transparency, as well as for being radical. He had a good position at the palace, but he was willing to sacrifice all that to return to Jerusalem. With regard to openness and being honest about one’s emotions, Westerners are especially challenged. ‘Cowboys don’t cry’ has become a standard expression especially for men. And yet, we read in the Bible that Jesus wept when he attended the funeral of his good friend Lazarus (John 11:35). All foreigners are challenged by Nehemiah’s demeanour to be radical and willing to return to their home countries when desperate needs beckon them to get thus involved. The example of Nehemiah apparently rubbed off on his fellow exiles as they linked up with the Jews who somehow remained in Jerusalem. Nowhere do we read of internal rivalry or accusations. In fact, we could even say that there seems to have been hardly any bickering and jealousy as they set about the job at hand. Everyone had to do a certain job and thus every part of the wall could be erected in quick time. Yet, all was not plain sailing, which points to the human frailty of the group. They were nowhere perfect because somewhere along the line we read ‘...their nobles would not put their shoulders to the work under their supervisors’ (Nehemiah 3:5).’ But Nehemiah apparently did not allow that to upset him too much. We should note in respect of the preparation which Nehemiah had performed beforehand, that every step was important - from listening, waiting, prayer, repentance, organization and planning. Daniel, an Exile in royal Service In Babylon, where Daniel was taken to, the special gifts of the young man was spotted soon. Along with his three young friends who received the names Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, he sought the face of God on more than one occasion when their lives were threatened. In the narrative where the three friends refused to bow down in worship of a golden image that King Nebuchadnezzar had erected, they dared to incur the wrath of the king, ready to be thrown into a scorching furnace. Significantly, the enraged king saw a fourth person, whose form was like the Son of God (Daniel 3:25). Daniel kneeled down when he prayed as a sign of his humility before God. He prayed three times a day as a token of his continuous dependency upon the Father in heaven. He stands in this way very much in the same line as Abraham and Moses as a friend of God, as someone who had an intimate relationship with the Almighty. His habit of praying thrice a day towards Jerusalem brought the idol worshippers to extreme rage. With this practice he was clearly distancing himself from those who worshipped the sun as God. The practise does not have a biblical injunction as basis as far as I know, but it may have served as a model to later generations. It is known that Muhammad was deeply impressed by the practice, modelling the qibla, the prayer direction on it. He made it incumbent upon all Muslims. The salat prayer - five times a day - possibly also has Daniel’s habits as model and origin, via the Jews living in Mecca and Medina around 620 CE. An Explosion of Missions Jews were probably already coming from Central Asia to Jerusalem at the great Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. What we may take for granted is that many Jewish believers will have returned to places like Damascus and Babylon after that special event. They had been dispersed already from Samaria by the Assyrian king that led to the Babylonian captivity and replaced from Babylon, Cutbah and other places (2 Kings 17:24ff). The persecution in Jerusalem (Acts 8:1) caused possibly the biggest explosion of missions in history ever. It is noteworthy that this persecution in the first century was the main catalyst of the spread of the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Together with the Babylonian exile, that circumstance prepared Jews to become vagabonds for the Lord. The hardship experienced under suppression made all other problems and tendencies to ‘settle’ relative. Automatically the Gospel broke through geographic, racial and nationalist barriers. Philip obeyed immediately to go the Gaza desert where he met the Ethiopian finance minister (Acts 8:27) who in turn pressed ahead to bring the Gospel to Africa. The Cypriot Barnabas became a leader in Antioch along with the Africans Simon, the Black and Lucius from Cyrene in North Africa (Acts 13:1). Different parts of the known world were reached with the Gospel from Antioch. Special Refugees and Exiles in Church History Jan Amos Komensky (latinised to Comenius) was one of the greatest refugees of all time. In 1614 he became a teacher at the Moravian school in Prerau. It was there that he introduced revolutionary teaching methods that would change the world. The inspiration that fueled Comenius’ insatiable search for knowledge was his belief that all things were made through Christ. For Him, Christ could be seen in everything (Colossians 1:16). Nature is God’s ‘second book’. Comenius’ notes about this period did not survive long. The war clouds turned dark over Europe. For thirty years, from 1618 to 1648, murder, violence and hunger were the order of the day. The population of Moravia was reduced from three million to one million. Apart from his precious library and all of his writings, Comenius lost his wife and only child, after he had refused to renounce his biblical convictions. Hereafter he felt that he now understood better what a great sacrifice the Father had made in giving His Son as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. This was only one of many calamities to follow. However, each time a calamity struck, he would just formulate an even greater plan to be implemented. In 1624 the ever faithful Pastor Komensky of Fulnek led a small band of exiles out of their native land to seek a safe haven. For the rest of his life Comenius remained a refugee. As the last bishop of the old Unitas Fratrum did not only lose almost everything through fire and persecution, but he was also forced into exile, first from his home country and on his 64th birthday, also from Poland, his adopted country. From his new home country Holland he became a blessing to the nations of the world through his writings, notably on education. The Moravians in Herrnhut in the 18th century most prob­ably also thought about the refugee ‘problem’ in a positive way. It is surely no co-incidence that the first mission­aries who left Herrnhut after 1732 were predominantly former Bohemian and Moravian refugees. Their preparedness to leave home and hearth to spread the Gospel, soon ‘infected’ the Germans. I dare to put it even more radically and it is not difficult to prove it: The history of missions would have been completely different if Count Zinzendorf did not allow himself to be impacted by the Bohemians and Moravian refugees. When Zinzendorf returned from Holland in 1736, it was conveyed to him that the government of Saxony had banned him. He thus became an exile himself temporarily. God turned around the period of exile from Herrnhut for the extension of the Kingdom. During these years missionaries were sent to many parts of the globe. Denmark leading Protestants in Missionary Sending Denmark led Protestants in sending missionaries to the rest of the world in the early 1700s. The Germans Plütschau and Ziegenbalg, sent as missionaries to India by the Danish Lutheran Church, were used by God to influence Count Zinzendorf decisively when he was still a teenager in the boarding school at Halle. The missionary endeavour of Denmark in Greenland by Hans Egede was decisive to get Herrnhut young men trained for missionary work. The slave Anton, working at the Danish royal palace, was to be God’s special instrument to get the Moravians in action when he challenged Zinzendorf to bring the Gospel to his people on the island of St Thomas. A Danish colonial pastor – working in the Gold Coast (today known as Ghana) has the distinction of spreading the vision in Europe to train Africans on an equal footing. He took along Christian Protten, an African from mixed parentage, to Kopenhagen. He was the son of a European soldier and the daughter of a tribal chief, one of the first persons from the third world to become a Moravian in Herrnhut in 1735. Christian Protten was probably the first indigenous person to minister in his home country as a missionary since the Eunuch of Ethiopia (Acts 8), landing in St George del Mina (Elmina) on 11 May 1737. The initial work had to be aborted when his companion, the German Huckuff, died a few days after their arrival. The governor-general changed his attitude. In a second attempt Christian Protten started a school in Elmina, but because of conflict with the authorities he was imprisoned for one and a half years. He then became seriously ill. After his recovery he was recalled to Herrnhut. Christian Protten married Rebecca, the ground-breaking mulatress and the widow of Matthäus Freundlich, one of the St Thomas island missionary pioneers. He returned to the Gold Coast, albeit without his wife, starting a school there (Beck, 1981:110). After a sad incident when he accidentally killed a child when cleaning a rifle, he was recalled to Europe once again. His bad temper and alcoholic habits prevented him to get a hero’s place in the annals of the Moravian church. Nevertheless, as a pioneer in Ghana he should be remembered. He returned with his wife to the Gold Coast after disagreement with the church leaders. There he translated Luther’s Small Catechism into Ga Fante (Beck, 1981:111), probably the first African language translation of that work. Vagabonds of a higher Order Christian David, the first Moravian refugee who found solace on the estate of Count Zinzendorf, was challenged when he heard about Christians who were imprisoned for having religious services in their homes. He started reading the Bible, something which he was not supposed to do as a born Catholic.127 He was convicted by the Holy Spirit, but no Lutheran pastor wanted to have anything to do with an apostate. Subsequently Christian David roamed through Bohemia and Austria before he finally came to Leipzig in Saxony. But also there he was ridiculed and told to go back where he was born and bred. He moved to Berlin and from there to Breslau. But also from that city he had to flee when Jesuit priests got to know about him. This brought Christian David to Görlitz, near to the border of his home country, from where he started on trips to encourage the persecuted believers there. The Neissers were one of the evangelical families he visited in 1717. He challenged them speaking about a complete commitment to the Lord, even to the extent of leaving their homes in faith; that it would be returned to them hundredfold. The clan had already indicated that he should look for a place across the border where they could be taught in the Scriptures. On Easter Monday 1722 Christian David brought them the good news that he had met the young Count Zinzendorf, who was not only himself a follower of Jesus, but who also endeavoured to lead souls to Christ. Just after Pentecost two Neisser families fled adventurously over the border into Salesia to Görlitz. On 22 June 1722 Christian David felled the first tree for the start of the village Herrnhut on the estate of Count Zinzendorf. When the flight of the two Neisser families became known, the other three family members remaining there were called to book. Imprisonment ensued. After their discharge, they decided to join their family in Herrnhut, where only one house had been built by the summer of 1723. Christian David continued with his missionary forays into Moravia. In the village of Zauchtenthal Martin Schneider had been treasuring the heritage of the old Unitas Fratrum (Unity of the Brethren), holding secret cottage meetings where he taught young people reading and writing, They were also taught the catechism written by Amos Comenius. After the death of Martin Schneider, spiritual lukewarm-ness set in. Christian David met the grandson of Martin Schneider, going from there to Kunwald, where the Unitas Fratrum had started in 1457. A spiritual revival broke out in Moravia in 1723 that was ignited by the preaching of Christian David. This happened in both Zauchtenthal and Kunwald. The revival there was followed by fierce persecution. Just like in biblical times, this was the fuel the believers needed to leave their home town. Many of them came to Herrnhut and later to other places. As a carpenter Christian David helped building houses also in Herrnhaag in the Wetteravia, in ‘s Heerendijk (Holland), in Greenland, in Pennsylvania and Latvia. He conceded his major ‘weakness’ that was so powerfully used in the service of the Lord: ‘I do not think that it is my calling to stay long in one place... Once things get started at one place, I love to hand it over to others’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:16). He would work only for something to eat. A Pilgrim Church Like the first generation of Christians, which was dispersed by the severe persecution (Acts 8:1), the persecution only served to change the Herrnhut Moravians. His reaction when the Count Zinzendorf read the notice of their banishment in 1736 showed that he had learned the lesson well: ‘Then we must gather the Pilgrim Church’128 (Nielsen I, 1951:44). The extremity was soon overturned into a divine opportunity. As a travelling church they went from place to place where Zinzendorf would preach. Sowing seeds of the Gospel, he regarded it as the privilege of the Pilgrim Church to be salt and to anoint, to bless other churches. The reason for this activity he expressed thus in 1745: ‘For thirty years I have yearned that all may be one in the Lord’ (Nielsen I, 1951:44). Zinzendorf used the acute threat of new persecution in Saxony as a catalyst. He relocated a part of the Brethren to North America. True to the biblical principle, the mission to the American Indians started, spear-headed by the fearless David Zeisberger. When Zinzendorf was accused of only sending others to go and sacrifice their lives in the tropics, he went there himself and subsequently almost died as a result of a disease that he picked up there. The community had to leave Saxony mainly because of their support for the Bohemian refugees. The opposition did not quite succeed in this because hereafter almost the whole community joined him in the Wetteravia area, some 50 kilometres to the northeast of present-day Frankfurt (Main). For a start, the group that called themselves the pilgrim congregation, moved into the Ronneburg, a dilapidated castle that was inhabited by the despised of their society, ‘thieves, gypsies, sectarians and Jews’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:68). Significantly, the whole family of the Count was involved with the Pilgrim Church. Zinzendorf proudly testified a few years later that after 25 years of marriage his wife Erdmuth was the only one that suited his occupation. She did not allow herself to be overwhelmed by the needs of the large Pilgrim Church. In fact, it had been the practice of the original occupants of the Ronneburg to go begging on Tuesdays and Fridays. Instead, bread was handed out and they were encouraged to work. Although Erdmuth was quite sickly, her room was seldom empty between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. She counselled many in the community, because her husband travelled profusely. Also other emissaries of the Gospel were constantly on the go. At the Ronneburg almost everything was shared and nobody worked for wages. Also in the ‘new world’ the notion of the Pilgrim Church was meticulously adhered to. The settlements at Bethlehem and Nazareth were started for no other purpose, than ‘that the work of the Lord would be rendered a hand not only in Pennsylvania but in the whole of America’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:122). Bethlehem only had to be a barn, a Pilgrim house, a school for prophets and the smith for producing the Lord’s arrows, from where workers would be sent into the rest of America. At any time a third of the adults would be on the road somewhere to spread the Gospel.) Itinerant Preachers The 18-year old David Nitschmann was one of the clan that would impact Herrnhut intensely in the next few years. He went around the Moravian environs of Kunwald with others of his age, speaking about what they had experienced, spreading the fire even more. All people who attended the meetings were imprisoned and some were locked up in the tower of a castle during the hard wintry conditions. The authorities hoped to get information about the books they were reading and how often the bush preacher (Christian David) visited them. Three young men with the name David Nitschmann, along with two other peers, Melchior Zeisberger and Johann Töltchig, appeared before Judge Töltchig. He was the father of one of the five young men. After they had been given heavy sentences and prohibited to have religious services in the homes, they went together to stage a prayer meeting on a meadow outside the town, concluding their service with a song that their ancestors had written. It was sung a century before them when the ancestors had to leave their fatherland (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:19). The younger generation was however not solely used as itinerant preachers. In 1740 they prepared a plan to use older couples whose children were not small. Fifty ‘anchorites’ as they were called, would go from place to place as witnesses of the Gospel (Nielsen I, 1951:44). From this source Zinzendorf also developed the idea of a Diaspora Church where members could visit Herrnhut every five years. Another variation on the theme is found in the practice of sending artisans from home to home. The habit was grasped spontaneously in Herrnhut to send these men as missionaries and witnesses, even to the ends of the world – albeit not before thorough preparation. During the daytime they would work in their respective trades. In the evening they received training in the Brethren’s house that would become the forerunner of a mission seminary (Van der Linde, 1975:29). By the way, Comenius had been teaching in the Old Unity of the Brethren and in the Reformed church that hand work was a noble calling. Students in Theology were taught practical subjects from the start. South Africa as a Beneficiary of Banishment Because of his support for the Moravian refugees, Count Zinzendorf encoun­tered problems with his authorities. Eventually the Count was banned from Saxony in 1736. South Africa became the special beneficiary of banishment. Georg Schmidt, the first missionary to our country, was ‘banished’ to the Cape in 1737 as punishment for a perceived serious misdemeanour. Schmidt had been imprisoned in Moravia because of his faith. There Schmidt signed a document in which he was said to have recanted his faith to regain his freedom. At any rate, Schmidt was hardly back in Herrnhut when he returned to the Roman Catholic areas to encourage the Protestants there, risking a new imprisonment or even worse. Schmidt was ‘banished’ by Count Zinzendorf to work amongst the primal Cape ‘Hottentots’ to compensate for the perceived damage he had done to the cause of the Gospel. Schmidt accepted the punishment to be ‘banished’ to go to the distant Cape of Good Hope, to minister to the ‘Wilden’, to the resistant ‘Hottentotten’. In the spiritual realm this could be seen as a divine response to the Islamic foundations laid by the exiled Shayk Yusuf who had likewise been banished to the Cape in 1694. The Small Country of Holland showed the Way The Netherlands illustrated what a blessing can ensue if refugees and foreigners are given ample opportunity to serve the Lord. The diminutive country of Holland influenced world history at various points in time, completely out of proportion to its size. The two great figures of the Unitas Fratrum, Comenius and Zinzendorf, both utilized the hospitality in that country to the full. It is significant that both these men had an eye for the Jews there in a loving way at a time when other churches looked down upon the nation of Israel. The Reformed Church in Holland had a positive view of the Hebrew Scriptures, but unfortunately only because they saw themselves as the replacement of the Jewish nation – the new Israel. This was an unbiblical premise. In recent decades the Netherlands were blessed by foreigners during the World War II and thereafter when secularism threatened to bring about moral decay. The Moravians in Zeist, started by the Germans, played a major role in reconciliation between Germans and Dutch citizens as evangelicals. Thus Jan Kits (sr.) rallied around Rev. P.L. Legêne, a Danish preacher. Twentieth century history in the small country shows how refugees and foreigners have been fruitful in the missionary movement. The persecution of the Jews and the repression by the Nazi regime brought out the best in the Dutch nation whose own history is interwoven with the refugee status of their monarchs. Evangelical Christians like the family of Corrie ten Boom were themselves persecuted because of their support to the hapless Jews. Brother Andrew, known in his home country as Anne van der Bijl, the founder of Open Doors, received much of his inspiration from Corrie ten Boom and Sidney Wilson, a British missionary working in Holland. Open Doors still has as its main thrust the support of the persecuted Church. Brother Andrew was the initiator for the seven years of prayer for the Soviet Union, which more than anything else brought about the downfall of the Communist regime. The ten years of prayer for the collapse of the wall of Islam is apt to have similar results if possibly not so spectacular. Aid to the embattled Christians of Romania was divinely orchestrated from Holland in the late 1980s, for example after the German-background Erwin Klein was allowed to emigrate to the West with his family. After meeting a family that had come from Holland to the Southern German holiday facility for big families in Tieringen in 1987, many parcels were sent to Christian families in the communist country. This must have angered the dictator Nicolau Çeaucescu and his Securitate profusely, because they had tried to isolate Romanian Christians from any contact with the West. Thereafter the town of Zeist became a hub for practical support from Holland to the persecuted Church in Romania. A scriptural Principle implemented The scriptural principle involved is no mere theory. This was shown in recent decades and going right into the present. Bishop Festo Kivangere, who had to flee the wrath of the dictator Idi Amin in the seventies, became a blessing to Christians around the world with his challenging message of love and forgiveness.129 Eyob Getachew, who fled the communist regime of his home country Ethiopia in 1989, led Bible study groups with refugees in Holland. In 1995 he was preparing himself for missionary work with Interserve.130 A year before this, an Egyptian Islamic scholar, had to flee his home country of Egypt, adopting the name of Mark Gabriel. Dr Gabriel and other Arab-background converts in the USA exposed the lie and deception of Islam like few others in recent decades. Drug addition and prostitution were fast becoming the hall-marks of the capital Amsterdam in the second half of the 1970s. That was the time when Floyd McClung from the USA, Jeff Fountain from New Zealand and other foreigners came to Holland, among others under the auspices of Youth with a Mission. McClung started his ministry in the drug capital of Europe in 1973 with six months of prayer as he walked through the streets of Amsterdam. The moral decay was clearly slowed down as churches started to work together, when pastors from different denominations came together for prayer. Many Christians tried to talk Floyd and Sally out of their calling to the red-light district of Amsterdam, but a Dutch pastor, Rolf Boiton, thanked them for availing themselves to be the answer of his prayer for 14 years. When the McClungs came to Amsterdam there were only five evangelical churches in the Dutch metropolis. After practising biblical principles of church planting, they were amazed to discover that the number (including house churches) had increased to 400 when they left Amsterdam in the 1990s (McClung and Kreider, 2007:88). The McClungs were blessed even more to hear in 2008 that the new Jewish mayor of Amsterdam had outlawed the notorious red light district of the Dutch capital. The Jewish mayor discerned that it did not make economic sense to propagate sexual immorality. It is an interesting thought that a decade before McClung came to Hol­land, Corrie ten Boom, worked in war-stricken Vietnam as an elderly Dutch evangelist, leading many American soldiers to the Lord. She dived into her work of reconciliation after she had come to terms with her bitterness towards the Germans - when she was enabled to forgive them. (She had been incarcer­ated in a concentra­tion camp in the second World War because of the part of their family in supporting the perse­cuted Jews.) The USA played yet another role in a significant effort to evangelize Holland when Jan Kits (jr.) got the vision to start Campus Crusade in his home country while he was studying there. Dutch Christians were encouraged and a major turnabout ensued when this organization challenged the nation. Many Chris­tians were engaged via a countrywide cam­paign in 1982 called ‘Er is hoop’ (There is Hope). This movement later also blessed other European coun­tries. Because of its positive image in evangelical circles, Holland was chosen to be the host to various mission enterprises. Dr Billy Graham chose the city of Amsterdam for two conferences in the mid-1980s, to which evangelists were invited from around the Globe for training. The Jaarbeurshalle of Utrecht was for many years the European venue and the equivalent of the American Urbana, the Lausanne Committee inspired annual missionary event for recruitment purposes. South Africans are generally less aware of the stalwart work of our late countryman, ‘Mr. Pentecost’ Du Plessis. There are few people in the world - if any - who did more to bring Pentecostals into the mainstream of evangelicalism. Much of this work was done while he was a foreigner in Europe and North America. Late 20th Century missionary Interplay involving South Africa A similar interplay can be discerned with regard to South Africa. Professor Verkuyl, a Dutch academic who had become very sensitive to racism during his term as a missionary in Indonesia, influenced many South Africans in the resistance to apartheid, for example through his booklet ‘Breek de muren af’. Dr Beyers Naudé, who started the Christian Institute, was decisively influenced by Verkuyl and he became the channel, which opened the Dutch Churches for the South African church leader when Naudé was outlawed by his own church (Ryan, 1990:113). Through the favour and offices of Dr Naudé many a DRC pastor of colour could procceed to post graduate studies in Holland. His influence was nowhere more eveident than in the doctoral thesis of Dr Hannes Adonis, Die Afgebreekte Mure opgebou. In turn, this work played a significant role in the run-up to the famous Belhar confession. Other compatriots, with Ds. Steve Deventer among the best known, played a major role in the Dutch prayer movement, spawned by a visit of David Bryant from England in 1988. The first regional prayer group in Holland started in Zeist-Driebergen, where a South African exile spearheaded the group. On the first Thursday of October, 1989, this group devoted the whole prayer meeting to South Africa, just a week before the momentous meeting of President De Klerk with Archbishop Tutu and Dr Allan Boesak.131 The latter meeting helped to pave the way for the release of Nelson Mandela in February 1990 and the ultimate democratization of South Africa. From 1982 a South African led a networking effort of Christians from different local churches and Bible Schools around the Dutch town of Zeist in the evangelism endeavour of the Goed Nieuws Karavaan, exposing the prejudice and lie that it was impossible for believers from doctrinally differing churches to work together in this way for any length of time. The ministry continued long after the family returned to Cape Town in January 1992. Countries benefiting from political Exiles Many countries like Canada benefited from political exiles that had left South Africa during the apartheid era. The value of Muslim-born South African believers as potential missionaries to Arab-speaking countries should not be under-estimated. For one, they have a head start in their knowledge of Arabic, which they learn at the Madressa schools. Some of them had been more than only nominal Muslims before their conversion to Christ. From the ranks of the Cape Muslims some have been trained in Cairo, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. With eyes of faith, Christians should not think of the people group as a threat, but rather as an asset. They are potential missionaries to the Muslim world. We should be praying that their spiritual eyes might be opened collectively to the fact that Jesus is not only a vague al mashih, (the Messiah) of the Qur’an, but also the crucified Son of God. Since 2004 many of them have seen the film ‘The Passion of the Christ’. A significant turning to faith in Christ is no pipe-dream any more. They could easily become experts in using the teaching of the Qur’an on the life of Jesus as a bridge. We should bear in mind that quite a few Muslims came to faith in Christ after their search for truth had been stimulated by their reading of the Qur’an.132 No wonder that the Camel Method – whereby Qur’anic common ground with Christianity is extensively used, proved to be a big hit. Jesus and Paul used the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures in their confrontation with Judaism (see Matthew 15:4; Acts 17:3). Refugees and Exiles keeping in touch with their Roots Another facet of the role of refugees, which has become a blessing to South Africa, is the fact that former refugees and exiles from the country have kept up the contact with their roots. Many of our present leaders - when they were in exile - utilized the educational and other opportunities, not only to keep abreast with secular training, but also on what was happening in their home country. When the opportunity arose to get involved in negotiations with the government of the day, they were not left wanting. In a similar way, we should encourage all refugees to keep in touch with their people back home, even though it might not be easy. (Also in the apartheid epoch of South Africa it was not always easy for those who opposed the regime to stay in touch with loved ones from abroad, without endangering them. Letters were opened at random.) Refugees should be assisted with educational and other opportunities to enhance their skills. In the post-apartheid South Africa there are refugees and exiles from countries where full-time missionaries would not enter easily. Many of these refugees have been found to be more open to the Gospel than for example South African Muslims. The mobility of refugees and former exiles is also a plus; a factor which gives them a special potential for missionary recruitment. This applies not only in terms of their return to their country of origin, but also to other countries. As was shown, the exiles and refugees from Bohemia and Moravia were in the forefront of the missionary movement from Herrnhut after 1732. People who have left the shores of their home country once, have usually lost much - if not all - of the natural fear of everything that is strange and foreign. More two-way Moves of the Spirit What is also not generally known is the two-way movement of the Holy Spirit between continents after 1949. The visit of Norman Grubb, a WEC missionary leader, caused a mighty movement in Zaire,133 which spilled over into Rwanda. Two African brothers from the Rwanda movement, who came to Britain, made a powerful impact on WEC in the UK and from there around the world. The two Rwandans shared the powerful principles of ‘Walking in the Light’, which were recorded by Roy Hession in his Calvary Road and Norman Grubb in his book Continuous Revival. Experience abroad played a role in yet another case where South Africa is concerned. The German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer received a major part of his theological formation during his exile in New York where he worshiped with Blacks in the suburb Harlem. Here he came face to face with the problem of racism at a time when Hitler was not yet persecuting Jews. But it prepared him for the struggle against the Nazi racism. Bonhoeffer also learned to work with a variety of churches in New York and he was challenged to become involved in working for world peace. Bonhoeffer had a powerful effect on Dr Beyers Naudé and a few others like Rev Chris Wessels, who were inspired by him in their resistance to apart­heid. Chris Wessels134 became an inspiration to many young people after his return from a study stint in Europe in 1962. Dr Allan Boesak, Professor Jutty Bredenkamp and Dr Franklin Sonn have been only a few of many who were influenced by him and who later became prominent in the struggle for democracy in South Africa. South Africa to set the Pace? In obedience to the biblical exhortation to be hospitable to strangers (Hebrews 13,2), refugees and foreigners should get special treatment. In this way South Africa could set the pace for the wealthy ‘Christian countries’ towards a return to the living God. We - as well as the Western countries with an influx of refugees - should welcome the opportunity to host refugees, even those of the economic type. If they are isolated, they could become even worse materialists than the inhabitants of their host countries. However, if these refugees are gripped by the Gospel, it is quite possible that many of them would want to return to their home countries to share the insights, which they have learned. And if they do not, they will nevertheless have enriched the individualistic Western countries if they have been given the chance to share their non-material attributes. South Africa has been having its fair share of refugees, especially from Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. In the first years of the new democracy the country has been quite exemplary in its care for these hapless people. Former President Mandela’s statement in the mid-1990s - not to see refugees as a threat - is completely in line with biblical guidelines. In the northern hemisphere refugees and other foreigners have so often been regarded as a threat and/or a nuisance. Germany proved the big exception in 2015, showed the way with loving welcome, perhaps naively and thus thereafter having to cope with thousands from countries where there is no war. Unfortunately this tendency also occurred in South Africa after the influx of thousands of foreigners from all over Africa and other countries like China. At the turn of the century the loss of jobs in the textile industry – that was most adversely affected by cheap imports from the most populous country of the world – contributed to general xenophobia. This ultimately led to serious mob violence on a national scale in May 2008. In terms of missionary strategy, future missionaries could nevertheless be seen in this category of people. Already significant ministry amongst Portuguese-speaking people in South Africa started over a decade ago by an ex-soldier working with refugees from Angola and Mozambique. Missionaries from Brazil proved to be a precious asset in this regard, following up the pioneering enterprise. Prayer could be directed that many of these refugees may be challenged with the Gospel and called for service in Mozambique, Angola and Guinea-Bissau, where there are still many unreached people groups. After 1996 ministry among French-speaking Africans took off at the Cape Town Baptist Church, and followed by a few other congregations of different denominations. In the new century this mushroomed, with many little fellowships and cell groups for French and Portuguese–speaking Africans all over the country in the big cities. In the ministry of Friends from Abroad, that was founded at the Cape in 2007, foreigners have been served initially in practical ways with English lessons and some income generating activities like beadwork for ladies. A few Muslims have not only come to faith in Jesus, but they also started sharing their faith with others. Some of them were and/or still are getting equipped to do this in other countries. We should keep in mind that especially those refugees became a blessing to nations who had been persecuted for the sake of the Gospel. Africa has started in recent decades with a good record after Mark Gabriel had voiced his objections to his own peril. He was ostracized and kicked out of his job as an Egyptian academic from Al Azhar University in Cairo for questioning Islam. A Role for former Exiles Comenius possibly had a much bigger influence in his home country after his exile than he would have had if he had never been forced to leave. The new democratic South African government of national unity since 1994 displayed an excellent blend of exiles, next to political prisoners and former apartheid rulers. This set an example for many other countries to make use of the expertise that their nationals had gained during a period of exile. The attitude to former exiles who have returned to South Africa is just as important. Although some of them may have displayed an arrogant know-all attitude, there is often a deep spiritual need. In South Africa’s case, the decision to leave the country was more often than not preceded by disappointment and bitterness because of an unjust political set-up. These former exiles have not always been cordially welcomed and given opportunities to share the skills which they have learned abroad. Special attention should be given to the children of such returnees who may still face the after-effects of culture shock. There are cases of children who grew up in Western Europe but who eventually landed in squalid living conditions. Opportun­ities surfaced to minister to some of those who had genuinely thought that Communism was the only solution to our country’s problems. Many of them became more open to the Gospel than before they left the country. Some of them have experienced the demise of the atheist ideology. A positive attitude to former exiles could go a long way in preparing the way of the Lord in their lives and that of their families. Some of them have learned languages like Russian and Spanish, which could be utilized in the service of the Lord. New oppor­tunities for missionary work, especially in Europe, have opened up. The special relationship of the government to countries like Cuba and Libya could create openings for South Africans in these countries about which many other Western nations can only dream. Coupled with this ex-President Mandela’s criticism of American and British entry into Iraq on rather flimsy grounds ensured for the Republic a good reputation among Muslim countries. Thousands have been coming to South Africa to learn English already from 2002. The Catholic countries of Southern Europe still resemble a desert in spiritual terms. Many nationals from Greece, Italy and Portugal – and in recent years from many other countries - came to personal faith in Jesus as their Lord and Saviour in South Africa. South African intercessors – led by Bennie Mostert and Gerda Leithgöb and their Network of United Prayer in Southern Africa (NUPSA) and Herald Ministries respectively - became prominent internationally in the prayer movement. The Newlands Rugby Stadium event of 23 March 2001 spread to all parts of the continent and ultimately led to the Global Day of Prayer in 2005. A former exile, who had been impacted during his stay in Holland to return to his spiritual roots, formed a network with missionaries from different agencies who had worked in other countries. Working together as Friends from Abroad, it started formally in February 2007. The name was taken from a defunct group in Coventry in the UK, of which OM’s Theo Dennis had been a co-worker in the 1980s. The Homeless as a Potential for missionary Recruitment Similarly, the homeless represent a potential for missionary recruitment. Some of these hapless people have landed on the street through very unfortunate circumstances. We would possibly be quite surprised what potential could come out when some of these people are guided towards a full committment to the Lord Jesus, after the healing of their emotional and other hurts. Pastor Willy Martheze, a qualified welder from Mitchells Plain, was still a vagrant when he was initially ministered to by Pastor Gay, a Scottish missionary. Humorously he would recollect how he had been such a good-for-nothing alcoholic. His own mother deemed it appropriate to send the police and the gangsters after him. ‘But Jesus found me first!’ he averred. Obedient to God’s voice when he saw a vagrant, Pastor Willy Martheze followed a call to minister full-time to homeless people, with the intention of bringing Gospel healing to these people. He constantly aims to empower them to return to the homes they had left. At the District Six fellowship at the Azaad Youth Centre, the congregants can clean themselves before the late Sunday afternoon service and get a plate of food afterwards. One of Pastor Willy Martheze’s ‘clients’ gave him the special testimony: ‘you are the only church where the pastor is happy when the members leave’. His main purpose is not only to minister to them with the Gospel, but also to empower them to return to their homes. At ‘the Ark’ in Cape Town, a place where more than a thousand homeless people have found a refuge, at least one of the former ‘bergies’ (vagrants) could already be given responsibility. In another project, Loaves and Fishes, a few churches work together to offer more than only shelter to the destitute. We would do well to consider that Jesus also did not have a place to lay his head (Matthew 8:20). At any rate, through their experience of suffering injustice and being prepared to take difficulties in their stride, the refugees and homeless have a head-start. However, this does not absolve our society in general, and the church in particular, from the responsibility to put much effort into reducing or even eliminating living conditions which are conducive to the production of the next generation of street children. (I believe however, that it should happen much more low-key than at present. The praise-worthy efforts of former President Mandela may turn out to become counter-productive, encouraging young children to take to the streets for the flimsiest of reasons.) The challenge is there however, to treat these unfortunate people not first and foremost as criminals, drug addicts, drunkards and prostitutes, but as individuals for whom our Lord bled and died. At least some of these street children and other vagrants could be rehabilitated and taught life skills, farming or other uplifting activities. Food for Thought: Apart from giving vagrants/street children bread or money at the door, have you, has your church attempted anything constructive about the matter? Have you ever tried to start up a conversation with one of the vagrants? How can we serve the refugees, who still struggle to find their feet, those who returned from abroad and those who have come from other countries? Who can match the radicality of Jesus in choosing Judas, a thief, to handle the purse of the group? And some Ideas: Aim to train/recruit evangelists and missionaries from refu­gees, vagrants and street children. Pray that God might lead you to those whom He has already prepared through His Spirit. Examine what can be done straight away and what could be achieved on the longer term. Set some goals, including a time frame within which you would like to meet those goals. 13. Jesus disregarded societal Status: A Nudge towards imaginative Initiatives! Jesus was an expert in utilizing the low and despised for His service. Even before His birth, Mary praised God in her ‘Magnificat’ that He ‘took notice of His lowly servant girl’ (Luke 2:48). This would be repeated over and over again in the lifetime of Jesus. Born from extremely poor parents, His birth was first heralded to and relayed by the despised shep­herds. He chose the commonly resented fisher­men and one from the ranks of the hated collaborating tax-collectors as His first dis­ciples. The Lord impacted the formerly demon-possessed Mary Magdalene (Luke 8:2) deeply, as well as a woman with doubtful morals from the ranks of the most des­pised group, the Samaritans (John 4). According to the Gospel of John these two were respectively the first evangelist of His resurrection (John 20) and the first witness to someone from an ‘un­reached people group.’ The only condition for divine service seems to be that men and women surrender and dedicate their lives to His service. Jesus himself was regarded as a very unlikely candi­date to be the Messiah, coming from the remote rural backwater nest Nazareth (John 1:46), that cannot even be found on ancient maps. Biblical Misfits used by God The Hebrew Scriptures are full of examples of how God used despised/rejected people. Joseph was initially rejected by his brothers; Moses was a fugitive and murderer when he was called by God. Ehud stemmed not only from the minute tribe of Benjamin, but he was also left-handed to boot. But he was raised by God to be a deliverer of his people, as was Gideon who suffered from a serious inferiority complex (respectively in Judges 3 and 6). Gideon had an inferiority complex needing a ‘fleece’ in two different ways for reassurance. Jephtha, a prominent leader during the time when Israel was ruled by the judges, was the despised bastard son of a prosti­tute and initially rejected (Judges 11:1+2). Saul, the first King of Israel, came from the weakest tribe and the smallest family in the tribe (1 Samuel 10:21). Eli, the priest, was wise to discern that Samuel could be raised to become a divine tool already as a boy and David, the shepherd boy, was clearly initially overlooked as a future king of Israel. God had to teach Samuel in the process not to look at the outer looks and size, that God looks at the heart (1 Samuel 16:1-12) when David was clearly regarded as an outsider of the family at first and over­looked to become the future King of Israel. At a time when females counted for nothing, Deborah led the Israelite army (Judges 4 and 5). What distinguished the rejected and despised ones was their availability for God. Rahab and Ruth are specially mentioned in the lineage of Jesus, although they were originally a pagan prostitute and a despised Moabite respectively (Matthew 1:5). Rahab, the prostitute, is a very special case. She must have had special revelation to declare to the spies: ‘I know that Yahweh has given you the land’ (Joshua 2:8) and in Joshua 2:11 ‘Yahweh, your God is God in heaven above and on the earth’ ... To use scarlet, the dye which was known for colouring flax, was known for its durability, a colour of permanence, was prophetic. A piece of scarlet cloth that turned white on the Day of Atonement gave a similar prophetic message. Centuries later the prophet Isaiah (1:18) would use that image for the divine cleansing and forgiving of sins. No sin is too big for Him to forgive!. Paul refers to his own unimpressive stature and lack of luster in his public speaking (2 Corinthians 10:10). In His divine wisdom God deemed it fit to save those who believed through the preaching of the Cross, that was being regarded in the world as stupidity (1 Corinthians 1:21). Furthermore, Paul also stated clearly not only ‘when I am weak, I am strong’ (2 Corinthians 12:10), but also that the foolishness of the Cross is actually God’s wisdom (1 Corinthians 1:18). It looks as if this has generally been forgotten or overlooked. The jet-setting big names are as a rule some of the eloquent sought after speakers. Jesus and Paul display the nature of God on this issue. The Lord entered Jerusalem on an inexperienced colt, the foal of a donkey – not on a horse or a camel, the more fancied transport animals of the day. Even today the animal is more known because of its obstinacy and stupidity than in any other way. It is remarkable that God seems to have a special place for young people who are ready to go all out for him. In fact, it has been generally overlooked that Jesus drove out the religious establishment – with animals and all – so that there could be place for despised, for those coming from the nations,135the lame, the blind and the children Matthew 21:14. All too often the religious church people have to be driven away so that God can be worshiped in spirit and in truth. A big biblical 'rational' Factor - Faith Like a golden thread through the Holy Scriptures there is faith in Yahweh as the big 'rational' factor. The deeds of God all too often defy all rational explanation. To trust God for off-spring when you are 100 years old required exceptional faith. Abraham was also willing and obedient thereafter to sacrifice his 'one and only' son (Genesis 22;1), the one of promise as opposed to the one of compromise. Moses, in hitting a rock or Gideon, who had to send away just under thirty two thousands and keep only 300 men to fight the Midiates would not be able to say: My won hand has saved me (Judges 6:2). Similarly, the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17) was another personality who was required to do a completely irrational thing in faith. Steps of faith have also in the Bible resulted in various options including desperation or blind obedience, like when the disciples had to throw out the net on the other side, after fishing in vain the whole night, but obeying on the rhema of the Master (Luke 5). The 18th century Moravians were masters in taking leaps of faith or shall we rather say be obedient to death? It was customary for the early Herrnhut missionaries to take their coffins to the mission field. Many of them died there. In the case of the pioneerikng work on the Carribean island St Croix no less than 22 persons died in the space of two years (Lewis, 1962:82). Comenius’s Vision on the use of 'misfits' Comenius was probably one of the very few who had a vision for the spreading of the Gospel to ‘misfits’. Because he was driven by the idea of Pansophia – an all encompassing wisdom – he taught that the task of the church is to bring all people to unity and wholeness, to direct everybody to the one God, Yahweh. But what about blind, deaf, dumb and those with other disabilities? The answer of Comenius: ‘only non-human beings have no part in this guidance towards God’ (Van der Linde, 1979:118). Naturally, Comenius’ progressive ideas clashed with notions about so-called ‘inferior races’ that were spread, sadly also from the precincts of the church.136 Zinzendorf followed in these footsteps. The Negroes had been regarded widely as a people doomed to slavery. The Moravian missionary enterprise shows that they are people who are graced by God and called to high honour as Christians. (Zinzendorf himself was however still very much a child of his day in this regard.137) The Count however fully understood the radicalism of the Gospel with regard to the misfits of society. Gottlieb Israel was sent to the West Indies in 1740 although he was half lame, only able to use one leg fully. The outreach of the Moravians was very much directed at those who would normally not hear the Gospel. Thus they were the pioneers for outreach to the ‘Hottentotten’ (Khoi), who were called the ‘Wilden’, regarded as game who could be shot without fear of punishment in the 18th century. Likewise, the primitive Eskimo’s and North American Indians belonged to their early missionary targets. In more recent years Brother Andrew was driven by the question of who would bring the Gospel to Communists and terrorists. Chuck Smith was challenged by the same token to reach out to the hippies of the late 1960s, who later became the alternative Jesus People. Floyd and Sally McClung followed that generation on the drug trail, ministering in Nepal and Afghanistan as well as to the misfits of the red-light district of Amsterdam. In the later case they actually went to live among them. The Role of Children in the Herrnhut Revival Zinzendorf recognized like few, if any, before him how strategic it was how children and young people have been used since biblical times. Isaac and Joseph had God’s hand on their lives since boyhood. Moses and his siblings were evidently well trained. Every Sunday school child knows the story of the birth and dedication of Samuel to the service of the Lord as a boy, while the unknown girl in the service of the high-ranking soldier Syrian Naaman possibly does not belong to Sunday school repertoire. But almost every Jewish child will have heard of young Esther’s commitment and willingness to put her life on the line to save her people. That the revival amongst the children started in the girls’ hostel of Berthelsdorf is not so surprising when one considers how Count Zinzendorf prepared it through prayer. After a visit there he complained to his wife that the nine girls there were so shallow. They would listen equally to tales of Essop than to stories about Jesus (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:28). He cried to the Lord on their behalf intensely. When he subsequently used a hymn about Jesus who can change hardened hearts on 26 May 1727, the Holy Spirit touched them. The next day he also sent to them Mr Klumpe, a faithful teacher, to guide them. Anna Nitschmann and Susanna Kühnel, an eleven-year-old, were one of four young girls who were revived on 17 August 1727. That must be regarded as a part of the general revival. Through the testimony of Susanna Kühnel more girls came to the Lord in the days hereafter. Mr Klumpe was also impacted. His witness contributed significantly, so that on 18 August all the girls in the hostel of Berthelsdorf prayed throughout the night (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:29). The Count joined them for prayer on Hutberg, the nearby hill top. By 23 August the revival had also spilled over to the boys, leading to the beginning of the famous 24/7 prayer that started on 27 August 1727 with 48 believers. On 29 August the girls were having a prayer meeting on Hutberg from 10 p.m. until 1 a.m. that could be heard in the town, while eight to ten boys were in prayer at another location. In 1728, long before the actual mission work started out from Herrnhut, the young men were busy with training as ap­pren­tices and with study in preparation for mission service. Two years later also the single sisters followed suit, assembling in a building. For Example Anna Nitschmann When the time had come to select a "chief eldress" for the women in the bustling community of 18th century Moravians at Herrnhut, four names were put on slips of paper. Quite surprisingly there was also the name of Anna Nitschmann. Only 14 years old, she had already demonstrated leadership among the girls and the single women. They gathered together as usual for the drawing of lots that was used to discern the leading of God. But she was so young! Had there been a mistake in this case? Count Zinzendorf strongly advised Anna to refuse the appointment. But the young peasant girl respectfully reminded the nobleman that she was accepting the appointment as from the Lord. Just as the surprising choice of the shepherd-boy David proved decisive for Israel, so the choice of young Anna would be for the Moravians. Six weeks after this election, Anna led 18 of the "single sisters" to devote themselves so thoroughly to Christ that even marriage would take second place. This commitment was a major one, signalling a serious desire to serve the Lord. This "single sisters" group would grow over the following decades, providing a stream of courageous missionaries. Later, Anna became part of the “Pilgrim Church” a group of spiritual warriors ready to go anywhere to spread the name of Christ. Her missions travels took her to numerous countries, also to America, where she helped in the founding of Bethlehem and Nazareth, Pennsylvania. She also ministered effectively among various Indian groups. In an era when women were not looked upon as hymn writers, Anna Nitschmann wrote more than 30 hymns that were published in the Moravians’ German hymnal. Anna twice refused offers for marriage. But a year after Count Zinzendorf's wife died, he asked Anna to marry him and she agreed. She was a commoner and he a noble, but within the Herrnhut community all were equals. They got married in June, 1757. Utilizing the Zeal of young People When Paul and Barnabas set out on their first missionary journey, they took the inexperienced John Mark along as their assistant (Acts 12:25, 13:5). Later Barnabas took young John Mark as his partner in mission work. This could have been just the encouragement Paul needed – he had a tiff with John Mark on their first trip - to utilize the gifts of the young Timothy, entrusting to him leadership responsibilities. Zinzendorf and the Herrnhut fellowship were pioneers in utilizing the energy and zeal of young people. Even before some of them came to Herrnhut, the youthful believers were fearlessly involved in the spreading of the gospel. The 18-year-old David Nitschmann, one of the clan that would impact Herrnhut intensely in the next few years, went around the Moravian environs of Kunwald with others from his age, speaking about what they had experienced, spreading the fire in this way. Anna Nitschmann was given the leadership over the single sisters although she had just turned fifteen (Weinlick, 1956:84). Eighteen single ladies decided under her leadership to live solely for the Lord. In 1731 Martin Linner, a seventeen-year-old, became the ‘Älteste’ - the Elder - for the bigger boys. Before Melchior Nitschmann was elected as one of the first four chief elders of the church, Zinzendorf had reservations. The bare-footed youngster was not even known at all to the Count, but he evidently had the trust of the congregants. Zinzendorf was humble enough to be the first to kiss his hand von ganzem Herzen (wholeheartedly) when he met him for the first time in his life (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:95). In 1728 Melchior Nitschmann went to Moravia with Georg Schmidt where they were arrested as they were fellowshipping with believers. Melchior died in prison the next year. Martin Linner, who had proved himself as very capable when he was an Elder of the single men at the age of seventeen, became one of the four chief Elders, although he was still in his twenties. When the Herrnhut fellowship decided to choose only one chief Elder in 1730, he was chosen. In spite of his lack of formal education and experience, he impressed many. Zinzendorf reported: ‘I was ashamed like a little dog that I could not do it like him when I saw how the dear Linner preached to the Count of Lichtenstein in such godly simplicity. Never have I seen the Count more patiently and at ease as when he sat there listening to Linner. He is normally very much prejudiced against us’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:97). To be on the same level as the poor brethren, Linner would never sleep in a bed. In spite of being quite sickly, he slept on the floor throughout the year, winter or summer. On 21 February 1733 he died. Still in their twenties, Tobias Leopold and Leonhard Dober were ready to go to St Thomas as the very first missionaries. Leupold was however turned down by the lot. Two years later Leupold led a team of fourteen brothers and four sisters to the neighbouring island of St. Croix, only to die there half a year later. Leonhard Dober, who was not much older, was recalled from St Thomas to be the chief elder after the sudden death of Martin Linner, arriving in Herrnhut in February 1735. Matthias Stach led the pioneering missionary outreach to Greenland when he was only nineteen years old, doing it so effectively that the Moravians had great liberty to hand the work there over to the Lutheran Church. Georg Israel, a disabled tailor, who survived a shipwreck in 1740, was given leadership responsibility for the work on the island St Croix where he died three years later, only 27 years old. David Nitschmann, the carpenter, Dober’s eventual partner to St Thomas, spied the land, returning to Herrnhut to report what it was like. He was inducted as the first Bishop of the Moravians on 13 March 1735 before he was forty years old. After passing a theological examination in Stralsund, Count Zinzendorf became an ordained Lutheran minister in Tübingen. He was inducted as Bishop in 1737, a mere 37 years old. The phenomenal growth of Youth with a Mission, Operation Mobiliz­ation and many mission agencies of modern times like All Nations International can be attributed to their willingness and ability to challenge and harness young people for mission work, albeit that mistakes have sometimes been made due to inexperience. God continues with a Remnant An interesting scriptural feature is how God continues with a remnant. Many left Egypt, but only a portion of them entered the Promised Land. God preferred to use a small band with Gideon so that it would be absolutely clear whose victory it was. Gideon started with 32,000 potential warriors. God sovereignly deemed it fit to use only 300 from them, possibly not even the biggest, the strongest or the most experienced amongst them. The tribe of Benjamin had almost been annihilated in an act of revenge (Judges 20) when Saul was taken from the smallest family of the diminutive tribe - to become the first king. This was definitely not an act of God hitting back after the Israelites had rejected Him (2 Samuel 8). By contrast, when the Israelites looked completely forgotten by God, a pagan ruler, King Cyrus, was used to bring them back to the Promised Land after the lengthy exile. In the ‘New Testament’ we find the same principle. After the persecu­tion of the Christians in Jerusalem, the apostles remained there as a remnant. A minute group of believers started in Antioch. Nevertheless, it is clear that the Antioch Christians did not seek their identity in the past of Israel. They understood themselves to be a link to the future; ‘they were not the heralds of a reborn Israel, but the advance guard to a new humanity’ (Bosch, 1990:10f). About thefellowship in Antioch, Bosch (1990:9) said: ‘The church... was indeed remarkably innovating...’ There was no church apartheid. Jews and ‘heathen’ ate together, which was unheard of, especially in the light of the fact that the Gentile believers had not been circumcised. The role for the Church in Africa can be derived from the Antioch model. Those believers who hailed from Libya (Acts 2:10) and Cyprus were the movers (The Jews who were scattered by the persecution when Stephen was martyred, were still too preoccupied with the past.) The North Africans and Mediterranean island believers shared the Good News also with the Greeks, not only to Jews (Acts 11:19f). The Hidden Seed revived again! A comparative event in Church History is the Unitas Fratrum, the Church of the Brethren, that was almost annihilated in Bohemia and Moravia. The last Bishop of this church, Jan Amos Comenius, appropri­ately referred to them as the ‘Hidden Seed’, which was then of course revived in Herrnhut on the estate of Count Zinzen­dorf. The Count evidently understood this principle himself, prepared to see the Moravian Church die rather than compromise biblical principles. In fact, he wrote a song which is still sung in Moravian churches all over the world: ‘Herrnhut darf nicht länger stehen...’ The village should not stay intact, unless God’s works would continue to proceed from there. In fact, this was the gist of Zinzendorf’s sermon already in May 1722 at the site of a school intended for the nobility: if God’s honour would not be served by it, the Almighty should rather ‘destroy it or devour it with fire from on high’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:20). It is quite special that God used the prayer tower of Herrnhut to usher in a new prayer initiative at the end of the 20th century (Goll, 1997:17ff). An interesting case was the first South African missionary, Georg Schmidt, who was initially sent to the Cape ‘on probation’ as punishment.138 The Word that he had preached before he was sent home by the Cape authorities was proof of the inherent power of the good seed after fifty years139 (Steinberg et al, 1960:25). When the three new missionaries came to Baviaanskloof (Genadendal) in 1992 where Schmidt had ministered after almost 50 years, they found the equivalent of a little fellowship led by the aged Magdalena, one of Schmidt’s five converts. All revivals through the centuries can be attributed to the faithful prayers of believers behind the scenes. In the early decades of the 20th century C.T. Studd, the founder of WEC International, coined the term ‘prayer batteries’. The small prayer cells were intended to prepare the ground for missionaries to penetrate people groups that have not yet been reached with the Gospel. The Moravians of Herrnhut in the 18th and 19th centuries taught the world how the agonising in prayer for the lost is valuable Gospel seed. The seed sown by them from their prayer tower germinated once again in 1993 when a group of American prayer warriors under the leadership of Jim Goll visited the site. It is special that the group included a native from St Thomas, the island from where the slave Anton hailed. (Anton had been used by God to ignite the missionary move from Herrnhut in 1732.) The group around Jim Goll, which had a Pentecostal experience at the tower at Herrnhut in February 1993, was possibly the instrument God used to start off the prayer watch movement that swept around the globe in the late 1990s. Another variation of the ‘hidden seed’ germinating was the Global Day of Prayer of May 15 in 2005, which started with the 7-day initiative a year earlier in the Moravian Hill Church of District Six in Cape Town.140 Harvest Vision We should pray to get a harvest vision, to have our eyes opened to see the strategic people in whose hearts God has already planted the seed of the Gospel. Let’s pray to be led to those Muslims and Jews who will invite their family and friends to come and see whether Jesus is not perhaps the Korban, the sacrifice, the true Lamb of God. We may take for granted without any shadow of doubt that it is on God’s heart to let the Jews discover that the one whom their ancestors had pierced on Calvary, is really their Messiah. Perhaps someone from the ranks of these people groups who is despised and rejected - for example a gangster, drug lord or prostitute - is exactly the one God wants to use to make the others spiritually hungry, thirsty and inquisitive. When people like the unnamed Samaritan woman of John 4 are drastically changed, it could spawn a people movement from the most resistant people groups in terms of the Gospel. After seeing the movie The Passion of the Christ, many Muslims became ready to accept that Jesus did in fact die on the Cross of Calvary. The harvest from the descendants of Ishmael which is alluded to in Isaiah 60:6, 7 started to take shape. The prophetic dimensions of Isaiah 19:23-25, which received its contours with the completion of the highway between Baghdad and Cairo still look very unlikely, but how quickly things can change, the world witnessed after the crashing of the Berlin wall in 1989. The Arab spring of 2011 ushered in a significant exodus from Islam. The Syrian refugee crisis, ignited by the ISIS atrocities of the last months, resulted n many turning to Christ in unprecedented numbers. There is a new urgency to pray to the Lord of the harvest to send workers to the Middle East … or Europe. There are not many cases known of churches, which actually disbanded because they have discovered that they had left the basis of the Gospel teaching, on which they had been founded. This is an important difference to churches, which closed down their buildings because of the aging of their members.141 The church universal would greatly benefit if some churches would take the courage to close down rather than prod on in traditionalism with a greatly reduced membership. A good compromise in such cases could be the merging of churches.142 Dumping the polished Society Zinzendorf brought the Moravian church at Herrnhut to dump the indifferent eighteenth century Christianity and the polite society. He taught: it was the Lamb and the Blood that bring deliverance to the poor and refuge to the outcast. In 18th century Herrnhut none of rank, wealth, special learning or age was a special recommendation. It was spiritual maturity that mattered. Thus Mordelt, a tailor and Gottfried Hahn, a gardener, were respectively made a teacher and an overseer (Lewis, 1962:49). Anna Nitschmann was given the leadership over the single women when she was only fifteen (Weinlick, 1956:84). It looks as if churches have generally ignored these biblical principles. Worldly standards are still used by and large in the appointment of workers. The prejudice and fear of other church people unfortunately obviously often carry more weight in such decisions. Somehow it remains a mystery why churches - after almost 2000 years - have not acknowledged generally that God seems to ‘favour’ using those who are despised by their respective societies. By contrast, Jesus was very critical of the high society of religious life. He exposed the ulterior motives of Pharisees and Scribes in no uncertain way. However, if a ‘clergyman’ was genuinely converted like the Pharisee Saul of Tarsus, someone who was originally so full of misguided zeal to root out what he regarded as the heretics of his time, then such a person can be used par excellence. As a former scholar of the famous Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), his intellectual and spiritual capability was fully used by the Lord after they had been put under His authority. On the Look-out for modern Sauls There may be other modern ‘Sauls’, for example some who genuinely still believe that Muhammad is the greatest prophet, whose spiritual eyes need be opened to the fact that Jesus died on the Cross; that He is the Lamb of God slain for our sins. Christians in South Africa - a country with poverty-stricken masses and an abundance of alcoholics and drug addicts of all races, could do the Church in other parts of the world a great service. We should pray to be given grace to look at these groups of people with the compassionate eyes of Jesus. He saw potential evangelists and missionaries in shepherds, fishermen and prostitutes, the outcasts of His society. In this way the Capetonian suburbs of Woodstock and Salt River, which have become infected with drug addiction and prostitution, could yet become pace setters for missionaries to the underworld. In the Cape townships there are already a few pastors and church leaders who had been gangsters and drug addicts, yes also ex-Muslims. But their recruitment as missionaries must still get off the ground. Prisons have been impacted in the countryside, such as at the youth prison near Wellington, where young inmates voluntarily started to attend Bible studies. And what about the South African clergymen who are still fighting so-called heresies of non-racialism, who are still not prepared to recognize that apartheid is much more than only a heresy, that it is demonic? (One of the names of satan is diabolos, which could be translated as separator.) What could still emanate from many right-wing Afrikaans-speaking churches if the ‘scales’ fall from their eyes? In fact, so much has already happened in this regard. Thus a group of intercessors from Heidelberg (Gauteng) - once the bastion of the AWB - came to Cape Town in October 1997, where they joined in prayer for new spiritual life in Bo-Kaap and District Six. We should not write off anybody. Jesus showed us the way: love and compas­sion to all and sun­dry is required! Selection Criteria for Missionaries During the training and preparation of missionary candidates it should have become clear that these believers are ‘hospitable, not addicted to alcohol and free from the love of money’ (1 Timothy 3:12-13). The first Christians set an interesting example to appoint Greeks predominantly as deacons, after there had been accusations and complaints that the Greek widows had been discriminated against (Acts 6:1-7). The use of people from the ilk of the Samaritan woman of John 4 - as evangelists and missionaries - does not imply however that other selection criteria should be neglected. It merely means that we should shed our own prejudice with regard to certain people groups, professions and social standing. In the appointment of missionaries (and clergy!), spiritual norms should be applied. Biblically, the major criterion should be whether men and women have been genuinely converted to the Lord and called by Him into His service. South Africa has started to set an example by dropping the usual educational admission standards for Bible School training in the case of more mature candidates. Considering the discriminatory legacy of the past in the field of education, many Bible Colleges have already started implementing this policy. Biblical criteria like a good reputation, being spirit-filled and having wisdom (see Acts 6:3) may however not be set aside in the appointment of anybody. The Moravians of Herrnhut practised this principle: the first bishop to be elected was a non-theologian, the carpenter Nitschmann. The disdain and arrogance with which mainline churches look to the African Independent Churches in this regard needs urgent revision! (This may however not be interpreted as support for despotism displayed by some of those self-appointed bishops.) Social Reform as a Result of Revival The mission-minded congregation of Herrnhut paved the way for the optimal use of the despised, for example (ex-)prisoners. When one of them was cast in prison (for spreading the Gospel), it caused great joy that they were found worthy to suffer for His sake. Georg Schmidt, the first missionary to South Africa, who came to Genadendal in 1737, had been imprisoned before he came to South Africa because of His faith. Although it was official Moravian policy to refrain from direct political involvement, their treatment of slaves and their identification with the downtrodden challenged slavery and other practices of the 18th century from the beginning of the missionary ventures in the West Indies. Leonhard Dober consciously resigned his work as a steward to live among the slaves. This was followed by the marriage of Matthäus Freundlich to the mulatto Rebbecca in May 1738. Accepting the West African-born mulatto Christian Protten not only into membership but also sending him out as a missionary to the Gold Coast was another unprecedented move which challenged the society of their day An indirect result of the revival, which swept throughout England due to the work of the Wesley brothers and George Whitefield, was various social reforms. They were all deeply influenced by the Moravians, when they looked into the putrid conditions in the British prisons. Evangelicals were at the fore-front of social reform at a time when the industrial revolution caused all sorts of misery. William Wilberforce, an evangelical parliamentarian - was influenced by the unorthodox missionary Dr Philip, who had returned to England after a stint in South Africa where he saw the results of slavery. Wilberforce was instrumental in the abolition of slavery when Britain took the lead in cleaning the world from this scourge.143 Early in the previous century the courageous intervention of the lady missionary Gladys Aylworth in China, driven by her love for the Lord, stopped a major revolt of prisoners when she spoke to a former teacher, who