Hoe Om Mense Met Liefde Hel toe te Stuur
(English translation below.)
Inleiding
Toe Jesus vir Petrus vra: “Het jy my lief, meer as hulle hier?” het Hy na regte vir Petrus geleer wat ware liefde is en hoe om dit van ‘n valse en helse soort liefde te onderskei. Ja, glo dit as u wil, daar is so-iets soos ‘n helse liefde, en as ons so kyk na die kerkdebat wat nog steeds in persberigte en webblogs woed, dan is dit nie so moeilik om hierdie helse liefde uit te ken en raak te sien nie.
Ware liefde (kom ons noem dit ‘n goddelike liefde want dis maar eintlik wat dit is) is om, soos Jesus vir Petrus gesê het, sy lammers en skape op te pas en hulle die regte geestelike voedsel te gee. Wie ookal hieroor met my wil stry moet gerus maar weer gaan leer wat Jesus bedoel het toe Hy gesê het HY IS die Goeie Herder.
‘n Goeie Herder is tog immers ‘n herder wat sy lammers en skape oppas en hulle teen wolwe en ander wilde diere beskerm. Koning Dawid was deeglik vertroud met die rol wat ‘n herder elke dag in die lewens van sy lammers en skape moes speel. Luister ‘n bietjie hierna:
Daarop sê Dawid aan Saul: U dienaar het vir sy vader die kleinvee opgepas, en as daar 'n leeu of 'n beer kom en 'n stuk kleinvee uit die trop wegdra, dan gaan ek uit agter hom aan en verslaan hom en ruk dit uit sy bek uit; en as hy my aanval, gryp ek hom aan sy baard en verslaan hom en maak hom dood. U dienaar het die leeu sowel as die beer doodgeslaan, en met hierdie onbesnede Filistyn sal dit gaan net soos met een van hulle, omdat hy die slagordes van die lewende God uitgedaag het. (1 Samuel 17:34-36).
Die hedendaagse liefdevolle en vol-van-liefde postmoderne predikers sou waarskynlik vir my sê: “Sjoe, maar jy’s darem wreedaardig en bloeddorstig, ou vriend.” Wees gerus, ek gebruik dit nes julle as ‘n metafoor om te verduidelik wat ek in die res van hierdie artikel wil sê. Wees dus kalm en lees gerus wat ek aan julle wil oordra.
Ons is geneig om ‘n goeie herder net in terme van wat Psalm 23 ons leer, te sien – groen weivelde; waters waar rus is; ‘n siel wat verkwik word; spore van geregtigheid; ‘n tafel wat voorberei is; ‘n hoof wat tot oorvloedens toe gesalf is met olie; ‘n beker wat oorloop van vreugde, en God se goedheid en guns wat jou al die dae van jou lewe agternajaag.
Hierin sien ons wat Jesus bedoel het toe Hy gesê het: “Laat my lammers en my skape wei.” Dit alles dui op vrede, rustigheid, en volkome tevredenheid. Maar daar is ook ‘n ander ewe belangrike aspek van ‘n goeie herder en dit is dat hy die lammers en die skape moet oppas.
Jesus het nie verniet gesê: “Pasop dat niemand julle mislei nie” toe sy dissipels by Hom wou weet wanneer Hy weer sou terugkom en wanneer die einde van alles sou aanbreek (Mattheus 24:4). Hierdie spesifieke opdrag word in 1 Samuel 17:34-36 weerspieêl. ‘n Herder wat sy sout werd is moet dus nie net die lammers en skape rustig langs groen weivelde laat wei nie; hy moet hulle ook teen wrede wolwe en ander gevaarlike roofdiere beskerm.