had been imprisoned. She heard from this prisoner that the rebellious men needed work more than anything else. South African Church and mission Institutions as the advance Guard? South African church and mission institutions could become the advance guard so that genuinely changed ex-prisoners get responsibility in state services (such as prisons) and converted prostitutes in the social ser­vices. A necessary and logical condition is that they are tested and tried to see if they are equal to the task. After all, Jesus was also arrested; Paul, Joseph and so many other bibli­cal figures were prisoners somewhere along the line. Luckily, in South Africa this is not an issue anymore. What is still problem­atic in the new set-up is that a role in the ‘struggle’ seems to have become a norm for appointment or promotion. There is a real danger that more former anti-apart­heid warriors may become ‘gravy train’ (gravy aeroplane?) passengers,144 unless they are thoroughly converted to committed service for the Lord. The distinction made between criminals and political prisoners should not be exaggerated. In the former case, it cannot always be taken for granted that their credentials are above board, i.e. that their remorse is genuine. But they should nevertheless be given a genuine second chance through pro­grammes of rehabili­ta­tion. South Africa has some strange ‘advantage’ with extenuat­ing circumstances in this regard. It is known now that prostitu­tion and homosexuality were nur­tured by the conditions in the Black hostels of the apartheid society and that thousands of ex-prisoners would never have been jailed in a normal non-racial set-up. I do not see any reason why converted ex-prisoners of the apartheid regime, any former prisoners for that matter, could not become missionaries in other coun­tries. We have already referred (p.??) to missionaries coming forth from the work of WEC among drug addicts in Spain.145 Also the work of Jacky Pullinger in Hong Kong comes to mind when the lives of many drug addicts were changed through the liberating power of the Gospel.146 Of course, the condition should once again be that any prospective missionary should have come to a personal faith in Jesus and that he/she has been clearly called to missionary service. A time of probation is taken for granted of course, just like for other missionary candidates. A former prisoner at Pollsmoor prison, Jonathan Clayton, became a pastor with a special concern for prisoners. His conversion was the fruit of the prayers of his family and friends including Jenny Adams, an Africa Evangelical Fellowship missionary, who later became his wife. Clayton attended the Baptist Seminary after his release. He started to minister in Pollsmoor prison on Saturday mornings while he was still a theological student. Members of the Strandfontein Baptist Church, the home congregation of his wife, assisted him. In 1999 Clayton became a prison chaplain. Another special ‘trophy of divine Grace’ is Marge Ballin, a former ‘Flower child’ who had not not only been a victim of abuse and become a later participant in all sorts of vice – along with so many hippies of the late 1960s. She narrated her story in A Rose, a Pearl and a Warrior (Iner Outreach Ministries, 2015) The Lord’s Treatment of Traditions I would like to draw attention - with regard to the Lord’s revol­utionary life style - to His treatment of traditions. The love of God and the love of the neighbour was to Him the supreme criterion for any custom. We note how Jesus assessed the age-old customs in Mark 7:1-23. One could say that He protested in the best sense of the word.147 On the one hand He opposed old anti­quated traditions, especially when they were opposing God’s supreme law of love. On the other hand, Jesus gave a new content to customs which had lost their initial purpose. Sometimes traditions have to be radically turned upside-down, especially if they hinder the general law of love. (Compare Matthew 5:21-48, for example "You have heard... But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.") Jesus healed people on the Sabbath, knowing full well that he was treading dangerous ground according to the prevalent custom. Habits and traditions should be constantly tested by Scripture. At a time when females were not even supposed to be seen in public with men, Jesus gave dignity to prostitutes and demon-pos­sessed women. A former demon-possessed Gadarene was delivered to become an evangelist in Decapolis, a region known by its ten 'cities'. Herrnhut-Moravian Innovations From its early beginnings the Herrnhut-Berthelsdorf experiment was innovative. The young pastor Johann Rothe was still a private tutor of Baron de Schweinitz of Löbbau and a theological student when he heard from a Bohemian refugee, Christian David, that Count Zinzendorf was about to appoint a faithful pastor on the estate he had bought and that the evangelical refugees might find the asylum there which they had so long desired. Before long Pastor Rothe was the Lutheran minister of the village Berthelsdorf: He practised a revolutionary mode of worship which turned out to be a great attraction The preaching was followed by a general conversation between the pastor and his hearers (Langton, 1956:68). In a similar way a student church in Pretoria applies an adaptation of this practice with modern technology. The church members there send their comments and questions via an SMS via their mobile phones during the sermon. The pastor would then reply at the end of his prepared sermon. An innovation introduced by Cops for Christ a few years ago when prayer points were sent via the mobile phone SMS, has become common practice for prayer chains. Count Zinzendorf grasped the revolutionary challenges of our Lord’s teaching very well. He showed little respect for whatever a nobleman was supposed to do and what not. Earlier we have seen how he had no qualms whatsoever to ordain Georg Schmidt by letter from Herrnhut, because this was the most practical way to clear the way for the baptism of new believers at the Cape. It seems that the Herrnhut Moravians were all but dogmatic. They only wanted to be guided by the Word, neither allowing general church custom to prescribe to them nor were they dictated to by the time in which they were living. It is typical that Bishop Spangenberg quotes Scrip­ture for the unor­thodox or­dination by letter. Thus Scrip­tures (1 Corinthians 5:3-5; 2 Corinthians 2:10; Colossians 2:5; 2 Thessalonians 3:18) guided them for the written ordination of Friedrich Martin in St Thomas, which became the precedent for the ordination of Georg Schmidt in South Africa (Spangenberg, 1971:1033). When Georg Schmidt had to baptize his first converts, he simply did it in a river, perhaps knowing full well that it could cause a furore in the Church at the Cape. Herrnhut innovations which differed with customary Church practice like the Cup of the Covenant and Love Feasts, had their origins in Scripture. The Moravians had the courage to differ with society because their stand was based on the Word. But it was not their intention to provoke unnecessarily. In the modern era Dr Billy Graham and his team can be reckoned to the great innovators. Already in 1970 the association utilized the latest advances of satellite technology to relay the evangelist’s messages from the German city of Dortmund in Westphalia to other European cities simultaneously. The latest technology of the time was also put to good use so that by the year 2000 continued connection and follow-up was accomplished with the more than 10,000 widely scattered evangelists who had attended Amsterdam 2000. Cape Town was the recipient and source of state of the art Internet technology in 2010 when people could be kept abreast with the event from around the world around the clock. Governernment intervention to prevent Chinese participants to attend marred the unprecented participation of leaders from every corner of the earth. Revolutionary Challenges To give permission for Friedrich Martin to marry Matthäus Freundlich to the mulatto Rebecca on 4 May 1738 was too radical for their day and age. She had been one of the best workers in the new congregation of St Thomas, a devout Christian. Friedrich Martin had no scruples to help his colleague into matrimony, against the prevalent laws and customs. She was not a slave, had a fair education and had endeared herself to the people by her skill in speaking to her sisters of the faith in spiritual matters. This was a very strategic missionary move, as the missionaries thus clearly identified with the despised slaves, while gaining a worker among the females at the same time and preventing isolation of the missionaries. The wily White planters, who were known to father children with slave women, were enraged but happy to have found a stick with which they could beat the missionaries. The latter had been a thorn in their flesh from the beginning of their ministry. For this purpose the colonists persuaded Pastor Borm of the Danish Reformed Church to hand in a series of complaints against the Brethren. He contended that Friedrich Martin was not properly ordained, because the ordination had not yet been confirmed by the King of Denmark. The end of an intricate story was that the missionary was forbidden to perform any church rites on pain of imprisonment. The Moravian missionary refused to comply. Not less radical was the decision of Friedrich Martin to acquire a plantation with the assistance of their friend Lorenz Carstens, after some planter had been deported. As part of the ‘inventory’ of the plantation there were nine slaves of whom three could still work. The three Moravian workers, Friedrich Martin and the Freundlich couple, were all set to go and live among the slaves. That was nothing less than sensational. On 25 July 1738 an equally sensational event followed. Friedrich Martin and the newly wedded couple were taken away to be imprisoned in the local fort, accompanied by many Negro believers as they sang hymns of faith. They were freed after Count Zinzendorf in person came to the island, landing there on 29 January 1739. He had come to the Caribbean, after accusations had been aired that he was sending others to die in the unhealthy tropical conditions while he basked in comfort in Europe. Other revolutionary Stuff Just like Jesus, who gave women a new dignity, Herrnhut took a lead in this respect. Zinzendorf and the Moravians ... ‘were the first to give regular encourage­ment and recognition to women as hymn writers’ (Lewis, 1962:163). The Count had a high regard of worship, but he was averse to a rigid form.148 Zinzendorf had already seen in worship ‘the purest and most effective address of man to God, and the purest and most effective evangelism towards man’ (Lewis, 1962:163). The liberal and progressive spirit which Zinzendorf radiated, inspired many innovations in education. An American scholar noted that ‘many twentieth-century educa­tional programmes were inaugurated in eighteenth-century Moravian schools’ (cited in Lewis, 1962:174). Long before children’s Bibles became common, Zinzendorf arranged a shortened edition for them. And when study Bibles and the like were still unknown, he produced in Ebersdorf at the Moravian press an edition of the Bible with prefaces and summaries at a price within the reach of the poor. South Africa could pave the way in getting rid of ques­tion­able customs in church and society, by testing it scrupu­lously to Scripture and by giving new content to worn out traditions. One way could be to heed advice given in 1959. Gerdener (1959:94) wrote: ‘We dare not cleave to the idea that the Gospel should always be presented in the same way.’ A beginning has already been made with alter­native forms of presenting the Gospel, like drama and dancing. The use of audio-visuals is not taboo any more, even though they are still fairly rarely used. However, Sunday evening ser­vices, in stead of being a fertile soil for innovation and experimenta­tion, by and large spread an odour of death; stag­nation and habit is still the order of the day. A joint Venture of another Sort This country has a wonderful chance to make a new start with unconventional means, for example by a combination of traditional African society and modern Western life-style and using it for the furtherance of the Gospel. This could not only be used on African soil, but it could perhaps also be exported as a ‘joint venture’ to secular­ized Europe and other continents where imaginative ways and means to spread the Gospel are being sought. The gospels (as well as Paul, the apostle) stressed that the strength of the believer is his weakness (for example 2 Corinthians 12:9-10). Jesus demonstrated his inner strength by willingly allowing God to fulfill His purpose, even though it led to His death on the Cross (Matthew 26:39,42). Chris­tians should definitely attempt to give to the notion ‘small is beauti­ful’ a new dimension. Count Zinzendorf was already a pioneer in this regard. Referring to his church, he included in one of His prayer litanies the words "Save us from an unholy growth." Through stringent measures of scrutiny and also by using the lot, potential new members were kept out. Zin­zendorf preferred Christians to be the leven and the salt in their churches. Thus the Moravians remained a small church in the countries in which they oper­ated, albeit usually with an influence completely dispropor­tionate to their size. Voluntar­ily the Moravian mission sta­tions in Austra­lia were handed to the Anglicans and those in Greenland were given to the Scandi­navian Lutherans. Questioning big Edifices for Fellowship With due acknowl­edgement to all the blessings God has evident­ly bestowed on massive congrega­tions in some countries, it is still debateable whether this is the best way of spend­ing the funds and energy which were needed to build these gigantic struc­tures. Having said this, I am quite aware that some of the huge cathe­drals with their valuable paintings started off as a (perhaps misguided) token of love and worship to God. The problem with big buildings is that later generations so often do not display the same commitment, with the inevitable result: white eleph­ants. This also happened to the Moravians. The big church in Genadendal, which was built in faith by earlier generations, is seldom filled to capacity. The question must be raised whether the sums budgeted for the erection of big edifices, should not have been used more effectively for world evangelization. The issue to face is whether the striving after big congregations is not tantamount to worldly thinking and actually strange to the spirit of the ‘New Testament’. The waste of funds for the building of new churches where there are already good evan­gelical churches in the area, is just as deplorable. This is especially the case in the townships, where there is thus a proliferation of small finan­cially struggling churches, whose pastors are forced to do other secular work to make a living. The deceiver will invariably see to it that the vision for the lost goes down the drain in the process. Churches which started off vibrant­ly often end up just as traditional - with their own new paraphernalia and worship patterns: just like the bigger denominations of yesteryear. This is not new at all. Even in ‘New Testament’ times there was a ‘tendency towards stagnation... also in those churches which came into being out of the hea­thendom through the tireless work of Paul’ (Bosch, 1990:13). Taking it up for the Lowly and Meek Jesus upset the apple-cart of His days by taking it up for the lowly and meek. He rebuked the disciples who wanted to send the children away (Mark 10:14) and He used the sacrificial giving of the widow as an example. Wherever missionaries clearly sided with the weak and oppressed and without a clear political agenda, there was usually spiritual fruit. One of the best examples of this is still the missionary work of the Moravians in their first missionary decade 1732-1741. They put themselves on an equal footing with slaves and those people who were treated as hunting objects in certain countries. The actions of some missionaries were regarded as political, for example in South Africa because of their stand on racial equality and their treating ‘Hottentotten’ as human beings. But first and foremost the Moravian missionaries wanted to be true followers of Jesus. Similarly, Christians everywhere have the moral and biblical duty to side against injustice; to get actively involved for a more just society.149 Very rightly Bosch said: ‘We must expose every form of economic injustice and exploita­tion in our society and witness against it - as part of our Christian calling’ (Bosch, 1990:44). South African Christians could become modern pioneers in taking it up for the lowly, meek and down-trodden. There is still so much inequality in our so-called post-apartheid society that no Christian should be complacent about it. Christians should be taking the lead in the fight against corruption, the present scourge of South African society. Food for Thought: What innovative ways could be used to ‘upset the apple-cart’ in a positive way? How could (small) churches work together, demonstrating their unity in Christ? What traditions are there in my church which should go over­board because they have no scriptural basis? And some Ideas: How about coming together as believers not only for worship services and prayer on a regular basis, but also for a religious film or a service to stimulate a missionary vision? How about sharing facilities and resources with other fellowships in the area? Pray for possibilities to emulate Jesus in making use of the gifts of the low and despised! Usually church members are expected to switch off their mobile phones. Are there possibly other creative ways to let the congregation be more inter-active, apart from the Pretoria student church model? 14. Jesus taught ‘Enemy Love’: The Power of Reconcili­ation Jesus showed by his life-style that the teaching is not only theory to love your enemy. It has a deep meaning that the Master looked up to Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1ff), the collabor­ator with the Roman oppressors. When everybody in Jewish society was condescendingly looking down on the mean tax-collectors, Jesus showed respect. When it was normal for a respect­able Jew to despise the outcast Samaritans (compare John 8:48 to see how Samaritans were equated with being demon-possessed), he gave them dignity. The Cross became the symbol of reconciliation. It has been ingeni­ous­ly suggested that the vertical bar symbolizes the recon­ciliation with God and the horizontal bar the reconciliation with our fellow men. Traditionally, the vertical bar is expected to be longer: thus reconciliation with God should also be the pri­mary one. Indeed, this would condition the relationship to those who have hurt us. By nature one can still be selfless, idealistic and generous, but to be forgiving and to reply with love when one is wounded and hurt, is only possible if one lives from the forgiving love to which Christ enables us (Ephesians 4:32). The radical Quality of Jesus’ Love The quality of the Lord’s love is especially shown by the inci­dents at his cruci­fixion. His first words of love from the Cross - even before he addressed his friends - were forgiving words directed at his enemies. After his resurrection he rushed to those who had denied and rejected him in the hour of his deepest need. Jesus has every right to put forward the high standard of sacrificial love because he had demon­strated this through his life and death. He showed the way to be prepared to sacrifice your life for your friends... and for your enemies. Within this framework the beatitude encouraging us to be peace-makers (Matthew 5:9) follows naturally. Paul echoed this injunction in one form or the other in almost every epistle. Jesus went to have a meal with the hateful tax-collector Zacchaeus and He used a despised Samari­tan (Luke 10:30ff) as an example of border-crossing benevolence. He challenged the establishment of His society by bringing them in contact with the gifts of the marginal people. In the Gospel of Luke, the Pharisee Simon becomes a witness to the devotion and dedica­tion of an ex-prosti­tute (Luke 7: 36-40). Common prejudice would not have expected anyone to find Jesus in normal company with a Pharisee, let alone to dine with him. The Lord’s presence brings a very improbable visitor into the house of Simon. What an example the Master gave, what a challenge for Christians to bring together whosoever belongs together, namely the body of Christ, regard­less of social status! Even more, our Lord dared to praise the prostitute and reprimand the Pharisee. What a reappraisal of their prejudi­cial value system must have followed from this encounter! How powerful this dynamic can be was demonstrated in Herrnhut in the run-up to 12 May 1727 when Count Zinzendorf brought the warring factions together. The reconciliation achieved was possibly the most important ‘ingredient’ towards the ultimate revival three months later. Even within the close circle of the disciples Jesus had to reconcile opposing factions. We do not understand fully why John always referred to himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved. Or was he pushing himself to the front all the time, like at the last supper? Even after the Lord’s resurrection, rivalry between him and Peter is still reported. The few verses which are recorded about the meeting of Jesus with the eleven at Lake Tiberias indicate enough of the mutual dislike of Peter and John (Acts 21:20-22). The two could have become bitter rivals for the leadership after the Lord’s ascension. The Holy Spirit is powerful to reconcile minds who would normally be at loggerheads constant­ly. This is evident in the case of the vastly different dis­ciples. In Acts 3:1ff it is reported how the couple operated as a team. This exposes the lie of giving incompatibility as the reason for a separation; that it is utterly impossible to work together with some Christian. If both parties are open to the work of the Holy Spirit, reconcili­ation should be the eventual result and even teamwork is possible there­after. South Africa had a notable example when Bishop Tutu and Dr Allan Boesak were at logger­heads in 1980. The reason for the rift was the willingness of Bishop Tutu and other clergymen to speak to Prime Minister P.W. Botha, while Dr Boesak and his Broeder­kring150 colleagues maintained that this would only give credibility to the evil system. After the reconcili­ation of the two clergymen they teamed up in their opposition to apartheid. This combination was definitely used by God - along with the prayers of God’s people around the world - to stave off a major bloody conflict in our country. A practical Consequence? From a biblical standpoint the believer should refrain from mud-slinging and rather offer forgiveness. It is good to be reminded that Jesus challenged the religious leaders who were about to stone an adulteress: ‘Let him who is without sin take the first stone (John 8:7). Indirectly Jesus was surely also attacking their double standards. Nowhere is the man mentioned with whom she was trapped in the act. In this regard, it is a sobering thought that the Master still called Judas his ‘friend’ immediately after he had been betrayed by the disciple (Matthew 26:50). The attitude of Peter should be an object lesson to all of us. Evidently tempered by his own frailty and failure when it counted, the impulsive disciple took the lead after their extended prayer session in the upper room in his recollection of Judas (Acts 1:16ff): ‘He was one of us!’ Bosch (1990:67) points out how Luke, a non-Jewish writer, went out of his way to keep communication lines open. In contrast to especially the Gospel of Matthew, Luke wrote fairly posi­tively about the Pharisees. But it does not mean that he left out everything which could have been offensive to the Jews. The mission to Samaria (Acts 1:8) represented a fundamental break with tradi­tional Jewish concepts, while he simultaneous­ly attached great importance to Jerusalem. More than any of the other ‘New Testament’ authors, Luke illumi­nated for example how the Lord uplifted the despised Samaritans. Thus he has actually given an example of using the pen for purposes of recon­ciliation - with­out however watering down the prejudice-bashing ministry of Jesus in any way. A Border crossing Movement The forward move of Jesus was apparently not even properly understood by some of his disciples and the believers in Jerusalem. Bosch summarized the differences aptly: ‘The delegation from Jerusalem which visited Antioch, was interested in consolida­tion, not in mission; in law rather than grace; in the fixing of borders rather than in the crossing of them; in doctrine rather than life; in the church as an institu­tion rather than the church as movement’ (Bosch, 1990:11). In many cases this is still the situation; many a church is so busy with their own little thing that they do not even have an eye for the needs of their local community, let alone for the lost. By his example Jesus also showed that loving your enemy does not mean condoning even the slightest notion of evil. In His altercations with the religious leaders He (and John the baptist) did not mince any words, calling the false leaders serpents on more than once occasion (Matthew 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). Standing firm for truth implies a clash with the forces of the lie. In a certain sense the guardians of the traditions around the temple and the Sabbath can be regarded as our Lord’s enemies. The Master had no hesitation to liken the outward show of religiosity to white-washed tombs with bones of the dead inside them (Matthew 23:27). But the respectful approach to Zacchaeus shows how loving confronta­tion can often achieve better results than harsh reproach. If we would generalize, it seems that Jesus reserved the harsh words for the religious leaders, even though the person in question may have had a good standing in the eyes of their society. On the other hand, he showed love and compas­sion for the sinner who was willing to repent. Zacchaeus is the example of true repentance. He bore fruit which fitted the repentance (Matthew 3:8), viz. restitution. Repentance without deep remorse and willingness for restitution has to be questioned. The proof is in the fruit: a changed life and putting right as meticu­lously as possible everything of which the Holy Spirit convicts one. In the Footsteps of the Prophets Along with John the Baptist, Jesus was of course only follow­ing in the footsteps of the Hebrew prophets. Nathan used a subtle way to illustrate to David that ‘you are the man’ the exposing the king’s adultery and subsequent indirect murder of Uriah (2 Samuel 12). Ezekiel and Amos called a spade a spade, dubbing the kings and the religious establishment with their wives respec­t­ively ‘fattened sheep’ (Ezekiel 34) and fattened cows (Amos 4:1). Amos was especial­ly severe in his denunciation of Is­rael’s sin. Quite viciously he attacked the social sins of the day. Injustice, official corruption, greed and false worship were mentioned by name. Paul brought in yet another perspective: he deemed him­self committed to a ministry of reconciliation. Driven by the love of Christ, we are challenged to be self-less. But the prime task remains to preach the message that God has recon­ciled the world with himself through the atoning death of Christ. Like Paul we should be beseeching people all over, as if Christ were pleading with them: ‘receive the love he offers you - be reconciled to God’ (see 2 Corinthians 5:14-20). The rich and the poor should meet each other (see Prov­erbs 22:2) so that they can exchange their gifts and mutually enrich each other. Although the visitor to the house of the Pharisee Simon (Luke 7:36-40) is described as a whore, thus socially completely unacceptable, she was allowed entrance because Jesus was there. The Master was the facilitator of this meeting. Chris­tians, followers of Jesus, should be the mediators to enable this sort of conversation, which could lead to healthy confrontation between rich and poor, between social and a-social. If possible, he believer should be at hand to guide and lead, so that the confrontation does not get out of con­trol. Making Friends out of Enemies Jesus was really the Master at getting beyond disputes, making friends out of enemies. This is wonder­fully illustrated in John 4. First of all he does not allow himself to be drawn into a discussion on minor issues and rumours like who exactly was the one who baptized people (4:1+2). In stead, he does address the major rift, viz. the animosity between Jews and Samari­tans. In his trip from Judea to Galilee he did not evade Samaria in any way. In fact, he went right into the ‘lion’s den’, sitting next to the sacred well of Jacob in Sychar (v.6). In the discussion with the woman, the common ancestry was subtly used by his counterpart (v.12) but Jesus neither allowed this, nor the issue of the locality of worship (v.19) to divide them. In fact, he used worship as such to point her to the true way of doing it. He did address her sinful life however, causing her to recognize Him as the Messiah. In the process she became the first evangelist of this message according to the Gospel of John.151 Similarly, we notice that Jesus did not allow the arch enemy to drive a wedge between Him and like-minded people. The mere rumour among the Pharisees, comparing him to John the Baptist, was reason enough for Jesus to leave Galilee (John 4:1-3). When his disciple John tried to oppose someone who drove out demons in Jesus’ name, because ‘he is not one of our group’, Jesus corrected him: ‘Do not forbid him...Anyone who is not against us, is for us’ (Mark 9:38f). Thus the Master would probably also oppose anybody to-day who would claim the ultimate truth in the details of following Him. We would do well to emulate the Lord in combating sec­tarianism, prejudicial nationalism and group thinking of all sorts. Deviations from stated Intentions Zinzendorf had a great aversion to religious controversy. He has been quoted as saying early in his adult life: ‘I hate controversy with God-fearing people and zealous professors as always. I will not seek to justify myself against them, neither by letter, nor by mouth, nor in print’ (Weinlick, 1956:103). Unfortunately Zinzendorf deviated from his early intentions. Because of the Count’s strong convictions the Moravian Breth­ren quarrelled with the Calvinist George Whitefield. Zinzendorf deemed it necessary to defend Luther to the hilt in a public debate with John Wesley, which caused a complete rift between Moravians and Methodists. He also had a sharp exchange of words with Mühlen­berg, a Lutheran from Halle (Weinlick, 1956:169). Against the Separatists - who shielded themselves from the rest of the body of Chris­tians - he actually not only replied in the Pennsylvania Gazette, but he also wrote separate pamph­lets (Weinlick, 1956:168). Another difference between Wesley and the Moravians was that Wesley and his friends would preach with great energy to the masses whereas Zinzendorf and his followers preferred to work behind the scenes through their life-style (The Count included in one of the church litanies the sentence ‘Protect us from unholy growth’.) Potential new members had to apply. The lot had to determine whether they were accepted and after confirmation and their first participation in the Lord’s Supper, they were put through a long time of probation (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:65). Yet, Zinzendorf emphasized to his fellowship that different methods are needed for the spread of the Gospel and that it is the task of all God’s children to love each other and respect the gifts of the other people (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:38). Confession on Paper and in Public In the controversy with John Wesley, the spiritual quality of Count Zinzendorf shone brightly. Humbled by the bad vibe spread in this way, he said: ‘I myself am not inno­cent in the matter. I have sometimes - in obedience to the other leaders and friends - been swayed by my indolent nature’(Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1970). Zinzendorf knew that whatever one does prematurely in this regard, could cause great harm. He did nevertheless affect much through his extensive letter-writing and publica­tions, later even receiving replies from his former opponents after their conversion. He knew also in these things how dependent he had to remain to the Lord. He was not inter­ested in petty point scoring. Thus he knew that it was much better to let the Holy Spirit convince the opponents of their faults. He said: ‘It is better when attackers fall to the feet of the Lord than that the brethren defend their cause before every­body’ (Spangenberg, 1773-1775[1971]:1970). His humility was highlighted perhaps the clearest when the Count confessed on paper that he erred in allowing his ideas about John and Charles Wesley to be printed. Simulta­neously he apologized publicly to the Wesley brothers and promised not to do it again. In a declaration in 1755, five years before his death, he expressed that he was so ashamed of ideas expressed in some of his writings that he wanted to scrap them. Two excellent examples of the powerful dynamic of making friends out of enemies have been recorded of Dr Billy Graham and Wilson Goeda, the national leader of YWAM. In the former case Dr Graham agreed to play gholf with a pastor who would initially not allow his church members to even attend one of the evangelist’s campaigns. Wilson Goeda, the national YWAM president, became a close friend to a right-wing White AWB member of whom he feared that the man would kill him the first time they met. Zinzendorf as a Reconciler At a young age Zinzendorf found himself in ‘the lion’s den’ when he took the ministry of reconciliation seriously. As an 18-year old final year theological student he tried to act as mediator in the theological dispute between the feuding fac­ulties of Halle and Wittenberg. He came to Wittenberg with first-hand knowledge of the viewpoint of Halle where he had attended boarding school, residing with August Hermann Fran­cke. At a time when the universities of Halle and Witten­berg were at loggerheads because of their respective doctrinal positions, Zinzendorf had friends in both camps, namely those who loved the Lord. The young count had come to appreciate the merits of both universities (Weinlick, 1956:39). Zinzendorf’s role of recon­ciler was never more spectacular than in the run-up to the revival of 1727. There had developed a major rift between the village of Berthelsdorf and the new settlers of Herrnhut, the estate where the Count had allowed the Moravian and Bohemian refugees to settle. The new settlers were led by Christian David while the Lutheran Pastor Johann Rothe of Berthelsdorf was the spokesman for the traditional church. Hutton narrates the position as follows: ‘There was war in the camp. On the one hand Christian David called Pastor Rothe a narrow-minded churchman. On the other hand, Pastor Rothe thundered from his pulpit against the ‘mad fanatics’ on the hill. As Jew and Samaritan in days of old, so now were Berthelsdorf and Herrnhut. At this critical point Count Zinzendorf stepped in, and straightened the crooked sapling’ (Hutton, 1895:129). How Zinzendorf achieved this was very striking. Hutton gives a hint, quoting the Count: ‘Although our dear Christian David was calling me the Beast and Mr. Rothe the False Prophet, we could nevertheless see his honest heart and knew we could lead him right. It is not a bad maxim when honest men are going wrong to put them into office and they will never learn from specula­tion’ (Hutton, 1895:129). Zinzendorf ‘spoke privately to the settlers, and showed them how Satan was leading them astray.’ Apart from the extended times of prayer which accom­panied them, these pastoral visits in the summer of 1727 prepared the ground for the revival of 13 August. Without the prior reconciliation the Communion service of the memorable Wednesday would almost surely have taken place in a completely different atmosphere. Good missionary Dialogue Paul, the apostle gave us the example of good missionary dialogue, e.g. when he reasoned on three Sabbaths with the Jews of Thessaloniki the bare essentials of the faith from the Scriptures – the death and resurrection of Jesus - without getting involved in peripheral issues. He was ‘explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again and saying: ‘This Jesus whom I preach to you is Christ’ (Acts 17:3). Count Zinzendorf showed himself to be a reconciler of the first order. Beyreuther wrote that the Count ‘positioned himself always there where the war front of the opposing spirits ran. That was his elementary motivation’ (Beyreuther, 1957:192). Already from his student days the only cri­terion for special friendship was someone who loved the Lord: thus he easily bridged the gap of age and confession. During his cavalier’s trip through Europe he and the elderly Roman Catholic Cardinal Noailles discovered each other, that they ‘only wanted to love Christ and belong to him’ (Beyreuther, 1957:194). The Count’s discussion with Cardinal de Noailles developed into sound missionary dialogue. The Cardinal tried to win Zinzendorf over to Roman Catholicism. Instead of scoring petty points, the two discovered that the sufferings of Jesus present a wonderful common rallying point. At a time when church polemics provided scandals, Zinzendorf and Cardinal Noailles set an example for all time of how missionary dialogue could be fruitful: There raged an intense intellectual dialogue between the two of them, where both tried to convince the other. This happened however in a very tactful way, without belittling the religion and convic­tion of the partner in any way (Beyreuther, 1957:199). Calamity became God’s springboard to move John Wesley towards conversion. He was on the same ship with a group of Moravians who were en route to Georgia where they wanted to minister among the indigenous ‘Indians’. Wesley and Ingham were sent as Anglican missionaries to the New World. On 20 October 1735 Wesley started to learn German while David Nitschmann, the newly ordained bishop and one of 26 Moravians on board, and two others started to learn English. When the ship was in a terrible storm Wesley was deeply impressed by the calmness and lack of fear the Brethren radiated. That became the start of his search for inner peace. He was even more impressed when he kept close contact with the Brethren in America. The ordination of Anton Seifert by Bishop Nitschmann made an indelible impression. He diarized: ‘The simplicity as well as the reverence of it all let me forget that there were 1700 years inbetween. I felt as if I were in the same room without outer fancy with Peter the fisherman and Paul the tent maker’ (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:63f). An unheralded great Moravian Heinrich Coffart was one of the early Moravian missionaries who was someone you would hardly find highlighted in the annals of the denomination. Impacted under a sermon of Pastor Johann Rothe in 1734, he moved to Herrnhut the same year. Yet, Coffart evidently understood two elements of the teachings of our Lord profoundly, namely to give support for the persecuted believers and to love the Body of Christ. He thus visited England, Switzerland, and he joined the Swede Arved Gradin. Coffart twice dared ‘unter großen Gefahren’ (at great perils) to go to the persecuted Waldense and also visited the Moravian missionaries in Egypt in 1758. On his return from there he had the opportunity to get an audience with Pope Clemens XIII. Typical of the flexibility and the use of the linguistic gifts of some Brethren, Heinrich Coffart wrote to Zinzendorf that he had pointed out to the Pope that the Moravians honour all churches and pastors, but live especially in love and harmony with those of whom they could detect that they were disciples of the Lord. In the whole world it was the Moravian sole purpose to preach the life, suffering and death of our incarnated God until the Holy Spirit would open the heathen hearts. He wrote a long letter to Count Zinzendorf about this occasion (the bulk of it is printed in Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:168ff). ‘He (the Pope) was astounded that I have travelled so far and enquired much about Egypt...I answered to the best of my knowledge, bemoaning especially that the spirit of disunity was also (discernible) in the Levante. “Yes, yes”, his Holiness said: “We know the spirit, which persecutes the Copts so much. How did you handle those people?” “Very well”, I answered “because I belong to a part of the heritage of Christ, our Lord, who has a catholic152 spirit and from the Spirit that gives salvation ... only to those who have been saved by grace. We honour all Christian churches and their shepherds, especially those children in the flock where we have found those of whom the Lord says that one can discern that they are his disciples, living in love and unity.” Coffart also wrote in his letter how he told the Pope about the extensive missionary work of the Moravians, with their Grundsatz (bottom line) ‘to emphasize the incarnation, the worthy life and death of our only God and Lord so long until the Holy Spirit opens the hearts of the heathen, without referring to the differences between the various Christian religions.’ (He possibly meant with the latter the different denominations.) How much Coffart had a vision for the Body of Christ across denominational boundaries one can derive from the sort of people he met in Florence. Thus he wrote of his conversation with a Greek Orthodox believer and a father from Aleppo ‘whom we shall still use in future’. He also visited the Ethiopian Church. With the Greek Orthodox believers he entered into correspondence and he bonded with a Syrian priest in a heart friendship’ already in Egypt. Breaking down Prejudice Also on the global level the Moravians understood that breaking down (mutual) prejudice was part and parcel of the ministry of reconciliation; that a Christian should endeavour to bring ‘enemies’ together. At a time when everything outside the parameters of their known Western world was regarded as barbaric and primitive, Matthäus Stach not only brought five ‘ordinary’ Eskimo Christians to Herrnhut and Zeist, but also to London where they were received by King George and the royal family (Lewis, 1962:84). Likewise, Leonhard Dober apparently did not think twice to take along the seven-year-old orphan boy Carmel Oly when he returned to Herrnhut from St Thomas. On the cemeteries of Herrnhut and Herrnhaag one can find the graves of many of these ‘first fruits’ from the mission fields. This treatise would be very incomplete if the remarkable conciliatory effort of the American Moravians towards the Sabbatharians in their area is not mentioned. They added Saturday as a holy day, noting among other reasons: ‘if the Indians ... were to be redeemed, it might be a step leading them back to the true God to restore the Sabbath of their ancestral religion’ (Weinlick, 1956:171). Saturdays thus also were upheld as a day devoted to the service of the Lord, where they has love feast ‘not seldom’. 153 Modern Efforts towards biblical Reconciliation In our day and age there exists worldwide still a lot of mutual distrust and prejudice between Jews and Muslims; between Christians and Muslims. In a country like Ireland there has been ongoing strife between Catholics and Protestants, in India between Hindu’s and Muslims. Fundamen­talism in the respective camps continue to do great harm to the cause of reconcili­ation. Followers of Christ would do well to concentrate on those societies where healing and reconcili­ation are desperately needed. So many Chris­tians of the Western Cape nurse their bitterness due to marriages where they have all but lost their dear ones to Islam, in stead of forgiving and loving them. Too often it is forgot­ten that Christ taught us to ‘turn the other cheek’; that Paul told us to heap fiery coals of love in ‘retaliation’ (Romans 12:20) when we have been hurt. Service to the Cape Muslim community for instance with the major drug problem, which affects so many fam­ilies, will be a much better response than to allow bitterness and resentment to spread in a cancerous way. Even though mosques are springing up like mush-rooms all over the world, followers of Jesus must resist any call for retaliation. Jesus taught us to love our enemy. During the previous century some remarkable achievements towards recon­cili­ation came to pass. It is not surprising that the prin­ciples of Jesus which were put into practice by believers, played a major role in these achievements (Even someone like the great Hindu Mahatma Ghandhi, who led India to independence, was decisively influenced by the teachings of Jesus. After World War II, Frank Buchmann and others who were linked to the Moral Re-armament movement - took the abso­lutes derived from our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount as their guideline. Humanly speaking, Buchmann and his movement ushered in the reconciliation between the traditi­onal enemies Germany and France). Here in this country, Professor Washington Okumu of Kenya, a committed Chris­tian, was used by God to bring about reconciliation when the country was dangerously near to the brink of relentless blood­shed just before the elections of 1994. I would also like to highlight again the Christian reconciliation which was started by two Africans, one white and the other black. This took place a quarter of a century ago when Catholicism, Pentecostalism and Protestantism were still regarded as three blocks which were miles apart from each other. That the big rift between these church entities have been drasti­cally reduced, can be attributed to a great extent to the work of reconciliation of our late compatriot, Mr. Pentecost’, Rev. David Du Plessis and Bishop Festo Kivengere of Uganda. The work of Du Plessis was all the more remarkable if we consider that he - as a white South African, operated at a time when his home country was isolated and rejected because of its racial policies. Dr Billy Graham incurred much flack from Christians for daring to visit Moscow during the Cold War. That surely paved the way for people like Brother Andrew to become God’s special envoy and emissary in the destruction of the ‘iron curtain’. Inside South Africa the theme of the Christian Institute (CI), the brainchild of Beyers Naudé, who was its founder and national leader from the outset, was (racial) reconciliation. All initiatives were preceded by discussions based on Bible Study and prayer. Beyers Naudé, set the prophetic tone in the pursuit of truth and reconciliation. Naudé dreamed of establishing a ‘Confessing Church’ in South Africa along the model of what happened in Germany when Nazis threatened to absorb the Church in its ideology. With the help of friends and colleagues, Kotze regularly prepared and disseminated memo’s explaining the implications of Parliamentary Bills and giving ideas for practical involvement. The demonic apartheid ideology tilted the Bible-based beginnings of the CI. The CI was quite prophetic when it encouraged Black, Indian and ‘Coloured’ Dutch Reformed Church leaders to consider how apartheid was destroying Church unity in South Africa. However, the CI was at the same time acting diabolically, politicizing a part of the body of Christ in an unhealthy manner. Unwittingly the CI became a catalyst for unchristian activism. This was especially evident in the University Christian Movement (UCM) that was more or less a spiritual child of the CI. After my return from Europe in 1970, my personal interest was very much inspired by a dubious activism. A Middle East Reconciler behind the Scenes The founder of Open Doors, Brother Andrew, became persona non grata in many Communist countries by the mid-1970s. During a visit that was scheduled to have been a vacation in Jerusalem in 1968, the Lord started to prepare his heart for a special relationship to the minute nation of Israel. His close relationship with the well-known Corrie ten Boom and Sidney Wilson, a missionary that would impact Holland so tremendously in the second half of the 20th century, Israel had already been close to his heart. The 1968 Jerusalem visit impacted Brother Andrew deeply as he reflected on the Holocaust: Why didn’t the Church rise up in protest? Didn’t it know what was happening? (Brother Andrew, 2004:19). There his thoughts also went back to the bold Paul Schneider whose voice in the wilderness of Nazi Germany was not heard when millions of Jews were killed. There in Jerusalem he also recalled how he was moved in 1955 to see thousand young communists marching in Warsaw. At that occasion he was impacted via Revelations 3:2 to start supporting persecuted Christians: ‘Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die.’ This was God’s way of throwing him into the ideological and spiritual warfare against Communism and Islam. In chapter 2 we highlighted his contribution to the collapse of the Iron Curtain. His role in the eventual demise of Islam will probably become clearer in years to come. Palestinians streamed into Lebanon, after King Hussain had expelled them from Jordan in 1970. The Maronite Church, which had held sway there since 1945, was swamped by a Muslim majority. Tension between Muslims and Christians increased dramatically. When the war between Muslims and Christians started to take off in the mid-1970s, Beirut, the capital, gradually became one big ruin. After various visits to Lebanon, Brother Andrew saw the Church dwindling. Because he was committed to his calling to strengthen the persecuted and suffering Church, he was moved intensely. He also visited West Bank Christian believers and others in Gaza. In 1988 he met Sallim Munayer, a dynamic Arab Christian in Bethlehem. Brother Andrew had witnessed how Palestinians felt themselves being degraded to second class citizens in Israel, with no rights in the West Bank and in Gaza. He was very surprised when Munayer requested Open Doors to facilitate meetings with Messianic Jewish believers. One thing led to the other until a movement was birthed called Musalaha, an Arabic word meaning forgiveness and reconciliation. In 1992 a three day meeting was organised and partly funded by Open Doors in the Negev desert with 30 Arab and Jewish followers of Jesus in equal number (Brother Andrew, 2004:21f). Already in 1990 Brother Andrew made headlines when he volunteered to take the place of a devout Christian who had been held hostage by the radical Hizbollah. Pursuing the question of how to reach the terrorists, Brother Andrew spoke to all sorts of military, religious and political leaders hereafter. In March 1994 he also started to meet the leaders of Hamas, another radical Islamic group which had a big following in Lebanon. Meeting these leaders at the turn of the 21st century constantly was not only highly unpopular, but also considered as dangerous. By 10 June 2001 the question for him was: Could he strengthen the struggling Church of the Middle East without getting in the crossfire? (Brother Andrew, 2004:21). He decided that he could not turn back... The expression of regret that Muhammad was misled by our Christian forebears, is still not appreciated if not maligned. Repentance and Restitution: a Catalyst of Recon­cili­ation Not much has changed in the Church since ‘New Testament’ times with regard to dishonesty. Corruption is still very much to be found in the confines of the Church. In South Africa, much of it has come to the fore. No compromise is possible when evil things are perpe­trated, doubly so when the honour of our faith is at stake. Reconcili­ation on any level can only come to pass if there is no pussy-footing with sin. Genuine repentance uses restitution as a proof of its sincerity. (The quality of the repentance could be questioned if anyone claims that he or she has repented without being prepared to set things right.) In combination, repentance and restitution operate as a major catalyst of reconciliation. In many cases they would be a condition for it. Followers should really be open for all possibil­ities to make the unity in Christ visible, also outside the confines of church services. The miracle election of 1994 was the result of an unprecedented flood of prayer in South Africa and by concerned Christians abroad. The apartheid past could however still cause resentment and hatred as a belated natural reac­tion. If real racial harmony in our country is to come about, forgive­ness which is enabled and wrought by God’s Spirit, is a necess­ity. We are all very thankful that a major racial conflict could be averted in our country. But we should be aware that the situation is still very volatile, that the simmering violence of the townships could spill over into more estab­lished residential areas, that squatter food riots is merely a matter of time, unless the problem is tackled at its roots. Economic injustice is becoming the new time bomb. Rising prices have been causing substantial increases of basics. Much of the profits disappear into the pockets of the rich. This is sinful! Apartheid is still seen in some circles as a policy which did not work, rather than gross sin against the images of God. We are thankful for all attitudinal changes in the country. A general confession for the sin of apartheid, coupled with a definite programme of restitu­tion has surely helped to foster real reconcili­ation. But we must stay on our guard. Rashied Staggie’s tribute at the funeral of co-gangleader Glen Khan, charging all gangsters present to refrain from revenge, possessed a dimension of another order. This is especially remarkable when we consider that he was a new believer at the time, weeks after his conversion. A number of Muslims turned to Jesus, notably in the Mitchell’s Plain area. Supernaturally, PAGAD was marginalised. A negative was that churches were and still are very much doing their own thing, not cooperating with other churches and mission agencies. The Need for Remorseful Confession It would be inappropriate if those who have been wronged in the past wait for others – Whites – to confess more or again. It would be better if they offer forgiveness magnanimously and unconditionally. Our country has been blessed with an example from the top. President Nelson Mandela set about what he had to do, without waiting on his apartheid ‘enemies’ to apologize for incarcerating him for 27 years. This also applies to the fighting factions in the townships: they should forgive each other and not wait on the other party to start forgiving or confessing. The arch enemy is of course very happy if new fuel for the simmering fires is constantly brought along. The seemingly never-ending township violence and crime is partly the result of the wind which had been sown in the seventies and eighties when the impression was given by certain church leaders that violence could be condoned under certain circumstances, such as an expression of discontent of the apartheid repression. As churches our role could be to start confessing our indif­ference and lack of courage to give clear guidance in the past with regard to violence. Christians from the various groups which are at loggerheads with each other, for example those from the IFP and ANC in Natal, should likewise be in the forefront of an effort towards visible reconciliation. The example of Zaccheus (Luke 19:1ff), the former collaborator with the Roman oppressors, who gave away voluntarily so much of his possessions, show that real reconcili­ation radiates a dynamic, which could result in significant mission funding. Food for Thought: With whom must I be reconciled? Who could have problems with my way of doing things, with my attitude? What can I do to improve on it? What can I do as a first step towards restitu­tion? If the other party refuses to accept my apology, what could I still do? What can I do to facilitate restitution and reconciliation between feuding parties in my neighbourhood? How can enemy images be broken down? And some Ideas: How about giving substance to ‘enemy love’ through gestures, when the spade-work has been done through contact and fellow­ship, for instance with flowers, a neutral booklet, a card or letter? How about inviting ‘enemies’ to a meal at your house? (This must however be prepared prayerfully otherwise the rift could become wider than before the event.) Be careful nevertheless to react angrily when you perceive provocation. Churches would do well to arrange contacts between perpetra­tors and victims of atrocities as a follow-up. This must be handled prayerfully and discreet­ly. Counselling and pastoral care should be included in this ‘package’ as a matter of course. 15. Jesus, an Example of proper Stewardship and a pioneer of good Ecology Stewardship entails the responsible handling of every­thing which God entrusts to us - not only our health, time, gifts and money. The latter should be used according to what one can do, however without comparing yourself with others.154 We should remember that God enabled us to acquire whatever we possess. Note how King David expressed his gratefulness to God: ‘Everything we have has come from you, and we only give you what is yours already! ...O Lord our God, all of this material that we have gathered... comes from you! It all belongs to you.’ (1 Chronicles 29:14,16; see also Deuteronomy 8:17,18) We have already noted the spontaneous giving of Zacchaeus. On giving for God’s work there rests a blessing.155 But a material­istic expectation may never be con­nected to the giving; ideally, it should be spontaneous and voluntarily. The poor Macedonians had a deep joy as they gave freely and ‘they begged us to take the money so they could share in the joy of helping the Chris­tians in Jerusalem’ (2 Corinthians 8:4). What a challenge this is to us! Jesus gave us the perfect example, how to use our resources properly. He chided Judas after Mary had expressed in a tangible way her love and adoration for the one whose disciple she had become: with the costly essence of nard (John 12:7). At a similar occasion Jesus rebuked the disciples who took exception when an unknown woman ‘anointed’ Him. The proverbial widow’s mite similarly encourages sacrificial giving. On the other hand, Jesus requested the disciples to collect the crumbs after the feeding of the multitudes (John 6:12); a definite encouragement to counter waste of all sorts. It is so easy to be either wasted or be miserly. The Master follows in the footsteps of the greatest of Jewish Kings. In 1 Chronicles 29 it is reported how David challenged the Israelites by his own example in giving to the Lord. The temple which would be built was meant ‘for the Lord himself’ (v.1). In challenging his subjects to follow his example, David also prescribed the attitude of the heart: ‘who will give himself and all that he has to the Lord?’ This is echoed by Paul when he challenged the Corinthians through the sacrificial voluntary example of the poor Macedonians: ‘for their first action was to dedicate themselves to the Lord’ (2 Corinthians 8:5). A biblical View on Possessions What Paul said with regard to possession of a wife in 1 Corinthians 7­:29, (Those who have wives should live as if they had none) applies in a similar way to all our material possessions: Let those with a wife (a husband, a house, a car etc.) be as if they have not. The first church in Jerusalem had the proper attitude. ‘No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had’ (Acts 4:32). The Hebrew Scriptures also give negative examples of stewardship. In Judges 8:23+24 Gideon thus starts off so well: ‘I will not be your king, nor shall my son; the Lord is your King!’ But towards the end of his life Gideon made a compromise, gathering jewel­ry from the foes to make an idol from it (Judges 8:23f). Saul is another one who started off well, but who ended with building a monument unto himself (1 Samuel 15:12). It is quite possible that many a church which started off with Jesus as King, ended with idolatry. The building became a monument to the pastor who laid the foundation stone or who stimulated the initial fund-raising. Some pastors are proud to mention that they have been successful at fund-raising. This might be regarded as a modern ‘ministry’, but the bibli­cal foundation for it is very scanty. We should look critically at some of the methods of fund-raising. Many churches and related institutions have turned bazaars and dinners into traditions. These efforts are usually accompanied by stress on a few and a low premium on fellow­ship. The ensuing encouragement of gluttony - in a country where hunger is part of the everyday life of many - should really make us question these practices. If Jesus had still been around in person, he would surely have turned over many a table of church halls and the like! Hospitality An important facet of stewardship is hospitality. In biblical times this was very normal. No church was chided specifically by Paul because of a lack of hospitality. Yet, the selfish trait in us does need the occasional reprimand on this score. Thus we are reminded to practise hospitality to the needy (Romans 12:13), do it without grumbling (1 Peter 4:9) and not to exclude strangers (Hebrews 13:2). In fact, the latter Bible verse encourages believers to practise philoxenia, to literally love strangers: Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have hosted angels without knowing it. If we have a posi­tive attitude towards guests, they are no burden but a bless­ing. Today hospitality is still the vogue in the orient and in so-called primitive regions. In the more affluent societies of our day, the selfish materialism of the West has made hospitality a scarce commodity. Responsibility for Nature The Bible commands a responsibility for nature and for the future of the earth - in so far as it is within our power - which may not be left compleely in the hands of atheist environmentalists, because Christians believe that everything belongs to the Lord.156 The creation reports of Genesis reflect a unity between God, man and nature. Man was created from the dust of the earth and God intended man to rule over and sub­due nature (Genesis 1:28) like a loving sover­eign. With regard to the soil man was given the task ‘to work it and take care of it’ (Genesis 2:15). The Scriptures speak in various ways positively about the glory of the creation, especially in the Psalms (for example Psalm 104 and Psalm 108). The creation of the Sabbath was clearly described as a God-given present for man. This was extended to nature by way of the Sabbath and Jubilee year when the soil had to be laid fallow (Leviticus 25). We note in the repen­t­ance of Nineveh, how also the animals were included (Jonah 3:7). However, God used the withering of a tree to reprimand Jonah that His compassion for fellow humans - though they belonged to another nation - was His prime concern. Nationalism is thus depicted as a neutral value. It can be used in God’s service, for instance to rouse Christians to mission service, but it should never exclude other nations. The scribe Ezra seems to have missed this point in his view of Samaritans who wanted to help building the temple. The distinguishing line is sometimes very fine, not always easy in sharing a common ‘yoke’, for example in business. With regard to an unbelieving marriage partner, biblical teaching is clear enough. An interesting feature of the wisdom literature from Scripture is how animals are used to teach important prin­ciples. The lazy are admonished to have a look at the ants (Proverbs 6:6). The ants teach us networking as they work together towards a common goal to store food for the winter (Proverbs 30:25). Proverbs 30:24-33 shows how the small and insignifi­cant can actually outclass the big and mighty. Four very ‘wise’ small species from the animate world (ants, cliff badgers, locusts and lizards) are contrasted to three impressive animals (a lion, a peacock, a male goat) plus a king with his mighty army. Jesus also stresses this principle when he used the despised ass - not a horse or a camel - to enter Jerusalem (Matthew 21). The Master furthermore pointed to the birds and the lilies of the field as he taught dependence on God, contrasting this to undue worrying about eating, drinking and clothing (Matthew 6:25-32). God’s Rule in Nature opposed by Satan The ‘New Testament’ depicts the basic differ­ence between the rule of God and that of satan in nature. It is taken for granted that satan possesses power and riches. He drew on that, for example when he tempted Jesus in the desert (Matthew 4:1-11). On the other hand, the deity of Jesus is for instance displayed through the miracles of healing and when he calmed the storm. The disciples immediately recognized His divine authority when they saw how the winds and the sea obeyed him (Matthew 8:27). In His parables, Jesus displayed a loving attitude towards nature, for instance using wheat fields and seed, the care of the shepherd for his flock (John 10) etc. Jesus rectified the legalistic use of the Sabbath whose intention was contracted at creation: Sabbath was made for man and not vice versa (Mark 2:27). Paul speaks of the basic problem of sin when man worship­ped the created things rather than the Crea­tor (Romans 1:24), causing the groaning of nature (Romans 8:22). Yet, it seems that throughout history until the so-called enlightenment, the basic unity of creation and nature was still taken for granted. Thereafter the main problem raised its head when man started to act like God, fiddling around with nature in an unscriptural way, exploit­ing it in stead of ruling over it. This happened to such an extent that the impression became prevalent in many circles that one does not need God any more. The ruining of soil by the ever-increa­sing use of chemicals is only one way in which man has created a serious problem for himself instead of heeding biblical injunctions. Bishop Kenneth Cragg has put succinctly what we need, viz. ‘a strong ecological theology and the new discovery of the mutual interaction of nature and grace in Christ.’157 We should be conscious that ‘God created everything there is - nothing exists that he did not make’ (John 1:2f). Cragg pro­ceeds, after reiterating the axiom of all theists that nothing exists outside the authority of God: ‘Every service offered by the Christian should testify to the eternal value of this truth.’ A holistic View of Nature From here the Eucharist elements of bread and wine become more than mere symbols.158 They are symbols of man working together with nature. Neither bread nor wine is a prod­uct of man’s work alone. Conversely, it is not good enough only to bemoan where technology has brought us, viz. to the precipice of our own destruction. If we believe that the sovereign Creator of all things is indeed almighty and omniscient, why can’t we trust that He still has everything under control? But then it also follows that is fitting for believers - and on this level there need not be any scruples to work alongside adher­ents from other religions - to testify and be counted for the conservation of nature, oppose economic growth which does not keep in mind the appreci­ation of God’s creation. We must protest against avirice and greed which destroy nature and make beggars out of fellow human beings; yes, degrading them to less than what God intended them to be. Because Zinzendorf really took Scripture seriously, he clearly opposed both the rationalism of the enlightenment and the false mysticism which deified man. An example of this is how he started off as an admirer of the mystic Johann Arndt in 1723, but he later rejected this influence on account of biblical truth (August, 1985:60). Because Jesus is the author of the new creation: ‘Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation...’ (2 Corin­thians 5:17), Zinzendorf had little difficulty to see in Jesus the Creator, calling our Lord as such. ‘Mein Heiland, mein Schöpfer’ (My Lord, my creator) was one of his favourite dictums. This was furthermore influ­enced by his belief in Christ as part and parcel of the creation Trinity. The positive holistic view of nature enabled the Mora­vians to take a position, which clearly distinguished them from the Pietists of their time. First submit yourself fully to Christ By using less paper - how much paper is being produced for synods, for the bulletins of churches every Sunday and the like - the churches could for example erect a sign of the coming Kingdom of the Prince of Peace, who protested by His example against unnecessary waste. We mention this because it is well known that every day nature is ruined as hundreds of trees are cut worldwide to produce paper. I dare to challenge the validity of the argument that other branches of the economy would be negatively affected if less paper is produced. The care for nature should be the prime concern in this case. Having said this, we do not want to imply the negation of modern technology. The use of computers, fax, E-mail and modern equipment - if this can be used more effectively for the spread of the Gospel – is part and parcel of life! However, Christians must make a conscious effort to off-set the depersonalizing effect of computers and the like. With regard to stewardship, I wish to repeat how Paul cited the example of the poor Macedonians in 2 Corinthians 8:5. It is stressed once again in this context as God’s will to first submit yourself fully to Him and then to the fellow Christians. Giving which omits these components is un­scriptural. Since much fund-raising of churches omits this element, we should not be surprised when the blessing seems to stay away. On the issue of stewardship, the Herrnhut Moravians were exemp­lary. The adage of Zinzendorf ‘I do not accept Christianity without fellowship’ was practiced there to the hilt. The ‘Umgang mit dem Heiland’ (daily communion with the Lord) was the basis to really give themselves to each other. Furthermore they gave everything they had, for the cause of missions! Whatever could be spared was contributed and whosoever could contribute anything to the cause of the spread of the Gospel, did so gladly. A simple life-style fitted into this pattern like a glove. One of the positive traits which followed from the Moravian understanding as unique creatures of God was that they detested copying each other in a negative way. ‘Freedom and bonding were in ideal balance. The closer one lived with the Lord, the more dependable and heartily one could be with the siblings in the faith’ (Beyreuther, 1962:196). This produced ‘lauter originale Leute’,159 no copy-cats. Churches have so often fallen into the trap of trying to show off with impressive, expensive buildings, which basically comes from comparison. This actually negates the life-style of the man after whom Chris­tians are named. On the other hand, certain mission agencies have often fallen from the other side of the horse through a pov­erty mentality, whereby some missionaries even deem it necess­ary to make excuses when they have a nice piece of clothing or a comfortable car. What is our Goal in Life? Modern technology tends to make a cog out of humans, where people are expendable if they do not serve the one and only goal: maximal profits. Many churches have also fallen into this trap. The church is these cases became a machinery that had to be kept going. The prime purpose of the church, to reach the lost and to support the weary often have to play second fiddle to fund raising and meetings. Even if it is impossible to turn the clock back, Christians must really look at ways and means to give people a sense of purpose. I suggest that the challenge of a return to the Great Commission may be a way to give fulfillment to many, even to the unemployed and redundant. In the same vein churches should scrutinize all doctrines and traditions. If they are actually tempting congregants to become disobedient to the great commission, they really need be given a new content or be scrapped. If the church choir for example only entertains the faithful few in the church, it will surely give them much more satisfaction to go to hospitals and other institutions where they can bring joy to the lonely and destitute. Taking the doctrines of the second coming of Jesus and the judgment thereafter more seriously, are issues which are apt to bring back some purpose into church life. It seems as if these doctrines are generally disregarded. Much harm has been done through doctrinal bickering since 1860 when contra reformation theology introduced a split in the doctrine of the second coming of the Lord. Jehovah’s Witnesses and other groups have since then been used by the enemy to confuse believers completely. Furthermore, it seems not fashion­able any more to speak about judgment and eternal damnation. Is this the only reason why many preachers shy away from the teaching which has been giving such a drive to the preaching of the Gospel in areas of revival through the ages? Or are they afraid to be unpopular, to say clearly that God’s judgment is on sin and that it angers Him? In biblical days the Thessalo­nian Christians became known in their pagan surround­ings not only through their turning away from idols to God, but also because they were ‘looking forward to the return of God’s Son from heaven... He is our only Saviour from God’s terrible anger against sin’ (1 Thessalonians 1:10). Insensitive Use of Resources The lack of sensitivity in the use of resources is hindering the spread of the Gospel, not the least in South Africa. Too often churches in affluent suburbs have two or more full-time ministers while their denomina­tional counterparts - sometimes only a kilometer away - struggle under financial strains. This is a smear on the Body of the Lord. The sooner this situation stops, the better. The sheer ease, with which churches have been splitting, is likewise a blot on the Body. Too often the name of Jesus and the Holy Spirit is abused in this connection. If people assert that the Holy Spirit has led them to separate themselves, this must be questioned because it goes against the spirit of the Bible. A clash of personalities or a striving after recognition have often been basic causes of many a so-called church plant­ing. It is questionable that many new churches spring up in close proximity to lively existing ones. Funds are wasted, which could much better have been used for genuine evangelism and mission work. Churches - especially those in the townships - should seriously consider merging and start using the superfluous buildings for recre­ational purposes. This would be a positive contribution to counter (gangster) violence. Resistance to Form a separate Church One of the greatest but underrated personalities in Church History is Martin Bucer in Strassbourg. His vision for the unity of the Body of Christ is in my view almost unparalled. Untiringly he tried not only to mediate between Rome and the Reformed leaders of Switzerland, John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli, but he also corresponded with Archbishop Cranmer about hierarchical church structures. Although his flexibility angered Calvin profusely,160 he remained a close friend of the Swiss reformer. His wide vision for the Body of Christ across national boundaries, as he fought for the retention of the unity of the reformed churches in its relationship with the churches in England and Poland, had equals only in Zinzendorf and Comenius. Martin Bucer advocated a radical reformation, which would begin in small groups or Christian communities. His main weakness was probably that he did not implement his views strongly enough. Like Martin Luther, he still hoped to reform the big Catholic Church from within. For years Count Zinzendorf refused to break away to form a separate church. He encouraged his congregants to be the enlivening influence in the Lutheran Church. The Moravian Church only became a separ­ate denomination when the legal position in England more or less forced their hand. Too easily it is forgotten that the revival in Herrnhut which followed after the 13th of August 1727, was preceded by a time of severe testing for that com­munity. At that time Zinzen­dorf resisted the much more convenient parting of the ways. 12 May 1727 has in my view been rightly described as the actual birth of the Herrnhut revival. On that day the Statutes (rules and regulations for the inhabit­ants of Herrnhut), were finalized and put before the congregation. It was the result of many tears and prayers. In the love and patience of Jesus Christ the Count pleaded with those who had erred. Among those who had come to Herrnhut were many reli­g­ious refugees, strong personalities who individ­ually pushed more or less forcefully their own interpretation of Scripture. Many of them had felt deeply the sin and pain of division. On 12th May 1748, 21 years after the Statutes were drawn up, Zinzendorf wrote: ‘Today 21 years ago, the fate of Herrnhut hung in the balance, whether it would become a sect, or to take its place in the Church of our Saviour. The power of the Holy Spirit ... decided for the latter.’ In the use of resources and of their time Zinzendorf and the Moravians were exemplary. Each member saw his own particu­lar work as service to the Lamb. There was no room for idle­ness in Herrnhut; there was not even time to think about worldly amusements and there was no money to spare for anything reeking of ‘vanity’. Everything was tuned to the missionary effort. The dustman in the street, the night watchman on his rounds, the carpenter at his bench felt himself ‘called to the service of the Lord as much as the preacher or the foreign missionary’ (Lewis, 1962:75). Too often the basic reason of church splits has been domination by the minister or a clique. Giving as many church members as possible the chance to get involved in a meaningful way according to their gifts and abilities, would solve many a problem. The truth still is that ‘ledigheid is die duiwel se oorkussing’ (literally, idleness is the devil’s pillow). A fellowship where members do not reach out to the community with concern for the needs of people, often leads to a situation where the members bash each other in less loving ways. Small Groups At the same time, the empowerment of the (spiritually) weak should be our goal. Through proper Bible study, sharing and prayer in small groups this can probably be achieved best. Already in the 16th century Martin Bucer taught that the partaking in small communities modelled the ‘New Testament’ way for optimal fellowship where the leaders of the various groups would meet each week, and every two months there should be a meeting of all groups for teaching. The community of Herrnhut was divided into little cells, into bands and choirs for the very reason of mutual encouragement and upliftment. The communication with each other and with the Lord - as they shared joy and sorrow - made out of them such a radiant and loving community. Centuries before cell groups were ‘discovered’, the congregation was divided in 56 small bands of social groupings like single brethren and sisters, where an informal atmosphere encouraged innovation. The revival in England in the eighteenth century under the inspiration of John Wesley and George Whitfield can possibly be contributed to the implementation of these principles when the Herrnhut model was emulated. Wesley started ‘class meetings’ at which the class leaders were disciplers. The use of the gifts of every church member has resulted in churches revolutionized in recent years. Ralph Neighbour perfected the theory of cell groups which had been started by Yonghi Cho in Korea some years ago. Many churches have been planted in this way, for instance in Cote I’voire. Bill Hybels and his Willow Creek is another example where the gifts of the man in the street have been put to good use. But also here in South Africa the strategy has been profitably used for mission orientation for example by ASSA (Action for Sending South Africans): ‘... the group preparing to leave for Central Asia was oriented first of all by a course in exegesis for the layman... Anyone could query any other member’s ideas on a subject, provided that our love for one another would not be negotiable. The other member would have to explain, on the basis of the Bible, why he or she believed this or that way.’161 Waste not, want not That Jesus gave the instruction to His disciples to gather the crumbs, can surely be interpreted as an encourage­ment for good ecology. It is not a compliment to present-day evangelicals that the leading ecologists have not usually been found among their ranks. In fact, too often those who did plead for nature preservation and similar issues, were often regarded as Communist leftists. We should consider seriously that Comenius encouraged his com­patriots to erect signs of the coming reign of peace when the Messiah will take control in the millennium.162 We should be very much aware that we can­not bring about the reign of peace ourselves. But we should not leave any stone unturned to be instruments to create optimal living conditions on this earth for others, for our­selves and for the next generation if the Lord tarries to return. Conversely, the fact of the second coming should be stressed as a catalyst. Peter even challenged believers to hasten the coming of the Lord (1 Peter 3:12). Whosoever reckons not only with the second coming of the Lord, but also with cata­strophes of the last days, will not fall into the trap of Utopian thinking. Neither should the believer be lamed by a feeling of helplessness. A biblical Eschatology (doctrine of the last things) must help us to erect signs of the reign of our coming King as agents and heirs on account of our faith in Jesus (Ephesians 3:6). Believers would do well to examine the use of their time regularly. TV watching is a major culprit where masses of Christians are not even aware how addicted they have become to (consumer) sport. The mass media of the country should rather give the country a lead towards healthy habits like hiking and outdoor sport. We are blessed with so many assets in nature. The Church has a ministry to be a healing community on a much broader level. Appreciation of our beautiful country should definitely get more attention. Food for Thought: How could we rectify the disparate denominational church structures - the sad heritage of the recent past - on the very short term? What can I (my church) do to show concern for nature conserva­tion? How could I become thriftier, without becoming stingy? What can we do to make example rather than begging the basis of the giving of the church? And some Ideas: Could our fund raising efforts be changed in such a way that the needy may more from it? What about organizing drives to clean up the area, to plant trees, perhaps in conjunction with other churches in the townships? Is it Utopian to suggest a common local pool of funds, with a common treasurer or Trust among local churches to help ensure a more equitable using of resources? 16. Jesus, a Man for the Individual: Fellowship as a Priority Jesus showed us the way in taking time for the individ­ual. On more than one occasion he had compassion for the sick, an eye for the individual in need, although there were scores of others around Him; He noticed Zacchaeus up in the tree (Luke 19:5), he felt the touch of the woman who desperately needed the healing for her haemorrhage (Mark 5:24ff). In spite of the masses Jesus heard the desperate cry of the blind Bartimaeus (Mark 10:49). Fellowship with the twelve is to Him more important than thousands who are clamouring to see Him.163 How powerful attention for an individual can be is displayed in Jesus’ interaction with an ‘enemy’, the longest recorded conversation in Scripture. His loving and compassionate concern for a woman with low morals from the despised and mutually resented Samaritans, ushered in the discovery of her townsmen that Jesus is the Saviour of the world (John 4:42). Fellow­ship also for the Despised Jesus offered fellow­ship to people who were despised by their society. Seeing her deepest need, he spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4) who was probably so ashamed to be seen by others that she went to fetch water at a time when there was the least chance to meet others or be seen by them. In meeting her deepest need, Jesus turned the social outcast into one of the first evangel­ists of the Messiah of all time, causing a people movement among the Samaritans of the little town of Sychar. Breaking with all custom of the time, he spoke with a woman in public. The Western rational mind would regard the speaking about ‘koeitjies en kalfies’ (trivialities), as wasting of time. Jesus demonstrated how the opening up of a conversa­tion with a stranger about a mundane thing like water can break down walls of prejudice (John 4:10) . Alternately, Jesus was so open and accessible that even strangers have no qualms to come to Him for help. Thus the Roman military chief from Capernaum had the liberty to approach him (Matthew 8:5). Jesus was immediately prepared to go to his house. The apostles took the cue from their Master. The Lord also addressed masses of people like at the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:7), the teaching at the lake (Matthew 13) and the feeding of the thousands. But this seems to be the exception rather than the rule. His method contrasts completely with that of modern-day mass evangelists. Nowhere do we get the impression that our Lord’s presence was formally ‘advertised’, nowhere does one sense an appeal to the masses. In stead, we read how he sent people away (for example Matthew 13:36), how he left the masses to be alone for prayer (Luke 5:16). From a ‘New Testament’ point of view, the tendency to use mass media for evangelistic purposes seems to have only limited value. Jesus taught and lived with a relatively small group of people, which he finally sent out. That is the biblical pattern. No fixed Approach We note how different our Lord’s approach was to the many people he met. There is no fixed scheme. He treated every person individually in the situation in which he was, espe­cially in terms of need. However, Jesus did spend much time with his disciples. Fellowship was evidently very important to him, not only as a strategic tactic in his ministry. His teaching was practical and individ­ualistic, using mundane examples for His parables. Jesus had an eye for the doubting Thomas. By the way, it seems as if Western theologi­cal tradition has overlooked that it was Thomas, who was prepared to go and die with Jesus (John 11:16). Many only see him only as the ‘doubting Thomas’ or even ‘die ongelowige Thomas’ (the unbeliev­ing Thomas). The Master took doubts seriously, reassuring the hovering disciple in this way. Jesus saw behind the impulsive Peter also his qualities as a potential leader. In obedi­ence to the nudging of the Holy Spirit, Philip had no qualms to speak to a seeking foreigner, an Ethiopian official, about his soul (Acts 8:26ff). Peter had some difficulties to step down from his pedestal of pride and condescension towards Gentiles. Paul kept in touch with the churches he had planted with letters of encouragement, but also with reproach. Count Zinzendorf cared for the Individual In a similar way, Count Zinzendorf had an eye for the individual. At the Danish court he defied the custom of the time to have fellowship with a slave, a person of low social status. By doing this, he discovered the quality of the West Indian slave Anton. Through this act and the ensuing visit of Anton to Herrnhut, the whole world mission­ary movement was started. Zinzendorf showed by his example that his philosophy: ‘Ich statuiere kein Christentum ohne Gemeinschaft’164was no empty theory. It has been suggested that Zinzendorf added fel­lowship as a third sacrament in the Protestant Church (Lewis, 1962:66). Yet, it must be stressed that the Count did not expect fellow­ship to be man-made; it was a gift of the Lamb. ‘It is not so much a fellowship of kindred minds but fundamental­ly of kindred hearts’ (Lewis, 1962:66). It was therefore natural that he expected believers who were linked to Herrnhut to get involved with fellowship locally, wherever they lived. Although Zinzendorf broke with Pietism in many other ways around 1734, the small ecclesiolae within the bigger churches remained a part of the Moravian practice in the diaspora. This was definitely in line with the teaching and example of the Master. Thus, I dare to suggest categorically that God would surely not be happy with the practice of some Christians to travels long distances to get to some fellowship, without however having contact with other believers in their neighbourhood. An important part of this personalized approach is working towards the development of latent gifts in others. Zinzendorf ‘was swift to recognize the diversity of racial and individual gifts, and from the beginning he insisted on the enlistment of native ‘Helpers’ wherever possible (Lewis, 1962:96). The graves of native Christians from all over the world at Herrnhaag, where the Count and his retinue found refuge after their banishment from Saxony, bear witness to the fact that this idea was also put into practice. Special in this regard was the Count’s eschatology where he saw it as the duty of missions to bring in the ‘first fruit’, the first converts from all tribes and nations. He believed that the Moravians could hasten the Lord’s return in this way. His personal sojourn among the Indians of North America taught him to be happy and content to see individuals come to the Lord, who however are fully sold out for his service. From the ranks of the nations these individuals will take the message to their peoples. The day of using the net to catch fish (Matthew 13:47) will come. Spangenberg reports how Zinzendorf not only noticed the absence of a particu­lar organist in a British congregation, but immedi­ately went to go and pray with him at his home afterwards when he heard that the brother was terminally ill (Spangenberg, 1971:1963). Spangenberg wrote about his relationship to the single brothers: His first aim was to know every one of them... very well (Spangenberg, 1971:1912). An incident shows the quality of the Count, when he looked through the list of men in the fellowship. He also requested information not only on those who had left the church, but also about those who had been sent away for various rea­sons (Spangenberg, 1971:1913). The church members took the individual approach to the mission field. Thus we read how Dober and Nitschmann patiently visited the Negroes one by one after sun-set (Lewis, 1962:81). This was definitely not merely done because public meetings were not allowed to be held amongst the slaves. Using the Gifts and Talents of others Following the example of our Master, we should be on the look-out for latent talent, eager to help others develop them. In the previous chapter we have already referred to the bands, the cell groups of the Moravians. To maximize the personal attention, the leaders of the choirs met with Zinzendorf individ­ually on a weekly basis ‘to lay before him whatsoever hindered or blessed the work of the Lamb in the souls committed to his charge’ (Lewis, 1962:69). Here latent gifts could easily be spotted and devel­oped. Zinzendorf excelled at using the gifts and initiatives of others. When a few believers approached him with the idea of coming together for prayer, he encouraged it. From there the 24-hour prayer chain developed, which kept the missionary train run­ning from Herrnhut. When he was attacked on his simplistic teaching, he would point to the congregation who preferred to listen to the exposition of the potter, Leonhard Dober, when he was leading Scripture readings, usually using the Hebrew text. Although Zinzendorf was really an intellectual, who used Latin, French, English, Dutch, Italian and other languages in his discourses (Spangenberg, 1971:1992), he opposed the rational religion of the Lutheran orthodoxy and anything which was philosophi­cal, which would leave the individual stranded. Zinzendorf’s interest in children is another case in point, following the example of His Master. He loved children, regarding his own children as the possession of the Lord. It has been reported how a diffi­cult situation was salvaged in North America when a little Indian child ran up to Zinzendorf to kiss him (Lewis, 1962:149). He had evi­dent­ly given attention to this girl on a previous visit to that family. Because of his love for children, it was only natural that he prayed for the teachers. Proof of the Depth of Revival The care for individuals should be the proof of the depth of any spiritual renewal which deserves the title revival. Any so-called ‘revival’ meeting, which only lists how many have come forward or even how many have been ‘saved’ (how does one measure that?) has to be questioned. In this regard the Moravians were once again exemplary. Lasting changing of lives should be the result and not merely an emotional eruption of the moment. Innovation usually accompanied real spiritual renewal, impacting many sectors of society. Of the revival among the boys in Niesky two of those impacted, William Verbeek and Theobald Wunderling shared years later: ‘The big meetings that we had in the beginning gradually petered out; however, ‘vereinigungen zweier oder dreiter’ , associations of twos and threes continued (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:384). They would not enumerate how many were converted, but would rather refer to those whom the Lord had found. The lives of the boys who had been full of mischief and pranks changed drastically. In stead, they hereafter gladly attended prayer and other religious meetings as well as going for spiritual counselling. All around the place there was now good behaviour and diligent study in their ranks. ‘Mocking holy things was outlawed. Yet, they enjoyed youthful fun. ‘Jokes, games and walks were now filled with sunshine even more.’ Theobald Wunderling went on to become an anointed preacher and bishop in the denomination. He clearly learned the lesson of the caring for the individual properly. To him the training of preachers was entrusted. That he took responsibility for the individual became known already in his first sermon in 1878 on Ezekiel 3:17-20 after his return to Niesky as a 52-year old. That he followed the example of our Lord seriously is demonstrated about what was said about him, for example that he was a friend of the poorest and most destitute. When he was the teacher at the court of Count von Richthofen in Gimmel, he took a completely neglected boy who had come to the village to his room where he cared for him and educated him. He was not deterred by quite a few disappointments. His positive attitude saved many a life on whom others would have given up. Wunderling had the gift of innovation like Count Zinzendorf. In stead of going through the motion of tradition, He taught is congregation to be ready for something new ‘in meisterhaftem Wechsel von Schriftverlesung, Gemeinde und Chorgesang.165 (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914:268). Bishop Wunderling impacted many sectors of society, right up to the aristocracy. Fellowship as an African Asset Close fellowship has traditionally been the normal thing to the African mind-set. We have to concede that this has been tarnished by the age of the televi­sion. In the townships one can now also find whole Black families glued to the ‘box’. Nevertheless, we shall possibly discover a reservoir below the surface, a potential for quality fellowship which is not found to the same extent in the West. Whole movements of people groups turning to Christ are possibly more likely in Muslim countries like Algeria, than in secular Germany. The recent influx of refugees to Europe might bring a change to this viewpoint. Perhaps the West, which is underdeveloped in this regard, needs missionaries from Africa to offer and teach them what quality fellowship is all about. We need missionaries who have an eye for the deeper non-material needs of people. South Africa with its relative technological sophistication in comparison with the rest of Africa, could provide this sort of missionary for Europe and North America. Zinzend­orf had the insight that ‘it would be much better if there were men of their own among the Hotten­tots and other heathen, who could take care of their own people; for as soon as we send people there, the heathen remain subject to the Europeans’ (Lewis, 1962:96). They put the theory in practice around 1740 with Christian Protten, who hailed from West Africa. He was somehow in a different category. After studying Theology in Copenhagen, he was sent as a Moravian missionary to Guinea, later as a pioneering independent to the Gold Coast - today called Ghana (Beck, 1981:49). At the Cape the theory proved to be very prophetic. Magdalena, one of Georg Schmidt’s Khoi (‘Hottentot’) converts, had to lead the congregation for many years after the missionary was more or less forced to leave the country. That Zinzendorf’s teaching was obeyed, is borne out by the fact that natives were taking leadership much earlier in Moravian mission stations compared to that of other missions, for example in Surinam and South Africa. In South Africa Rev. August Habelgaarn, a Moravian, became the first president of colour of both the SACC, the national council of churches and FELCSA, the Federation of Lutheran Churches in South Africa. Rev. John Gqweta from the same denomination was one of the first Africans on the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches. There are most probably gems to be found among the ‘rubble’ of African society, people who could turn the present social order upside down when they get on fire for the Lord. But they must be unearthed by Christians who are prepared to besmirch their hands, who are prepared to offer fellowship to those people, on whom the establishment generally looks down. Zulpha Morris, a Cape ex-Muslim from Mitchell’s Plain, turned out to become one of these jewels after her conversion in July 1998, starting a wonderful ministry to abused women and rejected children and persevering in spite of much opposition – albeit that much of it was because of mistakes made. (She had been an abused, rejected and despised street child.) Father Samaan, a Coptic Priest of Egypt, embraced this concept when he ministered to the down and outs of the massive garbage dump of Cairo, planting a big church there that became an integral part of the first Global Day of Prayer in 2005. As we go along, we may also discover some more slumbering gifts, which the Mother City of Cape Town possesses. Pastor James of Victory Outreach has already uncovered some of them among the drug addicts, since he started ministering here in July 2006. However, also in South Africa Western secular­ism has brought negative individ­ualism and egocentrism over as the norm. The result is extreme loneliness especially among the affluent, with dire conse­quences. There exists a definite need for Chris­tians who are prepared to break out of their own comfort zones to offer fellowship to ‘poor’ rich people. Food for Thought What individual in my family, neighbourhood, at my place of work needs special attention? Who has been sick, bereaved, hurt or despised within my circle of acqaintances? What hidden or latent gifts are there in our church? How could these gifts be put to service as an encouragement to the people concerned? (Be careful however of abuse!) And some Ideas Apart from giving attention to those people side-lined by circumstances or ignored by others, look for ways to encour­age them. How could the dormant gifts of people with training and experience in counselling, for example Bible School graduates who are at present holding secular jobs, be used more effectively, also utilizing what they have learnt? 17. Jesus, the Risk-taker par excellence: a Call for special Solidarity In the narrative recorded in John 4 to whom we have referred repeatedly, Jesus flouts just about every conven­tion of his time. By speaking openly at the well to the woman with doubtful morals, He risked His reputation. That He got a bad name because of his habit of dining with shadowy figures like publicans and prostitutes, is in fact recorded in Scripture (Matthew 11:19). It is interesting that Jesus highlighted this sort of reputation as the wisdom of God. In Matthew 23 it is reported how he really threw the gauntlet at the Pharisees and Scribes, openly telling the crowd that they must follow the teachings of the religious leaders but not imitate their lives. Through his scathing public attack on them he was surely courting with trouble. Biblical risk-taking is serious business. Jesus gave the example of up-grading the outcasts of His society by having such close communion with them, for example by sharing a meal with notorious tax-collectors and (ex)-prosti­tutes. It is especially the tax-collectors, this group which was probably despised more than any other group by the Jewish establishment (because of their perceived collaboration with the Roman oppressors), which Jesus uplifted and rehabilitated. He risked contamination, in get­ting very close to, yes possibly touching lepers. This was very revol­utionary for His day! Jesus socialized to such an extent with the pariah’s of his age that he was called ‘a friend of tax-collectors and sinners (Luke 7:34). This was definitely not meant as a compliment! But exactly by taking these risks, Jesus challenged the society of his time. In the process he brought together some remarkable combina­tions. In a previous chapter we have noted how Luke (chapter 7:36ff) recorded how a prostitute, who had heard that Jesus was at the house of a Pharisee, also dared to go there. Thus the Pharisee Simon - perhaps for the first time - got the chance to see the human being behind the prostitute. In fact, Jesus used her as an object lesson for complete submission and sacrificial giving because of grati­tude. Gideon’s Fleece The Bible however does not teach that one must take reckless risks all the time. When the Angel of the Lord challenged Gideon to be available to save the Israelites, he asked for all sorts of assurances (Judges 6). It almost sounds like an inconsistency, but the God of the Bible also gives room for the person who finds it difficult to take big risks. If we feel incapable and ill-equipped for some special task, we have every right to ask the Lord to confirm the call through a ‘fleece’ (Judges 6:36-40). Thus the risk could be scaled down to propor­tions which we can handle, even if we have limited faith. Gideon did not have the courage to bring down the altar of Baal in daytime, so he did it by night (Judges 6:27). Neverthe­less, this almost cost him his life. But God vindi­cated His faith, proceeding to use him mightily with a small band of fighters, who learned to put their trust in God alone (Judges 7). Sometimes we have to advise against ill-conceived risks which have their roots in bravado, with little or no faith value. Smashing bad Custom The Jewish custom prescribed hatred and condescension towards Samaritans. The main reason for their rejection - because the Samaritans mixed the worship of Yahweh with idolatry - was later not even generally known. The Jews of that age were actually no better. In fact, 2 Kings 17 describes how God allowed the Assyrian king to take the Jews into exile for that very reason. Thereafter the people who were later called ‘Samaritans’ were settled in that region. After their offer of help was turned down to help rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, they became the inveterate foes of the Jews, thereafter trying to prevent the temple to be rebuilt and later also the wall around the city. In that sense they became a collective proto-type of Muhammad, who turned against the Jews after initial admiration because they had rejected him. We contrast this with Count Zinzendorf and the Moravians who kept Jews in high regard until the end of his life. The knowledgeable Samuel Lieberkuhn declined an offer to become professor in Königsberg to work among Jews in Amsterdam. To all intents and purposes, the Samaritans had to be regarded as the visible enemy of the proud Jews. It amounted to a great risk that Jesus asked the woman for a drink. Jesus’ request was almost suicidal, soliciting a clash from both sides of the racial divide. To drink from a cup that had been used by a Samaritan, was tantamount to getting defiled, it was almost like touching a leper. His request implied his willingness to drink from the same cup or jug that she had with her. We are reminded of staunch Muslims and Jews who also do not eat from utensils used by Gentiles (unbelievers). Jesus surely knew that he risked getting a rude answer or even rejection from someone whom the Jews regarded as the pariah’s of their society. The Lord did not have a drawing bucket with him to pull up the water. He deviated radically from the prevalent custom. South Africans of the older generations should comprehend this very well. Some of us may still vividly remember the days when people of colour were not allowed in the dining room of Whites - let alone share a cup with the ruling class. In showing respect where everybody else from the superior race would have shown disdain, Jesus showed the way to start breaking down the wall of racial prejudice and hatred. Being a Samaritan, the woman would certainly have been completely flabbergasted that he spoke to her, let alone being willing to drink from her cup. Almost every Samaritan of Jesus’ era may have been told how their forefathers were rejected when they wanted to help the Jews to rebuild the temple. A vicious snipe would have been a possible normal reaction. We know this from the South African setting in the old days! Many a race-conscious, embittered or hurting person of colour may remember how he/she would sometimes reply to an innocent enquiry by Whites with as much venom as possible whenever he/she had the chance. We may safely surmise that the question of the Samaritan woman was possibly not articulated in a completely loving tone: ‘How do you as a Jew ask me a Samaritan for water to drink?’ Apart from surprise, her reply possibly included the hate-filled response of someone who was happy to get the chance to hit back fiercely at a representative of the group that oppressed and despised them. ‘Wat vir ‘n cheek! Wie’s jy om vir my te vra?’ (What a cheek! Who are you to ask something from me?) That could have been an apt South African equivalent. She might have enjoyed the opportunity to refuse the simple request. Jesus however did not allow himself to be governed by revenge. But he also did not allow her hate-filled reaction to put him off either. Instead, he started a natural conversation about water. This is conveying the message: ‘I don’t despise you.’ If one starts to reach out in love to people from another culture, one must not be surprised at all, when the initial reaction is one of rejection. In cross-cultural outreach where language learning is part of the preparation, the humiliation of becoming like a little child is a very healthy spiritual exercise. Asking questions about the religion and culture from people - rather than acquiring it from books - can help much to counter an initial defence mechanism: up with the shutters! However, a simple mundane question, like the request of Jesus for some water to drink, can also break down the traditional animosity. Radical Enemy Love Jesus not only taught ‘enemy love’. He showed by His life-style that the teaching of ‘enemy love’ was not only a theory. His speaking to a woman from the ranks of the ‘enemy’, and at that one with doubtful morals, was revolutionary. As we have seen, He definitely risked extreme repudiation at the very least. It is sad that some Christians regard Muslims as enemies. The essence of divine love, agape, is the sacrificing of yourself, putting your own interests on the back seat to the advantage of the other person. Because of our sinful, fallen nature - slaves of sin - we have become enemies of God. But exactly that is where God displayed agape in sending His Son who ‘...did not come to be served, but to serve’ and to set us free from the bondage of sin, ‘...to give his life as a ransom for many.’ The other ‘NT’ writers stressed love through their teachings. After listing the various gifts of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:28, Paul continues by showing them ‘a more excellent way’, viz. love. Paul articulates this by way of the beautiful and well-known song on love in chapter 13. In Romans 13:8-10 and Galatians 5:14 the law of love - ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ - is described as a summary of all other commandments. Coming from the King of Kings, it is not surprising that James called it the royal law (2:8). James himself was possibly one of those bowled over by that love. To some Pentecostals it might be a big surprise to discover how Paul rates issues like charismata (gifts of the spirit) in the body of Christ as ‘mundane’. In Romans 12:4-8 - the corollary of the more prominent gifts of the spirit of 1 Corinthians 12 - the interlinking of different parts of the body of Christ are mentioned. Next to ‘special’ gifts like prophesy, ‘ordinary’ gifts like encouragement, leadership and compassion are listed. By risking His own life, Jesus started the upliftment of the despised Samaritans. Thus he actually gave an example of working towards reconciliation with the ‘enemy’. Jesus was really the Master at getting beyond disputes, making friends out of enemies. The quality of Jesus’ love is especially shown by some of the incidents at his crucifixion. His first words of love from the Cross - even before he addressed his friends - were forgiving words directed at his enemies. After his resurrection the Master rushed to those who had denied and rejected him in the hour of his deepest need. Jesus has every right to expect of his followers the high standard of sacrificial love because He has demonstrated this through his life and even more so through his death. He showed the way to be prepared to sacrifice your life for your friends... and for your enemies. Within this framework, the beatitude that encourages us to be peacemakers (Matthew 5:9) follows naturally. Paul echoed this injunction in one form or another in almost every epistle, with the apt central summary in Ephesians 2:14 ‘because He is our peace...’ Jesus is the one through whom the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile has been broken down. The risk Jesus took at the well of Jacob was completely in line with the rest of His life, where suffering and persecution were always very real possibilities. In fact, Jesus declared us happy if we are persecuted and vilified for no other reason than that we are His followers (Matthew 5:8). He taught His disciples that they should not be surprised to be hated by the world (John 15:20). Risk-taking of the Moravians Count Zinzendorf had little regard for the bourgeois mentality of his time. To the amusement of many of his contem­por­aries, he held an open religious meeting at his Dresden home every Sunday afternoon, when he worked there as a high government official (Lewis, 1962:31). Follow­ing His Master, he refrained from differentiating between rank and status on purpose, bringing together people from every rank of society. The example in well-known mission history with the greatest result is probably when Count Zinzendorf ‘stepped down’ to speak to the slave Anton at the occasion of the coronation of Chris­tian VI of Denmark in 1731, after the mediation of one of his team from Herrnhut. This risk spawned the whole missionary movement from Herrnhut like no other single act. At another time the Count was walking around anonymously like a pauper. He took such financial risks that Bishop Spangenberg, who took over the leadership of the Church after his death, had quite a job on his hands to try and sort things out to save the Moravians from financial ruin. This may not sound very complimentary, but it does give an indication of the guts and courage of the Count. He took seriously the fact that Christ gave his all, that Jesus risked everything. His followers took the cue from him. They were for example immediate­ly prepared to be put on an equal footing with slaves in order to reach the poor lost souls on the West Indian plantations. A typical example of this is the missionary Johann Michael Peterleitner, who had worked from 1804-1809 first among the Indians in Surinam (South America) and then on a plantation mission station among the Negro slaves before coming to South Africa. He started work among lepers before his death in 1829 at the baptism of one of his congregants (Beck, 1981:237). Sometimes the impression is given that risk-taking is the domain of young people. Zinzendorf put a lie to this sugges­tion. Only a few years before his death - as a 57-year old - he took a risk which could have landed the fellowship in great problems. His risk to enter the ministry in his younger days as an aristocrat was nothing compared to his decision to marry the peasant Anna Nitschmann after the death of the Countess Erdmuth. Many of his benefactors were from the nobility! But it was a well-calculated risk. The inner circle of the church family supported him in this step. In fact, they had encour­aged him to do it. In one of the amazingly well kept secrets, the broader church membership was only informed of their marriage in a letter almost one and a half years later. (It would have been extremely risky for the Count to have Anna Nitschmann in his group in respect of gossiping tongues as he travelled such a lot without his wife). There are instances of people who have taken risks, where it is not so clear whether God required the particular action from them. Occasionally Christians have sold their houses to get into some missionary adventure, not because God had clearly challenged them to do it, but because they emulated others who did have that call. Sometimes the action might be right, but the timing wrong. It is so important to consider prayerfully what should be done in terms of risk. However, even where people acted rashly with pure motives, they have discovered - with all things being equal - that God is no man’s debtor. Conversely, we have seen in our personal lives how ‘safety valves’ which we wanted to use due to our lack of faith, turned out to be of little use in the end. But God is sovereign: so often He has even turned our mistakes into opportunities for the good of the Kingdom. South African Risks at the time of the ‘struggle’ South Africa knows many people who risked a lot in the time of the ‘struggle’. Many ‘Whites’ risked their reputation by befriending people of colour and ‘Blacks’ who risked their lives when they dared to be seen in the presence of ‘Whites’. At least one ‘Black’ lady, Nomangezi ??, had her house burnt down because of her con­tact with Whites. But we also got to know a ‘White’ pastor and his family who had the courage to care for ‘Black’ street children in their home in the bad old days. As soon as Ds. Lensink or some­one from the family got a tip-off that police would come and search their home, they would hide them. And what about those who were imprisoned - but never tried before a court of law - for example by caring for the families of political prisoners? There would be numer­ous stories to be told of risks taken during the apart­heid era. On the negative side, it is a fact that Western Christians are often insured to the hilt! This is surely not the place to discuss the pro’s and cons of insurance, but we should look at the issue in the light of the fact that this inflated the support levels for prospective missionaries. In the case of those agencies which require a certain percentage before a missionary candidate can come into full-time service, people of colour were almost put out of contention. Fortunately, OM and other missions have started to look at matters differently, to be more prepared to take risks. The call is now for men and women who are prepared to take risks for the Gospel, to risk their life so that souls may be saved. But it is also the time for churches to take steps of faith in supporting missionaries on a regular basis. Food for Thought: Am I prepared to take risks for the Gospel? What sort of risks am I prepared to take? Am I also prepared to put my reputa­tion at stake (or even my life), if that could enhance the spread of the Good News of salvation through Christ? And some Ideas: Try out prayerfully some calculated risks. This may help to gradually get into bigger steps of faith. It may also help to take risks corporately as a group, as a church. In the venture of societal risks, our motives should be checked: mere non-conformism or bravery is not good enough - it should somehow still remain a risk for the spreading of the Gospel. 