As hy dit nie doen nie, kan hy onder geen omstandighede op goeie herderskap aanspraak maak nie. Hy is dan inderdaad ‘n slegte herder (d.w.s. ‘n selfaangestelde huurling wat nie die belange van die lammers en die skape op die hart dra nie)
Ek is die goeie herder. Die goeie herder lê sy lewe af vir die skape. Maar die huurling en hy wat nie 'n herder is nie, van wie die skape nie die eiendom is nie, sien die wolf kom en laat die skape staan en vlug, en die wolf vang hulle en jaag die skape uitmekaar. En die huurling vlug, omdat hy 'n huurling is en niks vir die skape omgee nie. Ek is die goeie herder, en Ek ken my eie en word deur my eie geken. Net soos die Vader My ken, ken Ek ook die Vader; en Ek lê my lewe af vir die skape. (Johannes 10:11-15)
Hier sê die Here Jesus baie duidelik dat ‘n selfaangestelde huurling (dus iemand wat nie deur God geroepe is om ‘n herder te wees nie) die lammers en skape nie lief het nie (niks vir die skape omgee nie) al verklaar hulle met temerige reêlmaat dat “Liefde help mens om te sien dat goeie verhoudings die belangrikste waarheid van alles is.” Werklik?
Verhoudings is die belangrikste waarheid van alles, en dit terwyl Jesus self gesê het: “Moenie dink dat Ek gekom het om vrede op die aarde te bring nie. Ek het nie gekom om vrede te bring nie, maar die swaard.” (Mattheus 10:34). Lees Nelus Niemandt, die Moderator van die Algemene Sinode van die NG Kerk, nooit sy Bybel nie? Wie moet ons glo – Jesus Christus of Nelus Niemandt?
Het jy my lief, meer as hulle hier?
Dit is uiters belangrik om te let op Jesus se woorde “Het jy my lief, meer as hulle hier.” Dit kom flussies daarop neer dat jou liefde vir Christus alleenlik tot volle verwerkliking kan kom wanneer jy Hom liewer het as enigiets of enigiemand anders, ja selfs liewer as jou eie lewe. As jy Hom nie so liefhet nie, dan skort daar iets met jou liefde. Daarom sê hy so pertinent:
Wie vader of moeder bo My liefhet, is My nie waardig nie; en wie seun of dogter bo My liefhet, is My nie waardig nie. (Mattheus 10:37).
As iemand na My toe kom en hy haat nie sy vader en moeder en vrou en kinders en broers en susters, ja, selfs ook sy eie lewe nie, kan hy my dissipel nie wees nie. (Lukas 14:26).
Dis darem ‘n ander soort liefde wat Jesus hierbo skilder, nê. Hoe verskil sy siening rondom ware liefde met dié van die hedendaagse geleerdes wat spog met ‘n liefde wat skrik vir niks? In ‘n neutedop sê vandag se liefdes-profete en -leermeesters die volgende:
“Ware liefde is om ter wille van goeie verhoudings God se dogmas (leerstellings) opsy te skuif en almal, selfs ook hulle wat God en sy Seun in die gesigte spuug, te respekteer en lief te hê, met die doel om gelyke grond te vind in ons beredeneringe oor God en sy liefde.”
Natuurlik moet ons almal liefhê, ja selfs ons grootste vyande, maar dan moet dit nie ‘n liefde wees wat mense hel to stuur nie; dit moet ‘n liefde wees ter wille van Christus en sy onveranderlike en ewige woord en ook ter wille van die redding van mense se verlore siele.
Om te toon wat ek hierbo bedoel, wil ek eers graag verwys na Ferdie Mulder se blogartikel “Kerkdebat – ‘n Derde Weg: Waarheid in liefde” waarin hy verwys na die klagte wat Dr. Wynand Louw teen Dr Ben du Toit by die NG Kerk se Algemene Sinode aanhangig gemaak het omdat lg. nie in die bestaan van die duiwel glo nie. Dr. Ben du Toit is onskuldig bevind wat natuurlik nie rede gee tot die lig van wenkbroue nie want die NG Kerk sal waarskynlik niks daarvan dink om selfs ook die duiwel onskuldig te bevind nie.
Ferdie Mulder begin sy artikel met tipiese Hegeleense opmerking wat vir albei Nelus Niemandt en Wynand Louw oor die vingers tik maar eintlik vir laasgenoemde in ‘n slegter lig plaas as vir Nelus Niemandt.
Prof Nelus Niemandt skryf n.a.v. die “kerkdebat” oor leerdwaling in die NG Kerk in Beeld (19/12/12) dat hy vashou aan “geloof, hoop en liefde”, waarvan die liefde die grootste is, teenoor dr Wynand Louw wat aankla en skryf oor die “New Age-filosofie direk uit die hel” (Beeld 18/12/12). Met respek, dalk is daar ‘n derde moontlikheid wat albei mis.
Die “derde moontlikheid” waarna Ferdie Mulder verwys is die Here Jesus se opdrag in Efesiêrs 4:15 “maar, terwyl ons in liefde die waarheid betrag, in alles sou opgroei in Hom wat die Hoof is, naamlik Christus,” Die postmoderne predikers het hierdie gedeelte al so baie nek omgedraai dat dit haas onmoontlik geword het om hulle te glo.
In die eerste plek is die hele doel om die waarheid in liefde te betrag (saam daaroor te besin) hoofsaaklik om die liggaam van Christus (alle gelowiges) saam te laat groei tot volwassenheid in die Hoof van die liggaam, nl. Christus.
Dit kom dus weer eens neer op die regte geestelike voeding wat aan die lammers en skape voorsien moet word sodat hulle mag groei in die kennis en die waarheid van Christus, en nie maar net om die arm om die skouer te sit en met ‘n soetsappige en bewerige ou stemmetjie te sê “ek het jou tog so lief” nie.
Nog minder is dit om God’s water oor God’s akker te laat loop of om ‘n blinde oog in die rigting van dwaalleer te gooi net omdat ek of jy hulle lief moet hê. Trouens, as jy hulle nie in liefde vermaan, bestraf en weerlê nie, kan jy nie sê jy het hulle waarlik lief nie. Dis dan ‘n valse liefde wat hulle inderdaad hel toe stuur.
Broeders, as een onder julle van die waarheid afgedwaal het en iemand hom bekeer, laat hy weet dat die een wat 'n sondaar van sy dwaalweg bekeer, 'n siel uit die dood sal red en 'n menigte sondes sal bedek. (Jakobus 5:19-20).
Dit is ware liefde
Jesus het immers nie aan sy dissipels gesê: “Julle moet die leer presies reg verwoord” nie. Hy het aan hulle gesê: “Julle moet mekaar liefhê.
neels jackson: beeld 28 mei 2009
Pleks daarvan om te verwys na Skrifgedeeltes wat juis oor hierdie ware liefde praat, wend Ferdie Mulder hom tot mense se raad wat net mooitjies niks beteken nie; Hy skryf:
Enige persoon wat Prof Niemandt al in aksie gesien het op ‘n sinode vloer sal moet toegee dat hy ‘n spesialis is in “goeie verhoudings”. Die manier hoe hy ‘n sinode vergadering bestuur is prysenswaardig. Maar mag mens met respek en ook in liefde met prof Niemandt verskil? In die konteks van leerdwaling in die NG Kerk skryf hy: “Liefde help mens om te sien dat goeie verhoudings die belangrikste waarheid van alles is”. Hierdie stelling herinner sterk aan die kerksake joernalis Neels Jackson se stelling oor die liefde ook in die konteks van kerkdebatte rondom spesifiek proff Julian Müller, Danie Veldsman, dr Ben du Toit en prof Adrio König se boek Die Evangelie is op die Spel. Jackson het al König se kritiek op Müller, Veldsman en Du Toit verwerp, en toe soos volg oor die liefde geskryf:
“Wat hier ter sprake is, is die leer van die kerk. En terloops, ek dink nie die professore bring dit in die gedrang nie. Die vraag is egter of dit, die dogmas, die hart van die evangelie is. Jesus het immers nie aan sy dissipels gesê: “Julle moet die leer presies reg verwoord” nie. Hy het aan hulle gesê: “Julle moet mekaar liefhê.“ My gevoel is dit is dié evangelie wat nou in die NG Kerk se teologiese gesprek op die spel is” (Beeld 28 Mei 2009).