18. Jesus, a Master in Conflict Management Sometimes Jesus is being depicted as a so-called softy. Because He taught his followers to turn the other cheek, to go the second mile, some people deduce that Christians should be willing to be trampled upon, to be a sort of door-mat. In chapter 7 we have highlighted the subtle difference between biblical sub­mission and bondage of servility. Related to the matter under discussion here, there is the issue of how we view God. Perhaps because Calvinists tend towards a one-sided legalistic view of the punishing Almighty, some Christians went to the other extreme, making God a ‘softy’, one who is only merciful and forgiving. This is then said to be ‘New Testamentical’ - in contrast to the stringent, revengeful God of the Hebrew Scriptures. This is a complete over-simplification of matters, actually a caricature of God. It may be true that the ‘New Testament’ stresses the love of God more than his ven­geance. We have shown in chapter 11 how this was indeed one of the issues which brought Jesus in disrepute with his fellow Jewish compatriots. But we should not overlook that the Lord also clearly taught, for example in Matthew 25, of a judgment to come, of a separ­ation between goats and sheep. He highlighted the possibility even of the separ­ation of husband and wife at his return; Jesus spoke of some who will be rejected. Even pious people will be turned away, weighed and found wanting. When the Lord is only seen as someone who circumvented conflict or even stayed clear from it, nothing is further than the truth. The Lord also taught us how to handle conflict in a positive way. We note furthermore that Jesus took conflict as a given, a reality of life. We prefer to speak of conflict management rather than conflict ‘resolution.’ The latter suggests that matters are resolved or even solved once and for all. The fact is that all too often compromises have to be used with no party in the conflict completely happy, although one would normally strive of course to achieve a win-win situation. Getting the Priorities Straight Let us deduce some lessons from our Lord’s handling of conflict. The major lesson is probably that he had his priorities in place. From the right relationship to his Father, his behaviour flowed and followed. A life of commitment to him, the light, automatically leads to conflict and confrontation with the forces of darkness. Because our Lord is the truth, the tempter - who is the father of lies (John 8:44) - tried to trap him through a distortion of the Word. As the only person who did not die again after having been resurrected, he is the way to eternal life – indeed the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6). Right from the start of his ministry, Jesus was involved with conflict. The narrative of the temptation in the desert in Matthew 4 is a high-powered confrontation between the forces of darkness that wanted to woo the Lord into a compromise, in a seductive exchange for power. His challenge to the fishermen to follow him was likewise conflict-laden as he, a stranger, was asking them to drop their livelihood and follow him. The report of the changing of wine into water (John 2:1-11) contains a conflict of priorities between his earthly mother and His heavenly Father. But a quick inner check permitted and demonstrated the authority, sovereignty, flexibility and creative ability of Father and Son. A good example of our Lord’s complete mastery of priorities is given in John 4 where it is reported how a rumour was brought to Him that his cousin John was baptizing more converts. The motives of those people who came with the rumour are not clear, but the gun-powder contained in the question is quite evident. In verse 1+2 there are at least three issues included in the rumour which could have drawn a response from Jesus. There was the suggested number of people baptized, who performed it and the comparison with John the Baptist. Instead of allowing himself to be drawn into a petty, unproductive discussion, our Lord ‘left Judea’ lest he be sucked into the arbitrary conflict between those baptised by him and those by John. A possible inference that he walked away cowardly, is completely refuted when we look closely at the verses that follow these words. The remarkable verse 4 squashes any idea that the Master was simply dodging difficult issues: ‘He had to go through Samaria’. If our Lord had been of the sort to circumvent problematic matters, then here was a good opportunity. We have already shown how he faced the issue of the despised Samaritans head-on. In fact, he uplifted them as he went along. Not only did he go to the town of Sychar, but he went to sit next to the cultic explosive well of Jacob. No Jew of those days would have done such a thing. It was tantamount to looking for trouble! Handling Confrontation On the other hand, we see in the enfolding narration how Jesus handles confrontation in such a skillful way that the Samaritan woman is completely turned around in the process. When she used religion as a cover-up after he had cornered her on her lifestyle, he challenged her in a respectful way. To this day his reply challenges religious people everywhere: The Father seeks true worshippers... those who worship in Spirit and in truth. Even in evangelical churches we could find Christians who worship the act of worship in stead of the triune God. Another special lesson of our Lord is how he handled dis­putes. In almost classical style he could unmask wrong alter­natives; more correctly, we should say he often radicalized false alternatives. When our Lord was put on trial on the issue of the paying of taxes, he coolly replied that both God and the Caesar had to get the due of their respective allegiance (Matthew 22:21). When his disciples became involved in petty bickering about rank, he challenged them with service as the qualifica­tion for rank: the greatest is the servant of all (Luke 22:24­ff). How our Lord operated cross-culturally in a loving way, can now be our model, not shying away from confrontation. The word tolerance has sometimes been abused in this regard. Whilst this is a virtue which should generally be the aim of every believer, we note from our Lord’s example that it is far from absolute. He hates sin but He loves the sinner. In the same context (John 10) in which he speaks about thieves who rob, Jesus calls himself the door. Whereas there might be different avenues to get to God, Jesus made it clear to which highway these minor roads should lead to: ‘I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes unto the Father but by me.’ This might sound intolerant to some ears, but this is nevertheless the biblical way, the only door. It thus becomes a matter of take it or leave it. It would be fruitless to debate about the matter. Managing Conflict The Master gave practical and clear teaching for handling conflict. The prime example is Matthew 18. Sometimes counselors forget to check out whether the very rudimentary step of sorting matters out between two quarreling parties had been pursued. Of course, it is never easy to confront the party who has offended you unless one is of the type that likes to fight. How often has it been helpful to check out a wrong assumption! In stead of taking any loaded or hurting information that had been passed on as truth, a good practice and principle is to ascertain if the spirit in which it has been conveyed has not perhaps been distorted. How much anger and hurt can be prevented in interaction among people – also in Christian circles - if this teaching of Jesus is followed. There is of course the very real situation where the opposing party reacts indifferently or even aggressively upon personal confrontation. Jesus’ advice to take one or two witnesses along for this eventuality makes such a lot of sense. Yet, how often is this practised nowadays, let alone the next step of church discipline, the exclusion from the fellowship if anyone persists with sinful behaviour and refusal to repent, to mend his/her ways? Have Anger sanctified An important facet of conflict management is the issue of anger. Fallaciously some Christians think that it is sinful to become angry. On the contrary, there is such a thing as holy anger. Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures one can read how God reacted with wrath and anger because of the idolatry and sins of His people. Similarly, Jesus really got angry when He saw how the temple was desecrated by traders. (One wonders in how far it also angered him that the foreigners and other proselytes that habitually used that part of the temple precincts were thus pushed out). Yet, the nature of God is such that he is swift to forgive, but ‘slow to anger and rich in steadfast love and truth’ (Exodus 34:7). In the Psalms it is repeated more than once that God is slow to anger. Some evangelicals give one the impression that it is sinful to become angry. At issue is how we handle our anger, or better still, to sanctify our anger. In fact, it would be an abuse of the Pauline verses (1 Corinthians 13:4-6) to say that love should cover sinful behaviour. The ‘New Testament’ gives clear teaching on how to handle anger. Paul takes it for granted that we can get angry, but we should be careful not to sin when we are angry. But even then we must set things right before the sun sets (Ephesians 4:26). We should guard our temper. Paul actually encouraged us to actively oppose anger in our midst by not only throwing off anger and other carnal traits (Colossians 3:8), but instead, let the Spirit renew your thoughts and attitudes. put on your new nature, created to be like God – truly righteous and holy (Ephesians 4:23,24), i.e. through the sanctifying work of the indwelling Holy Spirit. In his epistle also James (1:19, 20) passed on some practical teaching in this regard: be slow to get angry. This ties in with Romans 12:2 which defines the renewing of our thoughts as a transforming process that the Holy spirit must perform in us, rather than a quick fix - a metamorphasis.166 Occasional Need of Confrontation Both Peter and Paul did not shun confrontation r. When principles were at stake they were no slow coaches in heated debate. Acts 6 and 15 reflect conflict-laden situations. In both cases the end result was a sharing of responsibilities and a doubling of the work. If conflict is handled well, it has the potential to spread the Gospel even more widely and the work load can be delegated among more people. After Peter had been taught by God that he should cease despising those nations which he had regarded as ritually impure, he was prepared not only to act upon it by going to Cornelius (Acts 10), but also to defend his action before his colleagues. The end result of the delicate situation in Acts 6 was the appointment of deacons and the heated debate in Acts 15 resulted in church planting where the best men were sent (Verse 22). Calling a spade a spade might sometimes also be neces­sary. In Galatians 2:11-15 it is reported how Paul criticized Peter to his face in the presence of others when he sensed hypocrisy. If the actions of fellow brothers and sisters confuse young believers it might be necessary to do the unusual thing to reprimand them publicly. A related issue with which we have already dealt is the wrong conception that servility is Christian. Much anger can be averted if we use our authority in Christ, not to allow others to trample on us unnecessarily. And what about Judgment Day? It is reassuring that our Lord promised that nobody will be able to pluck His sheep from the Father’s hand (John 10:28f). But it can be misleading when it is being inter­preted is such a way that we can do what we like without dire conse­quences, not only in the spiritual, but also in the natural. Getting saved and receiving a reward in life hereafter is not as simple as some believers try to make it. This can be shown easily when we look at the teaching of the Master and that of Paul, the apostle. The Lord pointed to the equal ‘payment’ of workers (Matthew 20 1-15) who started at differ­ent times of the day. But he also used a parable to illustrate varying rewards according to talents (Matthew 25:14-30). Paul differenti­ates various degrees of getting a reward in the hereafter for our work done; gold, silver, wood, grass or hay (1 Corinthians 3: 12ff). In the latter case, getting saved means to scrape home, pulled out of the fire of judgmental condemnation, getting saved but smelling like smoke! Some church people try to give the impression that reward is not something to be strived after. Biblically this is not tenable and completely incomprehensible. Why should we not give believers something to live for? If our Lord challenged us to give our lives for our friends (John 15:13), if Paul ran the race and fought the good fight to win the crown (1 Corin­thians 9:24-27), if John had the vision of a crown which can be ‘earned’ through being faithful (Revelations 2:10) - as a reward for the victory (Revelations 6:2) - why should anyone settle for a dull Christian walk? The first Christians and Disputes The first Christians evidently had to handle disputes quite soon after Pentecost. Nationalism crept in so that there were discriminatory practices against the Greek-speaking (widows). The way these Christians handled the dispute became an example: the apostles did not allow the problem to detract them from the main priority, the spreading of the Gospel, but they appointed men from the rank of the Gentile Christians - including some with Greek names - to take care of the Greek widows (Acts 6: 1ff)). When the issue of the arrogant superiority of the Jewish believers threatened to split the fellowship, the problem was faced head-on and a worthy compromise reached (Acts 15). Although the inference is justified that problematic issues should not be ducked, this does however not mean that difficult matters should be handled in an unloving way. John, the apostle, taught a combina­tion of truth and deeds in love (1 John 3:18) and Paul also taught us to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15) Just like the Master, Paul had some harsh words for the Galatians (for example Chapter 3:1-5) when he noticed that they started compromis­ing the Gospel truths. The hypocrisy of the Roman Christians was addressed in no unclear terms (Romans 2:1, 2) and in 1 Corinthians 5 the immorality in the local church was condemned outright. In the letter of Jude (verse 4) a non-complimentary reference is made to godless people who wormed their way into the body of believers. This also happened in the churches in Galatia, where Paul did not hesitate to call a spade a spade (Galatians 2:4-6). Church Discipline An issue which should also be addressed again in the Lord’s teach­ing is that of discipline. This seems to have disappeared from the vocabulary of churches. In the report of the revival of Herrnhut in 1727 this aspect is so often completely overlooked and often even omitted. Informed sources rightly note that a decisive factor of the revival summer was ‘Zinzendorf’s becoming acquainted with the system of church discipline of the Bohemian Brethren as written in their official Ratio Disciplinae’ (Weinlick and Frank, The Moravian Church through the Ages, 1989:57). In this case it was the edition prepared by Comenius in Amsterdam in 1660, republished in 1702 in Tübingen. Zinzendorf discovered the booklet in the library of Zittau. Many churches do not seem to dare challenging the sinful life-style of people, for fear of losing their members. And if it is done at all, it is very rarely done in a biblically sound way. Of course, many pastors (ab)­use the pulpit for this purpose, lacking the courage to address the issues on a more personal level. A recent variation seems to be to trust the Holy Spirit to minister to people and bring healing after they had been slain in the Spirit. This has sometimes been abused as a sort of substitute for biblical discipline! I do not want to ridicule these matters, but I find so little Scriptural backing for it. I believe much hurt can be avoided, even more healing effected if we take the Lord’s teaching in Matthew 18 seriously. In stead of chatting with a third person - not even with the pastor - about a matter, much could be resolved and unnecessary harm avoided - if Christians go to those who have caused them hurt and sort things out by offering their apology. This goes against the grain of worldly thinking, where standing on your rights in retaliation is the accepted norm. It was not easy for Paul to chide the church at Corinth when they allowed an incestuous relation­ship in their midst (1 Corinthians 5:1ff). We note how serious he regards the matter, to suggest even that the man should be excommunicated and handed over to satan. On another level, when discipline is still exercised in churches, it is usually restricted to sexually related matters. So easily gluttony and excessive drinking are all but con­doned or exonerated. (In fact, it is a question whether the multi-course dinners and bazaars for fund-raising purposes are not encouraging over-indulgence in eating habits.) And what about gossip? We can derive from the teaching of James (1:21), that doubtful habits in this area can have the effect of ear wax, equal to moral filth, which have to be plucked out before we can properly hear God’s voice. Alternately, we can save ourselves much trouble by send­ing people who come with complaints about other believers back to speak first to those who have hurt them. And if this does not help, gossip would be nipped in the bud if a second person is brought into the mix. The teaching of Paul in matters of discipline is a natu­ral extension. Nowadays Christians take each other to court so easily that one wonders whether they know what the Bible teaches on the matter (for example 1 Corinthians 6:1-7). Furthermore, the advice of Paul - not to allow the sun to set over our anger (Ephesians 4:26), is as sound advice as what one can wish for. How much depression and stress develop because people have fretted, wallowing in their hurt, allowing the arch enemy to exaggerate matters. The healing Effect of straight Talk Sometimes it is forgotten that loving straight talk can have a healing effect. Although Paul taught that the truth should be spoken in love ((Ephesians 4:15), he also spoke out clearly against the hypocrisy of his fellow apostles when he noticed that their attitude caused confusion among new believers. There might even occur the rare occasion when the best solution could be to reprimand believers in public (compare Galatians 2:11-14). Paul did not hesitate to admonish by letter, sometimes causing distress, for example in Corinth. But the results show that they sensed that he was writing with a loving, bleeding heart: ‘I am no longer sorry that I sent that letter to you, though I was very sorry for a time, realizing how painful it would be to you. But it hurt you only for a while. Now I am glad I sent it... because the pain turned you to God... For God sometimes uses sorrow in our lives to help us turn away from sin and seek eternal life’ (2 Corinthians 7:8ff). In his teaching to Timothy, the apostle passed on a wonderful balance: ‘Correct and rebuke your people when they need it, encourage them to do right, and all the time be feeding them patiently with God’s Word’ (1 Timothy 4:13). Along with that an important principle is given: God’s Word - and not our own wisdom - should have pre-eminence in all forms of disci­pline. Having said that, it should immediately be added that this may never be interpreted as encouragement to bash someone else with Bible verses in a legalistic and loveless way. The Link between Sin and Fruit-Bearing Furthermore, we should also note the link between sin and bearing fruit. Solomon’s Song of Songs (2:15) taught that it is the little foxes that destroy the vine blossoms, thus pre­venting fruit to develop. So-called petty sin can add up like wax in the ear, hindering one to hear God’s voice properly. This increases until one becomes insensitive to every warning, sliding further away from God. The experience of Lot, who moved ever nearer to Sodom until he eventually hardly noticed the sinful habits of the inhabit­ants, can be cited as an example. A special responsibility rests with the clergy. If religious leaders persist with a sinful example, this could be the time when God refuses to recognize them (Hosea 4:6,7). In view of the danger of backsliding, Jesus warned prospective disciples of the cost involved through two parables (Luke 14:28-33), viz. counting the cost in building a tower and a king going to war with less soldiers than the enemy. Affirmation and Encouragement Also the positive side needs mentioning. The contrast to the above scenario is the Lord’s exhortation to us, His followers, to be in union with him, the vine, so that we can bear much fruit (John 15:4). Affirmation and encouragement often work better than repri­mand. However, this can never be a substitute for loving reproach. Paul warned against overstep­ping; in discipline you can unnecessar­ily anger and embitter your children (Ephesians 6:4). A major side-effect of our consumer society has been the lack of disciplined and persevering commitment to a task. Jesus himself set out ‘to finish the work’ of the one who sent him, of God (John 4:34). Spiritual work wears one down. Disappoint­ments and discouragements belong to the ball game as a matter of course. That is why Paul found it necessary to encourage the Galatians not to become weary ... not to give up (Galatians 6:9). The Corinthians were encouraged towards a full commitment ‘because your labour in the Lord is not in vain’ (1 Corinthians 15:58). With regard to perseverance George Verwer wrote very aptly: ‘God does not want sprinters, who go incredibly fast, but are exhausted after a hundred meters, but marathon runners who can go on and on’ (Verwer, 1993:116). The bottom line is to learn to run at God’s pace for your life. We should never try to run at someone else’s pace. Lack of Discipline can work like Cancer One of the examples of the lack of correction and discipline which is sometimes given is the treatment of the priest Eli, who did not even know what his sons were doing. They were actually seducing young women who assisted at the entrance of the temple. This eventually led to Samuel becoming a judge in Israel. A lesser known but a detailed descrip­tion how the lack of disciplin­e can work pervasively like cancer over many years, is given in 2 Samuel. David started the rot when he allowed his lust to take over, by having intercourse with Bath­sheba (chapter 11). Subsequently he indirectly murdered her hus­band, when she turned out to have become pregnant from their adultery. Considering his authority as king, his actions were tantamount to rape. It is doubtful if he would have owned up to his deeds, if the prophet Nathan did not confront him (chapter 12). Even though he repented and con­fessed, David did not succeed in translating his lapse into a lesson for his children. His son Ammon raped his half sister Tamar. After hearing this, Absalom - her blood brother - started plotting revenge, eventual­ly killing Ammon (chapter 13). In stead of communication and disciplining the guilty one, the matter is covered up, first by Absalom and then by David (2 Samuel 13:20, 21). A deep hatred was allowed to grow until murder and eventually suicide (17:23) became by-products. All this could perhaps have been averted if David had used his own sins as a lesson to educate his children. In any case, if he had spoken about things in stead of only getting angry, much harm could have been prevented. The ultimate obedience is to God. By contrast, many centuries later, the apostles boldly declared their stance when their ultimate allegiance was challenged. When they were required to stop teaching in the name of our Lord, they knew that they had to obey God more than men (Acts 4:18ff). Discipline in Herrnhut Zinzendorf and his Moravians evidently had few problems on this score. Discipline was generally accepted. Obedience to God - and to the leadership - was taken for granted. Even so, it is interesting to take note how the Count, even as a teen­ager, had learned to obey authority. His grandmother ‘knew only too good that he could keep quiet and obey’ (Beyreuther, 1965:29). As we have pointed out, the observance to the Statutes - which were accepted on May 12, 1727 – was the sound basis for the revival. Before that, the discord in Herrnhut was caused by the refugees who would not brook the discipline of the Spirit and the brotherly admonition of the helpers (Lewis, 1962:49). The role of the leader­ship in the administra­tion of discipline must be emphasized. In Herrnhut the strife could initially flourish because the local pastor, Rothe, was weak in applying discipline (Lewis, 1962:49). Having apparently solved the problems of schism and disunity, the believers went on to cover more serious matters than any petty doctrinal dispute. The Moravians prayed fervently for a great outpouring of God's Holy Spirit throughout the entire world. The various groups carried on these prayers constantly for one hundred years. And the revival that followed in their wake bore fruit that lasted nearly two centuries. Things changed dramatically after the acceptance of the Statutes, when all members committed themselves to abide by these rules. It must be stressed that the rules were not regarded as binding legalistic laws, but rather as guidelines for living in a community of believers. The Bible as Guideline The Bible was taken as guideline to resolve the differences. When someone suggested that compromise in a major dispute could forestall persecu­tion in Herrnhut, Zinzendorf dismissed it as unworthy (Weinlick, 1956:80). The Count tackled the issue head-on, using a Bible verse on the spur of the moment. We should however not think for a moment that the Brethren were easy on discipline. In fact, they were quite strict. But if there was any correction to be done, they took their cue from Scrip­ture. When the Brethren were attacked corporately, Zin­zendorf encour­aged the group to examine whether there was anything to be rectified from their side. And if people needed discipline, Zinzendorf would tackle the culprits individually. But also in this regard the Count was usually self-critical. In a random sample, taken from his diary entry of July 12, 1729 we read: ‘We took stock of ourselves and told each other what yet remained to mar the image of Christ. I let them tell me first what I lacked and then I told them what they lacked’ (Weinlick, 1956:91). Zinzendorf really had patience with the erring ones, giving us an example how people can be lovingly corrected. When the culprits brought up something which he could still allow, ‘he did not throw it away but quietly cor­rected them’ (Spangenberg, 1971:280). He appeared to love them unconditionally, choosing not to remember the past. Two major Blemishes Nevertheless, one should not get the impression that the Moravians were almost impeccable. Two major blemishes in the application of discipline can be mentioned, with the second a direct result of the first. Because of the Count’s many trips away from home, his son Chris­tian Renatus had been groomed to take over the leadership. He was given the charge of the congregation in the ‘Wetterau’, the area near to Büdingen, north of present-day Frankfurt/Main (where the community had settled after they had been banned from Saxony). Excesses in the spiritual realm developed, which grew cancerously until Zinzendorf saw a letter which really alarmed him. He immediately took steps, writing a letter to all congrega­tions - without however naming anyone - in which all and sundry were harshly reprimanded to set things right. He also ordered the responsible elders to come to London and he deposed his son with immediate effect. Eventual­ly the aristocrat came down much too harshly on the sensitive young man. After handing the charge of the fellowship prematurely over to his teenage son Christian Renatus, there followed a lack of scriptural correction. This led to emotional experiential utterings about the blood and the wounds of Christ, some of which had Count Zinzendorf as the originator. His drastic steps brought the Moravians back on a biblical course, but then the Count overstepped. Obviously Zinzendorf wanted to set an example with his only son, Christian Renatus, who had already proved that he was a man of God. However, the harsh treatment of his father brought the young man into a deep depression, from which he never recovered. He died prema­turely at the young age of 24. Zinzendorf was really remorseful after the death of his son, because he knew full well that through his own theologizing about the blood and wounds of Christ, the pattern was set for the excesses, which followed from it. A problem which flowed from this ‘sifting period’ was that some people wormed their way into the congregations as spies. Many half truths and downright lies about the Moravians were spread, which caused almost irreparable harm to the mission cause. Thus there was a pastoral letter of warning against the ‘extreme views’ of the Moravians issued by Ds G.Kulenkamp, an Amsterdam minister, in 1738. The letter branded the Moravians a mystical society, suggesting that the Moravians were spreading dangerous opinions under the cover of pure simplicity which were detrimental to the pure doctrine. It is important to note that the Brethren had clear guidelines for those who wanted to join their ranks. Zinzendorf made a clear distinction between leading someone to Christ and allowing someone to join the Church (Spangenberg, 1971:1967). All people who wanted to join the fellowship were tested and they had to be prepared to submit themselves to the rules. The Moravians had no intention to become a big denomination. In fact, the denomination grew in spite of their stated intention to remain small. Back to Church Discipline? Could it be that the lack of discipline and its mirror image, the lack of commitment, serve as major hindrances to a work of the Holy Spirit? I suspect that the consumer spirit of our modern society - accompanied by the craving after anonymity in big churches where independence is guaranteed and accountability is not required - is hampering a deep work of God in many fellowships. A caricature of a merciful God has developed. Thus some people think that He seems to permit almost every­thing because one can always confess the sins afterwards. This ushered in an atmosphere in which discipline became foreign. Especially in the area of sexuality a mislead­ing unbiblical ‘love your neighbour’ has set in. Hollywood Christian­ity has made premarital inter­course, extra-marital relations and divorce acceptable in a new morality. This has led the slide towards a false tolerance what the Bible calls sin, so that in some circles homosex­uality and abortion are merely treated as ethical questions about which the Bible does not give clear guidance. No wonder that marriage ceremonies for homosex­uals and the consecration of the ‘babies’ of lesbians in churches are not strange any more in some countries. At the ‘Kirchen­tag’ in Germany, the massive biennial church gatherings, one can find on ‘the market of possibili­ties’ all sorts of strange things. Even the propaga­tion of pedophilia has been noticed.167 Could this poss­ibly be the result of a bad conscience that sex tourism - including child prosti­tution - is thriving because undisci­plined immoral Westerners are the main culprits? Would it not be much better to confess that materialism was made fashionable by capitalism, and that the root cause of pornogra­phy, drug addiction, prostitution and all sorts of vice is the love of money? Paul had not only said this (1 Timothy 6:10) already many centuries ago, but also that materialism boils down to idolatry (Colossians 3:5). Or has idolatry also become fashionable? In Western society we have become modern pagans with the blessing of not only our governments, but also by and large unchecked by the Church. The sooner we repent, the better! Collectively the application of the lukewarm church of Laodicia in Revelations 3 is so valid. The context (v.20) indicates that the Lord is actually standing outside the church, knocking for entry, rather than knocking at the ‘heart door’ of the individual, as has been conveniently expounded for evangelistic purposes. But this gives us as Christians also a special responsi­bil­ity for our government. The Pauline injunction to pray for those in authority is the minimum. We should be challenged to pray for our leaders especially when we sense that they are leading people astray. If need be - in stead of criticizing cheaply - we should be prepared like the prophet Samuel (1 Samuel 15:11) to spend a whole night in prayer for the erring leaders. On the positive side, we should pray for godly politi­cians, irrespective of their party-political convictions. Let’s intercede for God-fearing legislation which can stand the test of both time and stringent moral scrutiny. And if this is not the case, Christians should be the first to leave no stone unturned, to rectify any such issue. If South Africa is to become a country that could export missionaries on a grand scale, a return to the biblical standards of morality and discipline is a pre-requisite. The present condition where Christians run from one church to the other, from one conference or ministry to the next - without any persevering committed service whatsoever - is completely unaccept­able. This caliber of Christians cannot be used as missionaries, not in this country nor in any other. Food for Thought: What could be concrete steps to curb or eliminate the slide towards lawless­ness and anarchy in our country? What rules do we have in the family, in the church? Are they being respected and upheld? And some Ideas: One of the best ways to curb the undisciplined hopping around from one church to the next is possibly the regular communication of leaders from different churches. Another would be to send ‘new members’ back to their old churches to sort out possible differences there first, before allowing them to join. When they still come back, check out whether they have resolved disputes, whether they have become reconciled. 