Is Neels Jackson waarlik gered? Ken Hy die Here as sy persoonlike Saligmaker? Ek twyfel nie dat hy goeie verhoudings met mense handhaaf nie maar ek betwyfel baie sterk sy verhouding met Christus. Hoe durf ek so iets sê?
Kom ons vergelyk Neels Jackson se stelling met wat die Bybel sê. Neelsie (dis nou nie die Sagmoedige Neelsie van boekformaat nie) maar die liefdevolle en sagmoedige Neelsie van Beeld, skryf:
Die vraag is egter of dit, die dogmas, die hart van die evangelie is. Jesus het immers nie aan sy dissipels gesê: “Julle moet die leer presies reg verwoord” nie. Hy het aan hulle gesê: “Julle moet mekaar liefhê.” My gevoel is dit is dié evangelie wat nou in die NG Kerk se teologiese gesprek op die spel is” (Beeld 28 Mei 2009).
Waar kom hy daaraan dat Jesus vir sy dissipels gesê het “Julle moet [nie] die leer presies reg verwoord” nie? As Jesus nie wou hê hulle moes sy dogmas (leerstellings) korrek en juis verwoord nie sou Hy nooit kon sê” “Maar wanneer Hy gekom het, die Gees van die waarheid, sal Hy julle in die hele waarheid lei; want Hy sal nie uit Homself spreek nie, maar alles wat Hy hoor, sal Hy spreek en die toekomstige dinge aan julle verkondig. ” (Johannes 16:13).
As God die Heilige Gees nie sou waag om iets anders te sê as wat Jesus ons geleer het nie, waarom sou Hy van sy dissipels verwag om sy leer nie presies reg te verwoord nie? Dis mos loutere onsin.
Ferdie sê ook dat hy Dr Wynand Louw persoonlik uit Engeland gebel en vir hom gesê het om nie persoonlik met die dwaalleraars te raak nie, kwansuis omdat die tyd vir ondersoeke na leerdwaling in die NG Kerk verby is. Wil hy daarmee sê dat ikabod uiteindelik oor die NG Kerk geskryf is of wil hy daarmee sê dat ons 2 Timotheus 3:16 maar uit die Bybel moet skeur? Hy skryf:
As voorbeeld het ek vir hom daarop gewys dat proff Jan du Randt, Adrio König, Jan van der Watt en Stefan Joubert alreeds in 2001 ‘n omvangryke artikel vir Kerkbode geskryf het waarin hulle aantoon dat iemand soos dr Ben du Toit in sy boek: God? Geloof in ‘n postmoderne tyd, “min van die evangelie oorhou, te min om dit nog die moeite werd te maak”. As vier van die mees gerespekteerde internasionale NG teoloê (op daardie stadium) se kommentaar nie ernstig geneem was nie, hoekom sal die NG Kerk nou skielik ‘n Dr. Wynand Louw se kritiek op dr Du Toit se uitsprake ernstig neem? Dan was daar ook die leerdwaling ondersoeke in 2006 wat, reg of verkeerd, almal onsuksesvol was.
Intussen het sommige van die leraars, o.a. Stephan Joubert, wat in 2001 ‘n woord van waarskuwing tot die NG Kerk gerig het, ook in dwaalleringe verval. Dit is uiters tragies, maar dit wys vir ons hoe maklik hoë profiel mense ingesuig word wanneer hulle nie waaksaam is nie. Ek wil op hierdie noot eindig deur vir Ferdie Mulder te waarsku om nie te pêllie-pêllie met dié mense te raak nie. Dit kan ook sy ondergang beteken.