19. Jesus, the Non-conformist: Questioning doubtful Norms If ever there was a non-conformist, Jesus was a prime example. In a society where women were regarded as second-class citizens, he gave them dignity. In fact, he socialized even with the outcasts of his day like prostitutes and tax collectors. It is generally known that women were seen as inferior in primitive societies (and still regarded as such in some groups). The view of some believers that women should be ‘kept in their place’- because Eve ‘caused’ Adam to fall into sin - is still prevalent in certain circles. On the other hand, the femin­ist viewpoint according to which all masculine notions - for example seeing God as a Father - should be eradicated from the Bible, also displays a very myopic conception of what the Word actually teaches. (Unfortunately, the authority of Scrip­ture is not always taken for granted in feminist circles.) The views of Jesus about the law, notably those he vocalized about the Sabbath, were radical. His ‘but I say to you’ approach was conveniently overlooked by his opponents, stamping him as a revolutionary. He was anomos, against the law and thus regarded as a criminal. On the other hand, many of those well-versed in the law were of the opinion that in his teachings Jesus had placed himself above the Torah - the Mosaic law. He was innovative and typified as a rebel against convention. To preserve things as they were, was far from his mind. Adolf Holl (Jesus in bad Company, 1972:34) aptly summarized the impact of our Lord that few emulated as effectively as Count Zinzendorf: ‘...Jesus was a social outsider and that this followed logically from his doctrine of renewal. The radical nature of his thought brought him into conflict with the society in which he lived and by whose standards his own behaviour was considered beyond the law': We have a law and by that law he ought to die (John 19:7). Even in his death he hung between two robbers, in the terminology understood by everyone as gorilla fighters, terrorists. He was thus stamped as a rebel fighter. The Almighty as Father and Mother Even though the Bible reflects the male dominance of the ancient society, Isaiah does describe how God wants to console us like a mother (66:13). In a similar way our Lord spoke motherly about Jerusalem: ‘...How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks beneath her wings, but you would not let me’ (Matthew 23:37). Even Paul, who is definitely not revered by feminists, wrote how ‘we should behave like God’s very own children, adopted into the bosom of his fam­ily,’ and a little further he said the creation is in labour, in pain before giving birth to the revelation of the children of God (Romans 8:15,19). The imagery of ‘bosom’ and ‘giving birth’ are female qualities which definitely allude to the picture of God as a mother. We have already highlighted how Jesus gave dignity to the despised of his society, a category to which women in general and prostitutes in particular, belonged. All the Gospels depict that it is exactly with this sort of women that our Lord socialized. In an earlier chapter we saw how a widow - another one of those nothings of their society - was spotlighted as an example of sacrifi­cial giving. That Jesus actually asked into the multitude who had touched him, probably knowing full well that a woman with a blood haemorrhage would own up to it (Mark 5:24ff), was revol­utionary for his day. He not only allowed this ritually unclean person to touch him, but he also proceeded to praise her for her faith. The example of our Lord’s deal­ings with the Samaritan woman in John 4 - to whom we have repeatedly referred - surely is a perfect example for questioning prevailing customs actively. Courage of Women Again and again the ‘weaker sex’ have been displaying exceptional courage when the chips were down. Women are rarely mentioned in the Bible. No wonder there is something special about those who do feature. Three females who defied the mighty of the wicked Egyptian King at the time of the birth of Moses are only mentioned by name once. They represented fearlessness and courage of the highest order. About the two Hebrew midwives, Shiprah and Puah, who defied the king’s orders after he had ordered them to kill all baby boys, we read: ‘But the midwives feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt had commanded them, but let the boys live’ (Exodus 1:17). The next virtually unknown but courageous woman in the tragic saga was Jochebed, the mother of Moses who hided him for three long months before devising the plan with the basket on the river Nile. Three women are mentioned in the Lord’s ancestry in Matthew 1. What really distinguished Rahab and Ruth was that they were prepared to risk all for their faith in the God of Israel. When Naomi returned to the Land with Ruth, they came to Bethlehem (the “House of Bread”) and it was the beginning of the barley harvest. In Hebrew, the spiritual significance of the barley harvest can be expressed as the “beginning of miracles.” Rahab is celebrated in Hebrews 11: 31 as one of the heroes of faith. The life of Ruth and Rahab are images and foreshadows of one of the greatest ‘mysteries of the Messiah,’ the breaking down of the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile in Yeshua, who was a descendant of King David (Ephesians 2:11-3:1-7). Tamar, the only other female mentioned among the impressive list of Jesus’ ancestors, had the courage to challenge Juda because of his promise to let his youngest son marry her. She proceeded with a rather strange action, masquerading like a prostitute (Genesis 38:11-30). The young Esther displayed extraordinary wisdom, first of all in sensing that the venture to go to the king without His invitation was a case of all or nothing. On the other hand, her courageous faith made her willing to put her life on the line. It was very risky for the anonymous Samaritan woman to concede that she had socialized with a Jew at the cultic explosive well of Jacob. Women belonged to the Lord’s most dedicated followers who stood with him to the end, right up to His cruci­fixion. (When the chips were down, the disciples fled in all directions.168) At the crucifixion itself, only John is mentioned along with four women, three Miriams (Marys) and Salome. This is quite remarkable when one takes into account that a woman was not regarded as a reliable witness in those days. And when the disciples had already returned to the order of the day after the traumatic occurrences leading to the cruci­fixion, the faithful women went to the grave. Mary Magdalene - who had formerly been demon-possessed (Luke 8:2) - was the first evangelist of the resurrec­tion according to the Gospel of John (20:18).169 Luke’s Gospel is in this sense equally remarkable. To entrust the resurrection Gospel message to women, whose word in those days had no authority in a court of law, was completely extra-ordinary. Lydia, a Gentile businesswoman, regarded as the first documented Europian convert to Christianity, became God’s instrument to start the first house church in Europe (Acts 16:14ff). The Equality of Men and Women The equality of men and women is shown by the leadership of the threesome Moses, Aaron and Miriam when Israel moved through the desert. God clearly appointed Moses as the first among equals. But before they left Egypt, God used Aaron as his mouth-piece (Exodus 4:14; 5:1). The principle of a leader amongst equals is clearly put forward when Miriam and Aaron had diffi­culty to accept Moses’ marriage to a North African (Numbers 12:1ff). They were severely repri­manded, even to the extent that Miriam became leprous. We could ask why Aaron was not punished as well, but it is significant that Moses had allowed Miriam to be part of the leadership team in the first place. For those days this was surely quite revolutionary. Deborah is another case in point. She was the leader of Israel at a time when the people of Israel were in complete disarray. Men were not fulfilling the leadership role. In fact, when she approached Barak to lead the army, he only wanted to do it if she went along. This is in spite of the fact that she gave him the assurance on behalf of the Lord that he would achieve the victory (Judges 4:6-8). Deborah also demonstrates that marital status does not disqualify for leadership in God’s view. She was a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth and the acknowledged leader (Judges 4:4,5). Miriam on the other hand was part of the leading threesome as a single woman. That neither sex nor age is the issue, but rather obedience to God, is shown by the wonderful way in which Esther and her uncle Mordechai are used in tandem to save the Jews from extinction. Esther herself displays extraordinary wisdom, first of all in sensing that the venture to go to the king without His invitation was a case of all or nothing. She was no indi­vidualist, but knew that this had to be in conjunction with her people, she had to have the prayerful support of her people. She prayed and fasted with them. A servant girl, who had been taken along as a captive, became God’s instrument to point Naaman, the Aramaic army officer, to Elisha as a prophet of God (2 Kings 5). In the enfolding story, Naaman got healed only after he obeyed the instructions of the prophet. Serious Errors of the Early Church In recent decades there has been increased interest in the feats of the Assyrian-Nestorian Church such as the possibility of a special ministry by widows during the first centuries of the outreach from places like Baghdad and Babylonia. The prohibition of widows to baptise men in that region points to the fact that they could have baptised women before that. Unfortunately, the early medieval church went overboard when the mother of our Lord received more reverence than what the Bible ascribes to her. The main influence at this time was the idolatry associated with the pattern of other worship habits of the Orient. Isis and As­tarte were mother gods which were worshipped by surrounding nations. The Coptic Church of Egypt possibly came into existence through the evangelistic outreach of Mark in Alexandria. The denomination, which dates their establishment as 63 AD, retained the high regard for the mother without elevating her status into something semi-divine. When the Church Council at Ephesus in 431 CE started to call the mother of our Lord theotokos, the God-bearer, the intention was still basically good. The rank and file Christian was soon however speaking of Mary as ‘the mother of God’ with an effect that was catastrophic. Not only did it result in a veneration of Mary, which led to worship of her at the cost of her Son, but it also caused a major split in the church. Two other doctrines about Mary which are not taught in Scripture, viz. the immaculate conception of Mary and her ascension, are not discussed here. What I regard as much more serious is that the basic tenet which the Bible teaches - that women are equals in the sight of God - has been undermined by the special position attributed to Mary. This has given reason for feminists to make an issue out of something that never should have attained such importance. Even though the Hebrew Scriptures were written and passed on at a time when women had little to say or to contribute, there are some examples of remarkable initiatives by women who listened primarily to God. The creation story was possibly abused more than anything else, quoting the Bible in a fundamentalist way to ‘prove’ the inferiority of women. A closer look at the narrative will show that it is too simplistic to say that because Eve was deceived, she has to get the prime blame.170 The Bible defi­nitely does not teach slavish obedience. In fact, it teaches that we should not follow others in sinful behaviour. If anything, Adam should have refused to be taken along this path of disobedience. That Abraham conceded to the ‘nagging’ of Sarah - leading to the conception of Ishmael - can likewise also be seen as failure on the part of Abraham. A closer examination of Genesis 12-16 shows that Sarah’s behaviour could also be interpreted as a test of Abraham’s faith. Chapter 15 depicts how God had confirmed His promise through a covenant! Marriage as God's Model of Unity The creation of male and female in parity has a special ingredient. It is a model of divine unity. God created man and woman in His image (Genesis 1:28). Paul describes marriage in turn as an image of the relationship between Christ and the Church. In the same vein, the functions and mutual relationship of the persons of the Holy Trinity can be viewed. The different entities in this relationship are equal but different. The Father is the primus inter pares, the first among equals. They perform functions that are different to each other. In loving submission the Son gets his instructions from the Father but he is also guided by the Holy Spirit. It is no wonder that the arch enemy perverted and distorted the biblical model throughout history. Similarly, husband and wife are enjoined to supplement each other with their unique divine gifting. By nature the husband should use his usual superior strength for protection and support and the wife must assist him by her emotional and intuitional divine gifting. To understand submission as the result of lording and oppression is a demonic distortion. Similarly, the abuse of physical or emotional strength for the hurting of spouses or using any superiority for manipulation and seduction are both diabolic pervertion of God's intention for marriage. No Points Scoring please! But this sort of argumentation could lead us into a less fruitful frame of mind, namely that of points scoring. If one tends to be fundamental­ist about these things, it might be more helpful to note that the second creation narrative depicts Eve as being taken from the rib, not the sole. The man was not intended to stand dictatorially on top of his wife, but rather to rule sovereignly together with her over nature. They were created, ‘gelijkwaardig, maar niet gelijkaar­dig’ (different, but equal in worth). This view is nowhere revolutionary. St Paul had already said something similar. Unfortunately he had put it in the context of his starkly culture-coloured view of headgear for women, where loose hair of women conjured up the prostitutes of Corinth. In 1 Corinthians 11 he described it as a sign that she is under man’s authority (v.7, 9). However, if we look more closely at the context, we discover that Paul stated that the first woman was made out of man, with the conclusion: Eve was made for Adam. But some feminists tend to overlook what he said in the same context. Not only ‘man’s glory is the woman’ (v.7) but also ‘remember that in God’s plan men and women need each other. For although the first woman came out of man, all men have been born from women ever since, and both men and women come from God their Creator’ (v.12). But even Paul was not completely new on the subject. He was simply following the line of Jewish scriptural tradition where the relationship of the husband to his wife seems to be depicted as a case of primus inter pares: in a marriage rela­tion­ship the man should be the first among equals. When the husband does not fulfill this role properly - due to whatever circum­stances - the woman has the responsibility to take over the leading role. A logical inference is that this should also be the case in the church. The examples of Miriam and Deborah in the Hebrew Scriptures indicate that Paul would have done well to state his vision of female leadership and prayer in the church less categorical­ly. The Bible does seem to indicate that the psycho­logical set-up of women make them more open to influ­ences on the emotional level. The example of Abraham and Sarah does however give some positive hints to a good marriage relationship. The Bible notes specifically that Abraham agreed to the compromise with Hagar after they had already been in Canaan for ten years. It has often been overlooked that Abraham listened to his wife’s frustrations, they were communicating! This is much more than many modern couples do. The only problem was that our vener­able arch father listened more to her than to God. He should have given the lead, reminding her of the confirmation of the promise of off-spring. The Emotional Strength of Women The emotional overlap of women can be used positively or negative­ly. Men tend to be more rational. That these statements are not hard and fast rules, is underlined by Scrip­ture. God looks at people individually, sometimes cutting across the general trend of things. If Eve was the one to be led astray first in the one account; Lot, a man, was the one in another when he was deluded to choose for the greener pastures. On the other hand, Sarah found the suggestion of a baby in their old age laughable on rational grounds at a time when Abraham was still hanging on in irrational belief in a prom­ise. Also, his faith that God could bring the dead back to life (Romans 4:17; Hebrews11:18) was com­pletely irrational. That Rebecca was misled by disbelief, doubting that God could see to it himself to fulfill his promise (which coincided with her own preference for Jacob) cuts across the prejudice that men are more rationally inclined, but her emo­tional bond to Jacob supports the same theory from the other side. She deemed it necessary to give God a helping hand. However, the actions of Abigail (1 Samuel 25), display evidence of a sharp mind. She showed respect to her husband, even though this meant that she had to do something behind his back. We note that her behaviour is praised by David. The Bible does not support the slavish obedience of wives to their husbands. In fact, we see another principle at work. When the husband does not lead properly, the woman has the responsi­bility to correct him in a discreet way. Thus Abigail upheld the dignity of her husband although he had acted foolish­ly. The Bible makes it very clear that faith is not the prerogative of men. In fact, the non-Jewish women mentioned in the ancestry of our Lord in Matthew 1, distin­guished themselves through their faith in Yahweh, the God of Israel. Even though Rahab was a whore who belonged to Israel’s enemies before they took over Jericho, she got a vision of His power (Joshua 2:8ff). Ruth, a Moabite, qualifies to become an ancestor of the Messiah primarily through her faith(fullness). Marriage The issue of marriage and family life should also be addressed in this chapter. It is possibly not realized sufficiently that the family unit and the fidelity between husband and wife are biblical priorities. In ancient history - and very especially so in the history of the Middle East - Israel has been the excep­tion with regard to the emphasis on family life. The meaning of the family, the sacredness of marriage and the care for children are central biblical concepts. Israel was taught to refrain from marrying the peoples of Canaan. The reason given was the temptation to fall into idolatry. It became especially clear with the immediate result of the women which Solomon ‘married’. However, even at the time of the inception of the prohib­ition, the racial issue was never at stake. Although Miriam and Aaron were not happy that Moses had taken an African wife, from God’s side there was evidently no sanction on this fact as such (Numbers 12:1ff). In stead, the rebellious siblings were repri­manded by God because they would not accept Moses’ leadership. It seems that nationalism does play a role with them, but biblically it is clearly a non-issue. (In fact, Jonah was rebuked for his nationalism.) This is further proved when Rahab and Ruth are included in the salvation history without any ado. Christians should really come up in opposition when inroads are made into marriages. In the narrative of the Samaritan woman we see how our Lord used infidelity in a posi­tive way. In stead of condemning her out of hand, he clearly put his finger healingly on that part of her life, which caused all her problems. Similarly, the best way to handle the sexual vices of our day is probably not to demonstrate against pornography and the rest. It is much better to take the own family as a high priority. An investment in time for the own children, where the contentious issues are discussed, will save much distress for parents and guardians. The older generation should give an example in transpar­ency and honesty in their dealings. Empty promises may turn out to boomerang harshly! A stable hospit­able family is possibly one of the best mission­ary tools, when the family can operate as a loving entity. Converse­ly, if the life at home is lacking, the impact of evangelistic outreach is effectively blunted in the spiritual realm. A special tribute should be made to the movement of the Promise Keepers which challenged men, initially quite dramatically in the USA. Since its spread around the world, fathers were encouraged to play their biblical role in the family. Two of their seven commitments refer to family life and biblical morality. A Promise Keeper is committed to practicing spiritual, moral, ethical and sexual purity and to ‘building strong marriage and families through love, protection and biblical values’. Also in South Africa Promise Keepers grew initially. Peter Pollock, a cricketing Springbok of yesteryear, became its able spokesman in South Africa. It seems howeer to have petered out at the Cape. The Alpha courses, which originated in Brit­ain and the Willow Creek church model, were initially intended as modern evangelistic tools.171 The spin-off is more stable families and a return to biblical values. The combination of these movements augurs well for the future. The question is only how general this trend will become. In respect of family life the Herrnhut model can never be idealised. Many children suffered terribly under the separation after being sent back to Germany for their education. The Streiter-Ehe (warrior marriage), which Count Zinzendorf practised, was a catastrophe. His long absence from his family as he traveled through Europe and abroad, caused almost unbearable strain and pain. It was no secret that he and Erdmuth had grown cool towards each other and that the last fifteen years of their marriage was one in name only. Celibacy Celibacy should also be addressed at this stage. In Protestant circles this is usually not taken seriously. In fact, it has often occurred that single ministers were looked upon as some rare breed. It is too easily forgotten that Jesus viewed it differently, as some­thing which is positive (Matthew 19:11). Paul likewise raised celibacy to something which one should strive after (1 Corin­thians 7:9ff). Thus both Jesus and Paul proposed marriage as a concession rather than as a must. The purpose of celibacy is the extension of the Kingdom (Matthew19­:11), towards the com­plete committal to the things of God (1 Corinthians 7:32). But neither our Lord nor Paul expected all evangel­ists and preachers of the Gospel to practise celibacy. Biblically, the situation is thus quite clear; whosoever comes to faith in Jesus when he is already married should stay that way. But if one can manage to stay unmarried, he/she should not rush into a marriage. The tendency to elevate celibacy to a special status, yes even as a qualification for service in the Church - has created more problems than it solved. Even though it is nowadays primarily practised in the Roman Catholic denomination, the Church universal should remember that the practice was started at a time when the Body of Christ was not split as Catholics and Protestants. We should guard ourselves against arrogance and a spirit of criti­cism! Free from marital commitments, single people could theoretically do so much more. Even though Paul mentioned that celibacy is something to be strived for, he picked up an important tenet of our Lord’s teaching, namely that the Church is the ‘wife’ of the Lord in an analogical marriage relationship. In Ephesians 5 a deep mystery is revealed: Christ as the head of the Church. In various parables (for example explicitly the ten virgins in Matthew 25, but also allusions like Matthew 9:15 and the parable of the right cloth­ing at the wedding), our Lord compared his second coming to a marriage. The Church as the Bride Comenius, the great Czech theologian, believed that followers of Jesus should not passively await the return of the Lord and his sovereign rule of peace, but that Christians are called to erect signs to usher in that reign. Van der Linde (1979:60) summarized his eschatology with ‘Babel goes, Zion comes’. Every inch a chiliast, Comenius believed that Jesus will reign on earth after his second coming for a thousand years. He believed that Babel typifies the building of all sorts of towers - man working without reckoning with God. Comenius held that all this will be terminated at the return of Jesus and the beginning of His reign. That is equal to Zion, the run-up to the new Jerusalem, where there will be neither injustice nor tears. It is interesting that John the Baptist described himself as the friend of the Bridegroom (John 3:29). This fits in with what Paul and the Book of Revelation said about Christ as the bridegroom and the Church as His bride (Ephesians 5:22, 2 Corinthians 11: 2, Revelations 19:7, 21:2+9, 22:17). It also cements the deity of Christ. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Israel has been repeatedly described as God’s bride (for example Exodus 34:15; Ezekiel 16; Hosea 2:19ff). When the disciples of John united with the Pharisees at another occasion to get an explanation of Jesus why His disciples do not fast, He referred to the presence of the bridegroom (Mark 2:19; Matthew 9:15). The eschatological dynamics of the forthcoming consummation of the marriage of the Church with its bridegroom, our coming King, has not been generally recognized – I believe at our own peril. The whole existence of the Church is at stake. Still, the outlook of Christians generally likens that of a widow. Of course, in a certain sense the Church is a widow through the death of our Lord on the Cross of Calvary. But the fact that the widow is to marry again must change matters of necessity. Zinzendorf utilized this doctrinal tenet - the Church as the bride waiting for her bridegroom - as an important cata­lyst for missions. In fact, he built a whole theology around it, calling it the ‘Ehe-religion’ (marriage religion). The first fruit from all the nations have to be gathered in as the bride of the Lamb. We have already referred to the concept of warrior marriage, which formed an important ingre­dient of Zinzendorf’s ‘marriage religion’. Even though the notion was too philosophical and not fully comprehended by the simple lay people in the church, the pending second coming of the Lord did drive the Moravians into an urgency to bring in the first fruit. Towards the end of his life Zinzendorf emphasized missionary work as an effort to usher in the return of Christ. In the earlier years he just wanted to have a representative of every tribe, believing that to be a requirement for Christ’s return, one of the conditions (Matthew 24:14). It is not surprising that satan, the arch copy-cat, has to come up with a surrogate. God gave to Hosea and other prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures and John, the apostle, a vision how he will attempt to deceive millions before the return of our Lord. The prophet Hosea had to demonstrate the picture to His people, the Israelites, who were elected to be the divine bride. Instead, Israel, became the unfaithful wife, resembling a harlot, but God as the husband still loved and forgave her. In Revelations 12 this image is intimated when the woman brings forth the son, who was snatched up to God and his throne. The dragon, defined as satan, that ancient serpent who leads the world astray, is the antagonist, which inspires the beast that came out of the sea. The Church as the bride has it antipode in the woman of Revelations 17, Babylon, the mother of prostitutes and the Queen of Heaven. Oral tradition that is supported by recorded ancient history, mentions Semeramis, the wife of Nimrot, with their son, Tammus. Semeramis was called the Queen of Heaven. Speculation through the centuries equated the Queen of Heaven and Babylon of Revelations 17 with the Roman Catholic Church. Certain Christians speculated that this denomination could be leading an inter-faith type of world church that would link up with the Beast, which is biblically identified with the anti-Christ. This has been fuelled by historical facts of recent decades. The increase of the killing and persecution of followers of Jesus by people who have been intoxicated, poisoned and ‘drunk’ from indoctrination by religious fanatics, has been bringing Revelations 17 into partial fulfilment. The formation of a world church has became more and more of a possibility as Church people in Western Europe and North America become less and less willing to criticize religious extremism. On the other hand, we are impoverishing ourselves when we neglect the teach­ing of the second coming. It is not surpris­ing that there is such confusion about the details of the coming of the bride­groom of the Church. The arch enemy knows what a power could ema­nate from this tenet if the Church starts to take the fact of the return of our Lord seriously. In every major religious awaken­ing this played an important role. The Practice of the Lot The practice of the lot has very much a place in the frame-work of Zinzendorf’s warrior marriage, where romantic feelings were not part of the ball game. Young people were recommended to each other by the elders of the fellowship and then the lot was consulted to confirm the match. Zinzendorf has probably not been fairly treated by later generations with regard to the practice. (We have to concede that the private lot, which the Count exer­cised in many a case, was quite problematic.) That the practice of the lot was later discarded, however overlooks the fact that the Count had the courage to take the Bible seriously on this matter. He may have overstated the case because the lot is definitely not central in the ‘New Testament’. However, Zinzendorf did make a point of it that the lot only had to be used in matters where serious consideration has preceded it and where they were really seeking the Lord’s mind. Furthermore, in the matters regarding marriage, the wives were not allocated randomly by lot. There was prior consulta­tion with the ladies in question. Beyreu­ther points furthermore to the fact that 18th century Herrnhut hardly knew a bad marriage and not a single case of divorce. The missionary advantage as prepara­tion for cultures where marriages are arranged by the parents and/or family, has also generally been overlooked. This should also give Westerners food for thought in the light of the general haughty attitude towards arranged marriages. Homosexual­ity and Lesbianism The Church must look seriously at the issue of homosexual­ity. Confession is really called for because of the legalistic uncharitable condemnation and condescend­ing attitude of the Church in general towards people affected by it. So many have been handicapped through circumstances in their sexual preferences. But this is no license to go to the other extreme, namely condoning what the Bible sees as sin. Many people, who developed a homosexual preference, have received healing to cope with it through a living faith in Jesus as their Lord. On the other hand, Western society has romanticised marriage disproportionately. Also in cases where couples have been led to each other in a special way, they have to continue working at their marriages. That matrimony is a workshop where results are proportionate to effort put into it, is not always sufficiently taught. Worldliness in the Church has become rife. The influence of soap opera’s has made infidelity and divorce a normal thing. Sex has been taken out of its proper biblical context, viz. that of a loving relationship in marriage. Even though the Bible candid­ly mentions sinful behaviour in this regard like adultery, fornication and homosex­uality, there is a clear scriptural sanction on these things. Polygamy and Women in the Pulpit Polygamy is a special case. In the Hebrew Scriptures there are many examples, but it is usually not mentioned positively. The ‘New Testament’ clearly outlaws it. In traditional societies such as in Africa, a legal­istic application of Scripture has estranged many a tribe from the Gospel. This has become one of the major causes for the estab­lishment of independent churches. Africans in leadership found it uncharitable to get rid of one or more of their wives on their acceptance of faith in Jesus Christ. The Pauline infer­ence about the church leader in a monogamous situation - to have one wife (1 Timothy 3:2+12; Titus 1:6) - may not be the per­fect way of address­ing certain cultures, but the injunc­tion of fidelity has eternal quality. In a similar way Paul’s expectation that the women should ‘keep their peace’ in the fellowship of believers, may radiate the culture of his day, but it is not completely fair to call him a woman hater as some feminists have done. In 1 Thessalonians 2:7+11 he for example addressed the believers with the rearing characteristics of both a mother and a father in the same context. For a purported woman-hater Paul wrote exceptionally positive about Phoebe (Romans 16:1f). He chose her to take the letter to the Romans to the half of Asia Minor, speaking about her as an elder, as someone who leads. In fact, in the whole of chapter 16 of this epistle Paul mentions quite a few women. Nowhere does one get the impression that he regarded them as second class Chris­tians. In fact, about Junia he noted reve­rently that she had been a Christian before him and she may even have been an apostle.172 The positive references to the mother and grandmother of Timothy (2 Timothy 1:5) underline the general tendency in the ‘New Testament’ that some women do possess the gift to control big areas of responsibility, oversee their house­holds, educate people in the faith and spread the Gospel - all at the same time. There is also the implication in the Pauline writings that Priscilla and Aquila operated as a couple, the first evangelists mentioned who complimented each other. In commendable language Paul noted how they risked their lives for him and who were treasured by all Gentile Christians. Various commentaries take for granted that Priscilla may have played a leading role in the local assembly. Lydia, the saleslady was even divinely used to see the first house church planted, one at Philippi (Acts 16:14ff). It is significant that the church of Corinth had such confidence in Paul that they asked for his advice on matters of marriage although they knew that he was not married himself. He was not glibly lashing out at them, but answering their letter. Against this background 1 Corinthians 7 can be seen as a masterpiece of exceptional wisdom. Female Leadership in Churches This should not hide the fact that the leadership in churches was kept away from women for centuries. As we have seen, the Hebrew Scriptures especially describe the role of female individuals in leadership roles and the ‘New Testament’ does also mention positively the contribution of people like Lydia and Priscilla. The dispropor­tionate number of men attending the fellow­ship in any particular church should however not be abused as an argument. The modern idea of ‘democracy’ is alien to the Bible. The issue should first and foremost be whether those in leadership are ‘wise and full of the Holy Spirit’ (Acts 6:2) and ‘above reproach’ (1 Timothy 3:2,8,10). The Pauline norm and criterion that the church leader ‘must have a well-behaved family, with children who obey...’ (1 Timothy 3:4), might sound rather antiquated in our day and age. But where they have been adhered to, for example when office bearers stepped down when their children turned their back on God and His Word, this often turned out to become a blessing even for the children con­cerned. The fact of the matter is that those churches and leaders who endeavoured to adapt their life-style to the ‘New Testament’ norm, were blessed. Where it has been the other way round - for example with compromise on homosex­uality and morality - there has been a hollowing out of the scriptural authority in general, with catastrophic results. It has not become uncommon any more to hear of divorce and incest in the most unexpected quarters. Infectious diseases like AIDS have decimated many churches in Africa, partly because of infidelity. The lack of a strong biblical base in churches became fertile soil where the econ­omic deprivation enticed many into prostitution. If the adaptation to a life-style which contra­dicts the ‘New Testament’ mind-set continues unchecked, it will have predict­able disastrous conse­quences to family life. Or do we expect children to get hardened and immune to hurt? We should not be surprised when teenage suicide starts to rocket sky high! In some European countries like Sweden it has been happening already and the loose morals created by slogans like ‘be wise, condomise’ have contributed to a dramatic increase in the number of teenagers who have to cope with situations they are unable to handle. Repentance - a turn around - could start a positive upswing. A beginning has been made among students in the USA and also elsewhere. The AIDS scourge has spawned many teen­agers to refrain from pre-marital sexual intercourse. The movement True love waits made significant strides in evangelical circles. Family Life It is clear from every biblical reference to children that the creation intention was that they belong in the context of a family with a heterogeneous parental couple. We are not sur­prised at all that cases, where death caused a drastic change in this status, God ordained special care. The widow and the orphan were to be subjects of special protection (for example Deuteronomy 10:18; 24:19; Psalm 68:6). Our Lord Jesus has rightly been described as a friend of children. Without delving too deeply into the matter, we can generally state that the Bible takes children and stable family life for granted. However, we should be on our guard for deductions which are not biblical, but which developed from tradition. Thus the Bible nowhere gives an injunction that males should not be involved with the rearing of children. Sometimes even Bible translations helped to cement traditions which had no sound biblical basis. Thus Mark 10:13 nowhere states that mothers brought the children to our Lord, but the Living Bible happily translates "some mothers were bringing their children to Jesus..." Similarly, the practice that women usually do household chores or the tradi­tion in African culture that they should do the manual work in the fields, actually both go against the equality of the sexes - a position that Jesus radically demonstrated. Having said that, we should remember that there are also other traditions, which are very much in line with the general biblical message. Even if modern science were to develop methods whereby men would be able to bear children, this would be very unnatural. The natural inclination for a woman to resist ‘self-realization’ in career matters and rather stay at home to rear the off-spring until her children are big, is completely in accordance to the biblical ‘yes’ to stable family life. Dying to self is a biblical concept which has its origins in the Hebrew Scriptures. It is just as clear that ‘self-realization’ and materialism go hand in hand. Elsewhere we have noted that the latter concept, materialism, is synonymous to idolatry (Colossians 3:5). When it was customary in Pietist circles and society at large that women were confined to the kitchen and typical feminine roles, the mid-18th century practice of the Moravians superseded a negative view on submission: the wife was not only regarded to be an equal and a helpmate simultaneously, but in the synods women participated naturally without any discrimination. Only the pulpit remained in the hands of the males. A Role for Widows and Singles The Hebrew Scriptures clearly depict God’s care for the widow and the orphan. In line with his special concern for the down-trodden, Jesus highlighted their plight in a positive way, for example the widow that gave sacrificially and the praying widow of Luke 18. It seems as if the Early Church took this concern seriously, so much so that the Greeks had liberty to complain when their widows were overlooked (Acts 6). In Acts 9 we read of widows who benefited from Tabitha’s compassionate care for them and for the poor before her death. As we have pointed out, the early Assyrian Church appears to have had a ministry by widows, albeit that already in those early years the contribution of women seems to have been suppressed already. Church fathers, who otherwise made noteworthy contributions, unfortunately also aided the discrimination of females. Nevertheless, the good tradition which Jesus inaugurated and that Paul, the apostle, extended, appears to have been exported with the early missionary work of the Assyrian-Nestorian Church. Writing about the conversion of the Kerait to Christianity in AD 1007, E.C.D. Hunter refers to the leading role of women in the political and dynastic history of the Il Khans (Zentralasiatische Studien, 1989/90). That Zinzendorf had a special role for widows and single men does not surprise us any more. We already noted how he appointed the gifted 15-year old Anna Nitschmann as leader over the unmarried womenfolk. There was a special Sunday not only for them, but also for the widow ‘choir’. A speciality of 18th century Herrnhut was the utilization of the gifts of people. Thus Martin Linner, who had proved himself as an elder of the single men at the age of seventeen, became one of the four chief elders although he was still in his twenties. On the other hand, the ability of Arved Gradin, a Swedish academic who had declined the call to a professorship at Uppsala university, was used to record (in Greek) the contribution of Greek Orthodox monks in the establishment of the Church in Bohemia and Moravia. (This was part of an unsuccessful attempt of the Brethren to get into the Orient after their missionaries had been imprisoned in Russia (Uttendörfer and Schmidt, 1914: 89). Single parentage (after divorce or otherwise) is not ideal. But this may not to be construed as condoning a situation where the children are reared in an atmosphere of tension and strife. ... and Grandmothers We read in the Bible what a blessing Timothy’s grandmother had been to him. In mission history the example of Count’s Zinzendorf’s grandmother, Henriette von Gersdorf, is unequalled. How a grandmother can have a positive influence on her off-spring, is amply illustrated in the life of Count Zinzendorf. The godly grand­mother inculcated in the sensitive lad not only a love for the Sav­iour at a very young age, she also imparted a true ecumenical spirit (Beyreuther, 1965:17). The young Nikolaus Ludwig, whom she endearingly called Lutz, came into her care when he was only three years old. (After the death of his father – six weeks after his birth - his mother remarried. She travelled substantially thereafter with her new husband. Zinzendorf gave due recognition to the contribution of his grandmother: ‘I got the general guideline of my life from her: without her our whole thing (meaning Herrnhut, the Moravian Church and missions) would not have materialized.’) When he was only four, the genial Lutz started preaching to chairs. He had hardly learned to write when he wrote letters to the Lord. (This is of special significance for South Africa where township grand­mothers often have to rear their off-spring.) That Henriette von Gersdorf had become a pioneer for secondary education for girls, surely rubbed off on the young count. He was clearly also influenced by her passion to see the Bible printed in the Serbian language as well as his grandmother’s support for refugees (Beyreuther, 1965:16). In South Africa a system has developed whereby child-neglect became part and parcel of the way of life as the care of children was left over to the grandmother. Teenage motherhood was condoned (perhaps even indirectly encour­aged!) when the state support became to many the sole income for the care of children. I definitely would not like to be quoted as putting a slur on the brave work of godly grand­mothers. But to simply perpetuate a tradition which is bad and morally despicable, is extremely irrespon­sible. This must be said very clearly. A more biblical approach would be to give incentives to families, for instance support for mothers (or fathers by way of exception) who stay at home to care for their children. For many this would mean a sacrifice in material advantage in a situation where both parents would work, but there is apt to be bless­ing. We should not ignore the heritage of the past where families were torn apart through legislation. The dis­ruption of family life and the ensuing encouragement of homo­sexuality in the male hostels is something we as a country should deplore and which we should confess. The ongoing violence is in part the indirect result of the racial policies of the past. Thousands of Blacks have never experienced normal family life. Having said this, the challenge remains for prayerful grandmothers to raise heroes and heroines under their care. The Moravians and Family Life It would be apt to close this chapter with the efforts of Zinzendorf and his Moravians to address some of the issues under discussion. As a teenager he became the natural spiritual leader of the order of the mustard seed, which consisted of five youngsters from the nobility. Inspired by what he had heard of what English noblemen had been doing among the poor, the stated intention of the mustard seed ‘knights’ was to spread the Gospel far and wide. We note that this took place at a time when mission work was far from common in Protestant circles. Zinzendorf was privileged and blessed to have attended the boarding school in Halle linked to August Herman Francke, the Pietist Church Father. There he was impacted by the first missionaries who were sponsored by the Danish monarch. The reports of the missionaries Heinrich Plütschau and B. Ziegenbalg in Halle about their ministry in India notably impacted the sensitive but devout teenager. Beyreuther also wrote how the family life of the Ebers­dorf believers and their silent walk with the Lord influenced the Count profoundly, as he was returning from his cavalier trip (Beyreuther, 1965:225/6). It is hardly surprising that he invited the devout Erdmuth from that environs to become his spouse. The count’s support for the underdog and the perse­cuted was likewise passed on some years down the road, when his own children paved the way for the children of beggars to receive elementary education in the castle of Ronneburg at a time when they themselves were refugees. The Count married Erdmuth after a romantic disappointment. He had to discover that he had a rival in his close friend Heinrich von Reuß for the hand of the beautiful Theodore.173 The way he handled the first disap­pointment was typical of the unique way in which he could tackle a problem. After his friend Heinrich showed up as a competing suitor, he left Theodore over to him. At their wedding ceremony Zinzendorf offered a moving prayer and after the death of Heinrich many years later, the widow came to Herrnhut as a stalwart in the widows’ choir, where she could count on the support of the spiritual leader of the settlement. Zinzendorf entered his own marriage more out of rational considerations than romantic feelings, calling it a ‘Streiter-ehe’, a warrior marriage. The Count was very serious about the issue, often leaving his wife behind for many months as he left on his extended trips to further the Kingdom. A slur hung over Zinzendorf’s second marriage, a mere week after the mourning year elapsed after the death of Erdmuth in June 1756. Already in 1742 a sickly Erdmuth had suggested that he should marry Anna Nitschmann should she die. But it was not to Zinzendorf’s honour that the second marriage was kept a secret because he knew that his mother and her sister who would have objected to such a marriage.174 Yet, Moravians in general never gave the impression that they regarded Zinzendorf as a saint without errors. Morality and Sexual Equality in Herrnhut and Herrnhaag On morality a fine balance was taught. The Count had a definite sense for freedom, but he would not hesitate to lash the guilty ones severely when lack of discipline occurred, especially in the area of sex. On the other hand, the statutes of Herrnhut clearly contrasted the practice of the environment: ‘The men were not to treat their wives harshly or even beat them.’ But this was finely balanced by the biblical injunction: ‘...wives should submite to their hus­bands in everything’ (Ephesians 5:24) The Herrnhut practice however superseded a negative view on submission: the wife was to be an equal and an aid. The relationship between a married couple would be like that between a king and a queen (Beyreuther, 1965:72). The Count and the Moravians would speak frankly about sexual matters because it was seen as natural. Prudery was out-lawed. Zinzendorf saw this as necessary preparation for mission­aries who would see ‘half-naked’ black women on the field. And the sisters should be equipped to ‘go among naked wild men’ (Beyreuther, 1965:73). Thus a unique freedom, a new relation­ship between the sexes could develop. At the same time, a new status was given to the women and girls in a society which was dominated by men. In the female ‘choirs’ they could really develop all their potential, also that of leadership. In the synods the women were given the right to participate and to vote, really revolutionary for those days (Beyreuther, 1965:75). The Moravians were following in the footsteps of their Master with regard to the role of women in a society which was very much discriminatory towards the ‘weaker sex’. In an earlier chapter we have already noted how they were the first to give regular encouragement and recognition to women as hymn writers. The women were exhorted to use their gifts at every appropri­ate occasion. At a time when it was not usual to give educational opportu­nities to girls, the Moravians had dormitories for both sexes. How­ever, they stuck to Paul’s prohibition with regard to preach­ing. Through the use of the lot the single women were sent to the various mission fields around the globe. The practice of missionary kids might not have been the ideal solution. The Herrnhut children and those in the hostels of Niesky and Kleinwelka were challenged from a very young age to get involved with the mission work on a practical level. Many a permanent scar occurred however, especially when mission work became traditional, when the Moravian evangelical flame waned. The Legacy of the Spirit of the Moravians Nevertheless, the earlier mission spirit filtered through until well into the 20th century. The Moravians pioneered missionary work in Tibet, where a traditional marriage by the lot played no mean role.175 On the issue of African children’s education and polygamy Traugott Bachmann, a German Moravian to Africa, made some daring suggestions, writing quite positively about the African customs.176 On the other hand, Bachmann also wrote honestly about the debt the colonialists were incurring, a debt that later indeed back-fired. Bachmann also listened critically to the sermons of the missionaries. It was definitely the old spirit of Zinzen­dorf coming through as he observed: ‘so much is preached of sin as a force, as a chain, as lust and so little about the complete victory of the Saviour over sin for the heart to open up on hearing it.’177 The spirit of the Moravians was taken over by people like William Carey, Hudson Taylor and C.T. Studd. The marriage of Charles Studd and his wife Priscilla - the founders of WEC - took the issue of sacrifice in marriage to the extreme. The pioneer worked in the heart of Africa for years while she conducted missionary matters from the home front in Britain. Her health would not allow service in the tropics, but she did come to Africa, also to Cape Town - to rally support for the missionary effort. We may have little understanding to-day that the mission­ary pioneers could live in separation for many years as part of their sacrifice for the Lord. But basically it was the same warrior mentality. In fact, C.T. Studd had only disdain for Christians who shied away from the harsh missionary front. He called them ‘chocolate soldiers’ who would melt in the heat of the battle. In the previous century especially, women have been the advance guard of almost all evangelical mission agencies. Even to-day the so-called weaker sex can be found in dangerous geographical areas doing Bible translation. All too often females are also doing hard manual labour under great deprivation. Women are now generally accepted in all capacities, also in leadership roles. South African women, especially those from the traditionally deprived groups, have developed a capacity to fight against odds. This has been amply illustrated by the reports on the sessions of the Truth and Reconciliation Commis­sion a few years ago. If we can get our act together, women from their ranks should be ideally suited - together with their male counterparts - to lead a new gener­ation of missionaries from the Black continent. Food for Thought: Can women participate fully with all their gifts in our church? Or is leadership still being regarded as the domain of the men? Can men who like to do catering, or things which are traditional­ly regarded as women’s tasks, perform these things in freedom or would they be hampered, overtly or silently in our congregation? What can we do to liberate our church from traditions which have enslaved church members in sexist roles? And some Ideas: In male-dominated churches the members may have to be re-educated on what the Bible really teaches. Much of the filtered teaching which developed in male-dominated cultures may have to be discarded. Steps which could help to move away from old traditions may be: Shorter sermons by more than one person by a male and a female, by young and old; even teenagers and children could make good contributions. Where do we go from here? If South Africa is to become radically new - from the roots - prayer will have to play a vital role. The country can then proceed to be pivotal in the erection of a clear sign of the reign of our coming King, the Lord of Lords and the Prince of Peace. A first step could be that Christians from different cultural and church backgrounds should come together to pray at regular intervals. May we see the beginning of such a beseeching of God’s face to turn our land into a country which may become a blessing to the nations! It is a shame that more than a century after Andrew Murray gave us The Key to the missionary problem, we still have to make proper use of it, to unlock the door to the white harvest. It is surely a good thing that all over the country half nights of prayer are being held from time to time. Here and there these meetings also straddle man-made boundaries of church affiliation and race, but the visible unity in Christ is not yet evident. A prayerful conscious effort is needed. The Cape Peninsula has a tragic church infrastructure. The present links of the Consultation of Christian Churches in the Western Cape should not be allowed to peter out. Sunday evening/afternoon services and mid-week prayer meetings offer valuable opportunities to give a face to the theory of the ‘one body’ if churches could start to organize combined services and prayer meetings locally. White, ‘Coloured’ and Indian Christians should go out of their way to offer fellowship to the brothers and sisters in the Black communities of the Cape. Occasionally - for example once a month on a Sunday afternoon - one or more common services could be held in Black townships with transport arranged for those who want to go there. In similar vein the monthly concerts of prayer – now held at the Bethel Bible School in Crawford - should be publicized better, but a change of venue and/or transport to the event could be considered to enable the less affluent parts of our society to attend more easily. The theological education should also be brought into line. It was not so long ago that there were too many struggling Bible Schools in the Cape Peninsula, with minimal mutual contact and in some cases absolutely none. There was (and still is) a complete wastage of manpower (person power?) with various lecturers teaching the same sub­jects at similar levels to small classes. Could not there be at least co-operation where the doctrinal differences are mini­mal? And where the differences are expected to be greater, should there not be at least a frank but amiable sharing of ideas? Or are we still guided by fear of contamination in some way? Could we not regard the doctrinal differences as a challenge to get to real unity? A common goal could possibly go a long way to this end. This is definitely a possibility of exciting inter-action with Muslim academics. The back-drop of mutual traditional tolerance with the followers of Muhammad is a fact of life in the Western Cape. But times are changing. In stead of shunning the con­frontation, should we not rather use the tradition of mutual tolerance to get into meaningful dialogue with the metropolitans of the other faiths? Willingness to be vulnerable seems to be a prerequisite. That should include a readiness to express regret for wrong attitudes and the misleading of Muhammad by our Christian forbears. Of course, this poses a challenge to us as well. We are apt to learn much from them and we may also have to rethink our own faith quite well. This may not always be easy but it will definitely be worthwhile. Why don’t we see it as a privilege to have such a heritage of tolerant co-existence? On the long run we may even become a blessing to many other countries where adherents from different religions are at loggerheads. But we shall not get there by evading frank inter-action. Yet, it is so easy to create antagonisms which may spawn an atmosphere of tension. In stead, we could try to show more solidarity with Christians who have come from Muslim backgrounds, for example by organizing house services on Fridays. It is sometimes too easily taken for granted that these converts should attend church services on a Sunday, for some of them quite a hurdle to take. A much better way - something for which Muslims might even be thankful - to do ‘Muslim Outreach’ is through loving practical service. Two facets where there are great problems among their ranks are family life and drug addiction. Seminars at neutral venues on relations within the family, where it could be made very practical how faith in our Lord Jesus is the solution, have been readily attended even by Muslims. Telephone lines, which one can dial for prayer, are used quite extensively by people from all religious backgrounds including Muslims, because of its anonymity. The establishment of more drug rehabilita­tion centres based on Christian principles is something which is desperately needed. Last not least, the Church should get to grips with the situation of the homeless. Recognition is given for what is already being done to finance sleeping and eating opportun­ities for this growing group of unfortunate people. But there is first and foremost the need of Christians who are willing to share there lives existentially with these folk for whom the Lord also died. If one realizes that a young man, son of an alcoholic, who grew up as little more than a problem child in a shanty of Steenberg, has now been working for many years as a missionary in England, the potential of ‘investment’ of energy and time on this level, gets a new dimension. Possibly an even greater model in this regard is Wilson Goeda, a destitute and terribly exploited farm worker, who in his teenage years became a gangster and drug addict. He now is the President of YWAM South Africa. The new South Africa offers many opportunities if the spirit of co-operation, that has started to develop, grows in the direction of a servant attitude. Those from the non-White races (I dare to use such a term again) who had been critical of ‘hand outs’, have become more willing to accept material aid from ‘Whites’. Unfortunately, so many have been falling too willingly into an unhealthy attitude of dependency. Issues like sustainability and the dependency syndrome are all too often overlooked in rendering assistance. We must strike while the iron is hot. In the metropolitan areas of South Africa, there are more pastors and churches than are needed in terms of good stewardship. Should we not also think in terms of ‘exporting’ our ablest men to areas of the world where there is dire need in terms of the spreading of the Gospel and closing down churches consciously towards this purpose? Taking into account the strategic role of our country at this time in history, South African Christians of all shades should drop petty differ­ences. Instead, we should take world mission seriously by utilizing the attributes of all the peoples at our disposal. But there is a serious threat for the realization of this vision. The moral decline which has set in since 1994 could nullify what has been achieved by the combined prayer of God’s people. A serious word of warning is definitely in place. It is a fallacy to think that we can help the poor through funds which come from gambling. We would be building on sand if we think that we can build our nation on such a foundation. What is needed is a strategy of structuring the nation on sound biblical principles, on premises which can stand the test of moral scrutiny. As one of the pillars there should be an emphasis to kindle healthy family life where God’s Word receives its rightful place. Where do we start? I suggest that the urgent need for the moment is to turn to God in prayer. How our country came back from the brink of civil war should never be forgotten. We were saved from a bloodbath of enormous dimensions through the combined prayer of Christians. Now however we have a Trojan horse in our midst. The moral degradation that was made fashionable under the guise of ‘democra­cy’, is quickly gnawing away at what has been gained through the peaceful elections and the fairly success­ful transition period. The only way to arrest this tendency is to turn anew to God, to mobilize prayer to this effect. Let us take Andrew Murray’s advice to heart: ‘The first step in returning to God for true service and real blessing, is always confession... (On) the leaders ... rests the solemn duty of lifting up their voices and making God’s people know their sin’ (Murray, 1979:39). From there the desire to pray for the evangelization of the unreached could flow naturally. Let’s listen to Andrew Murray once again in conclusion: ‘Until Christians are led to listen, and think, and pray for opened eyes to look upon these fields, “white unto the harvest,” ... they never will recognize the greatness of the work, their own unprepared­ness, or the urgent need of waiting for divine power to equip them for the task. As we take this in, we shall confess how little the Church has done. The guilt and shame resting on the body of Christ, will become the Lord’s burden on us’ (Cited by Choy, 1979:39f). Little has changed since these uncomplimentary words were written. The truth of it is just as valid. What are we going to do with it? Eileen Vincent, a British visitor to our country suggested in 1986 in her book I will heal their land, that ‘South Africa is not only rich in gold dug from the mines but in faith that has been tested and tried... and proven to be more valuable than fine gold.’ Are we going to leave the ‘gold’ in the earth, or are the Christians going to dig the ‘gold’ out, so that missionaries from our subcontinent can get to the ripe white fields in signifi­cant numbers? Selected Bibliography August, Karel Thomas – Die Kruisteologie van Zinzendorf, UWC, Bellville, 1985 Beck, Hartmut - Brüder unter den Völkern, Verlag der Evang.-Lutheran Mission, Erlangen (Germany),1981 Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church, Oxford University Press, 1967(1943) Beyreuther, Erich - Der Junge Zinzendorf, Francke Buchhandlung, Marburg/Lahn, 1957, - Beyreuther, Studien zur Theologie Zinzendorfs, (Neukirchener Verlag, 1962) - Nikolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf in Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten, (Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag, Reinbeck (Germany) 1965 Bosch, David J - Goeie Nuus vir armes ... en rykes, UNISA, Pretoria, 1990 - Transforming Mission, Orbis books, November 1993 Brother Andrew - A Time for Heroes, Kingsway Publications, Eastbourne, (1989 [1988]) God’s Smuggler, ??,1998 (??) Building in a broken World, Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, 1981 Light Force, the only hope for the Middle East, Open Doors International, London, 2004 Du Plessis, J. - The life of Andrew Murray of South Africa, Marshall Brothers, London, 1919 Gerdener, G.B.A. - Bouers van Weleer, N.G. Uitgewers Cape Town, 1951 - Studies in the Evangelization of South Africa, London, 1911 - Die Afrikaner en die Sending,(?? 1959) Goeda, Wilson – Why me? , Kairos Group, Durban, 2006 Goll, Jim W. - Die Verlorene Kunst der Fürbitte, Verlag Gottfried Bernard, Solingen, 2001 Greeson, Kevin - The Camel, Wigtake Resources, LLC (Arkadelphia, USA), 2007 Hutton, J.E. - A Short history of the Moravian Church, Moravian Publication Office, London, 1895 Jannasch, Wilhelm – Erdmuthe Dorothea, Grafin von Zinzendorf, Herrnhut, 1915 Joyner, Rick -Three Witnesses, Morning Star Publications, Charlotte (NC, USA),1999 Kreider, Larry and McClung, Floyd – Starting a House Church, Regal books, Ventura (Ca), 2007 Latourette, Kenneth Scott – The Christian World Mission in our Day, Eyre and Spottiswoode, London, 1954 Langton, ?? Lewis, Anthony J. The ecumenical Pioneer, (SCM Press, London, 1962 Lynse, Elana - Flames of Revival, Crossway books, Westchester (USA 1989), Lüt­jeharms, Het philadelphisch streven der Herrnhutter in de Nederlanden in de 18de eeuw, Zeist, 1935 Matthews, Arthur, Voor de strijd geboren, Evangelische Lektuur Kruistocht, Apeldoorn, n.d (Original title: Born for Battle, 1978) Murray, Andrew - Key to the missionary Problem, published by James Nisbet, London, 1901; contemporised by Leona F. Choy and published by Christian Literature Crusade, Fort Washington, 1979. Neill, Stephen - A History of Christian Missions, (Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1965) Nielsen, Sigurd – Der Toleranzgedanke bei Zinzendorf,Vol.1, Ludwig Appel Verlag, Hamburg, 1951 Praamsma, L De Kerk van alle Tijden, Volumes 1-IV I, T.Wever, Franeker (NL), 1979-1981 Retief Frank - Tragedy to triumph, (Nelson Word Ltd, Milton Keynes and Struik Christian Books, Cape Town, 1994 Richardson, Eternity in their hearts, ??, California,1984, Ryan, Colleen - Beyers Naudé, Pilgrimage of Faith (David Philip Publishers, Claremont, 1990 Sider, Ronald J. Rich Christians in an age of hun­ger, Intervarsity Press, ??, 1977, Spangenberg, August -Das Leben des Herrn Nicolaus Ludwig Grafen und Herrn Zinzendorf und Pottendorf, facsimile repro­duction of the edition 1773-1775, Georg Olms Verlag, 1971, Steinberg H.G., Schütz, H.I.C., Lütjeharms, W., Van der Linde, J.M., Zinzendorf, Callenbach, Nijkerk (NL), 1960 Tucker, Ruth – From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, Zondervan, Grand Rapids (USA), 2004 Uttendörfer, Otto and Schmidt, Walter (ed) Die Brüder, aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der Brüdergemeine, Verlag des Vereins für Brüdergeschichte, Herrnhut, 1914 Van der Linde, J.M., - God’s Wereldhuis, Uitgeverij Ton Bolland, Amsterdam, 1980 Van der Linde, J.M. - De Wereld heeft toekomst, J.H. Kok, Kampen, 1979 Verkuyl, J. - Breek de Muren af, Bosch en Keuning, Baarn, 1969 Verwer, G., - The Revolution of Love, (Hodder & Stoughton Ltd. Carlisle (UK), 1993,(1988) Visser ‘t Hooft, W.A. - The pressure of our common calling, SCM, London, 1959 Wagner, C. Peters and Wilson, (ed) - Praying through the 100 gateway cities of the 10/40 window, YWAM publishing, Seattle, 1995, Wagner, C. Peter (ed.) - Breaking strongholds in your City, Regal Books,, Ventura (USA), 1993 Walker, Williston - A History of the Christian Church, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1976 (1919) Weinlick, John R. - Count Zinzendorf, Abington Press, New York, 1956 Zinzendorf, N - Nine Lectures, Edited and translated by George W. Forell, University of Iowa Press, Iowa, 1973 Appendix A The Beginnings of the Moravian Mission at St Thomas Nowhere have the lessons taught by Jesus for missionary endeavour which we tried to expound in this book probably highlighted better that in the beginnings of the Moravian Mission on the West Indian islands of St Thomas and St Croix. I shall now attempt to summarise the salient points. Since 1728 Count Zinzendorf had meticulously prepared his congregation in general to get ready to launch out in missions in God’s time. In written instructions he impressed on them not to measure with the ‘Herrnhuter Elle’ (Herrnhut yard-stick), not to impose European culture in foreign lands. Converts were to be treated as equals and used in the spreading of the Gospel as equals. Count Zinzendorf had a firm belief to operate there where the Holy Spirit had already been at work. To Him it was providential, God’s timing that he met not only the Christian slave Anton, who became God’s special instrument to ignite the Herrnhut missionary endeavours,but also two indigenous believers from Greenland at the 1731 coronation of Christian VI in Kopenhagen. This was the vanguard of the Moravian engagement among the Eskimo’s from 1733. Missionaries could reckon to build on foundations that God had laid through his Spirit. This was definitely the case in St Thomas because when Leonhard Dober and David Nitschmann, the first Moravian missionaries – who were respectively a potter and a carpenter - arrived on St Thomas in 1732, there was already a believer, the old Marotta. She may have had some supernatural encounters with God. Brought over as a slave from West Africa, she had been accustomed to fall down on her knees, every morning and night in prayer before the Lord. Hutton (Fire and Snow, Stories of early missionaries, approx 1909:65f) narrates how she set apart one day every year as a day of atonement. ‘Her hut became a tabernacle; she herself was the officiating priest.’ She was already quite old when Dober and Nitschmann arrived. Her testimony likewise showed that the Gospel had somehow penetrated to Guinea before European missionaries came there.178 She testified that her parents ‘had taught her to believe in Pao, the only true God; in His Son Masu; and in Ce, the Holy Spirit’ (Hutton, before 1909:66). God could have used Marotta to prepare the way of the Gospel among the slaves of the island. Missionary workers sent from Herrnhut were expected not to meddle in the politics of the countries where they would work but this did not mean that they should not stand with the downtrodden. In fact, after living comfortably in the home of Gardelin, the Governor, as a steward, Leonhard Dober felt ashamed that he had compromised his original intention of becoming a slave. When he fell seriously ill shortly hereafter, ‘he determined that, if God should spare his life, he would henceforth dwell among the Negroes alone.’ Soon after his recovery, he resigned from his post as steward, hired a little cottage, living on dry bread and brackish water. For three months he worked as an overseer in a cotton plantation. But he soon gave it up because even this modest post made his suspect among the Blacks. At this time he was recalled to Europe because Martin Linner had died suddenly. He would become the new chief elder. Zinzendorf was a child of his day believing that enslavement of Negroes was a part of God’s punishment as descendents of Ham, but his emphasis on education helped to form the basis for the eventual liberation of many of them. Yet he had no scruples to let Christian Protten become a member of the church in Herrnhut and to send him out as one of the first missionaries into a pioneering situation. The Herrnhut Moravians dared to experiment, making mistakes, but in their positive view of all people, slaves and indigenous included, long before Jean Jaques Rousseau and others wrote about the equality of all men but also acknowledging the general depravity of man without Christ. Appendix B Non-biblical Examples of Disobedience The respective founders of Islam and Communism can be seen as simultaneously as people who could have been disobedient to God’s voice and Muhammad is generally regarded to have been a true seeker. It is however difficult to accept that God could have allowed such a potentially choice servant to be misled. There are a few possible explanations. It seems as if God had a special purpose with Muhammad, but that the enemy of souls, helped by the ignorance and indifference of Christians on the one hand and the pride of Muhammad on the other, hijacked the divine plans. One explanation could be that Muhammad possibly did hear the Gospel clearly enough but that he responded negatively to it. Instead, the youthful lad, already misled by the Syrian monk Bahira, seemed to have unwittingly opened himself further to the occult. Another logical explanation is that Muhammad reacted purely angrily in response to the ridicule and rejection, which he experienced from Christians and Jews. Jealousy has been attributed to the Medinan Jews when they heard that God has chosen an Arab as the last prophet. Talmudic scriptures indicate that Ishmael was regarded as wicked. For a Jew it would have been quite difficult to swallow that a descendant from Ishmael would now lead them (Very few possibly knew the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 60:6f which speaks about the descendants of Ishmael). Karl Heinrich Marx was born into a comfortable middle-class home in Trier on the river Moselle in Germany on May 5, 1818. He came from a long line of rabbis on both sides of his family and his father, a man who had agreed to baptism as a Protestant so that he would not lose his job as one of the most respected lawyers in Trier. At the University of Berlin where he remained four years, at which time he adopted Hegelianism, which ruled in Berlin at the time. There Karl Marx became a member of the Young Hegelian movement. This group, which included the theologians Bruno Bauer and David Friedrich Strauss, produced a radical critique of Christianity. Arriving in Paris at the end of 1843, Marx rapidly made contact with organized groups of German workers and with various sects of French socialists. It is said that there he also experienced the negative vibes of religion in general and Christianity in particular. That ultimately led to his thesis that religion is the opium of the people. In summary it can thus be said that the two greatest anti-Christian ideological challenges in history can be ascribed to the neglect of bible-believing Christians to share the Gospel in a meaningful way with the respective founders of Islam and atheistic Socialism. Removed: The Church universal should be very thankful for the correction that came through via Landa Cope. In her book The Old Testament Template (Burtigny (Switserland), 2006) she has wonderfully and quite convincingly shown how God gave to the nations his plan for government, economics and family in the laws of Moses. The mission agency WEC was almost knocked out after the publication of an unfortunate tract when the committee wanted to sack the founder C T Studd in 1931. Although the missionaries were also unhappy with the wording of the tract, they stood with their leader. The mission was saved by the sound advice of Rees Howells to Norman Grubb, another WEC leader who later became the international leader. In South Africa there was a time when young radicals regarded it as fashion­able to be able to boast with their imprisonment or suffering in the struggle. Very often the actions leading to their arrest were ill-con­ceived, born out of sensationalism or provocation. Pilgrims among modern Pagans Dedication to God implies a radical life-style which should reflect our status as pilgrims among modern pagans.