En Hy het vir my gesê: Mensekind, kom, gaan na die huis van Israel, en spreek hulle aan met my woorde; want jy is nie gestuur na 'n volk wat duister van spraak en swaar van tong is nie, maar na die huis van Israel; nie na baie volke wat duister van spraak en swaar van tong is nie, wie se woorde jy nie kan verstaan nie; as Ek jou tog na hulle gestuur het, het hulle na jou geluister! Maar die huis van Israel sal na jou nie wil luister nie, omdat hulle na My nie wil luister nie; want die hele huis van Israel het 'n harde voorhoof en 'n ongevoelige hart. Kyk, Ek maak jou aangesig hard net soos hulle aangesig en jou voorhoof hard net soos hulle voorhoof. Jou voorhoof maak Ek hard soos 'n diamant, harder as 'n rots; jy mag nie vir hulle bevrees of vir hulle verskrik wees nie, omdat hulle 'n wederstrewige huis is. (Esegiêl 3:4-9)
How to Send People to Hell with Love
When Jesus asked Peter: “Do you love me more than these?” He in fact taught Peter what true love is and how to distinguish it from a counterfeit and hellish kind of love. Yes, believe it if you will, there is such a thing as hellish love, and if we look at the church debate that is still raging in the press and blogs, it is not so hard to notice and identify it. True love (let’s call it a divine love for that is but really what it is) is, as Jesus said to Peter, to tend his lambs and sheep, and to give them the right spiritual food.
Whoever wants to argue with me about this, should please go and study what Jesus meant when He said He is the Good Shepherd. A Good Shepherd is, after all, a shepherd that tends his lambs and sheep and protects them from wolves and other wild animals. King David was thoroughly familiar with the role that a shepherd had to play every day in the lives of his lambs and sheep. Listen to this:
But David said to Saul, "Your servant used to keep sheep for his father. And when there came a lion, or a bear, and took a lamb from the flock, I went after him and struck him and delivered it out of his mouth. And if he arose against me, I caught him by his beard and struck him and killed him. Your servant has struck down both lions and bears, and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be like one of them, for he has defied the armies of the living God." (1 Samuel 17:34-36).
Today’s loving and brimming-with-love post-modern preachers would probably tell me: “Wow, but you are cruel and bloodthirsty, my friend.” Relax, just as you do, I use it as a metaphor to explain what I have to say in this article. So remain calm and please read what I’d like to convey to you.
We tend to think of a good shepherd only in terms of what Psalm 23 teaches us – green pastures; still waters; a soul restored; paths of righteousness; a table prepared; a head anointed with oil; a cup overflowing with joy, and God’s goodness and mercy following after us all the days of our lives. Here we see what Jesus meant when He said: “Feed my lambs and my sheep.” It all points to peace, tranquillity, and complete satisfaction.
But there is another equally important duty of a good shepherd and that is that he is to guard the lambs and sheep. Jesus clearly warned: “Take heed that no man deceive you” when the disciples wanted to know the time of his return and the end of all things (Matthew 24:4). This particular assignment is reflected in 1 Samuel 17:34-36.
A Shepherd worth his salt should not only lead his lambs and sheep to graze peacefully along green pastures; he must also guard them against savage wolves and other dangerous predators. If he does not, he cannot under any circumstances claim to be a good shepherd. He is fact a bad shepherd (i.e. a self-appointed hireling who does not take to heart the safety of the lambs and the sheep)
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep. (John 10:11-15).
Here the Lord Jesus very clearly says that a self-appointed hireling (ie someone who is not called by God to be a pastor), does not love the lambs and sheep (is not at all concerned about the sheep) even though they declare with whimpering regularity that “Love helps people to see that the most important truth of all is good relationships.”
Really? Relationships are the most important truth of all, when Jesus himself said: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34). Does Nelus Niemandt, Moderator of the General Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church, ever read his Bible? Who should we believe – Jesus Christ or Nelus Niemandt?”
Do you Love Me more than these?
It is imperative to note Jesus’ words “Do you love me more than these.” It means that your love for Christ should exceed your love for anything or anyone else, yes, even your love for your own life. If you do not love Him in this way, then there is something wrong with your love. Therefore he says so explicitly:
"Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37)
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)
Jesus paints a different picture of true love, not so? How does his view on true love differ from those of today’s scholars who boast of their love? What today’s love prophets and teachers are saying, is in a nutshell:
“True love is to set aside God’s doctrines (teachings) for the sake of good relations, and to love and respect everyone, even those who spit in the faces of God and His Son, in order to find common ground to talk about God and his love.”
Of course, we ought to love all, even our worst enemies, but then it must not be the kind of love that sends people to hell. It must be a love for the sake of Christ and his unchanging and eternal word and it must also be for the sake of the salvation of lost souls.
To illustrate, I want to refer to Ferdie Mulder’s blog article “Kerkdebat – ‘n Derde Weg: Waarheid in liefde [Church Debate – a Third Way: Truth in Love”] in which he referred to the complaint filed by Dr. Wynand Louw against Dr. Ben du Toit at the DRC’s General Synod because the latter does not believe in the existence of the devil. Dr. Ben du Toit was found not guilty. Of course, this is no cause for lifting eyebrows because the DRC would probably think nothing of declaring the devil innocent.
Ferdie Mulder begins his article with a typical Hegelian comment that raps both Nelus Niemandt and Wynand Louw on the knuckles but actually places the latter in a worse light than Nelus Niemandt.
In response to the “church debate” about heresy in the DRC, Prof. Nelus Niemandt writes in Beeld [A South African newspaper] (12/19/12) that he holds to “faith, hope and love,” of which love is the greatest, as opposed to Dr Wynand Louw who accuses and writes about the “New Age-filosofie direk uit die hel” [New Age philosophy straight from hell]. (Beeld 12/18/12). Respectfully, perhaps there is a third option which both of them miss.
The “third option” that Ferdie Mulder referred to, is the Lord’s command in Ephesians 4:15 “Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ”. The post-modern preachers have mangled this passage so many times that it has become almost impossible to believe them. The whole purpose of reflecting (together) on the truth in love, is primarily to grow the body of Christ (all believers) in maturity into the head of the body, that is Christ.
It once again comes down to providing real spiritual nourishment to the lambs and sheep so that they may grow in the knowledge and the truth of Christ. It is not about embracing and weakly whispering in a shaky voice “I love you oh so much”. Nor is it to ‘let go and let God’ or to wink at heretics, because you and I should love them. In fact, if you do not exhort, rebuke, and refute them in love, then you cannot say you love them. Then it is a counterfeit love that will indeed send them to hell.
My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. (James 5:19-20).
This is true love
After all, Jesus did not tell his disciples: “You must articulate the dogma precisely”. He told them: “Love one another.” My feeling is this is the gospel that is now at stake in the Dutch Reformed Church’s theological conversation “
(Neels Jackson: Beeld May 28, 2009).
Instead of referring to passages that speak of true love, Ferdie Mulder turned to the worthless advice of men; He writes:
Anyone who has seen Prof Niemandt in action at the synod will have to concede that he is a specialist in “good relations”. The way he manages a synod meeting is commendable. But may one respectfully and in love disagree with Professor Niemandt? With regards to heresy in the DRC, he wrote: “Love helps people to see that good relationships are the most important truth of all.” This statement is reminiscent of church affairs journalist Neels Jackson’s statement about love in the context of the church debates specifically on Prof Julian Müller, Danie Veldsman, Dr Ben du Toit and Prof Adrio König’s book “Die Evangelie is op die Spel” [The Gospel at risk]. Jackson rejected König’s criticism of Müller, Veldsman and Du Toit and then wrote the following about love:
“What’s at stake here is the dogma of the church. And incidentally, I do not think the professors bring it into question. The question however is whether this, the dogma, is the heart of the gospel. After all, Jesus did not tell his disciples: “You must articulate the dogma precisely”. He told them: “Love one another.” My feeling is that this is the gospel that is now at stake in the Dutch Reformed Church’s theological conversation “(Beeld May 28, 2009).
Is Neels Jackson truly saved? Does he know the Lord as his personal Saviour? I have no doubt that he maintains good relationships with people, but I doubt very strongly his relationship with Christ. How dare I say such a thing? Let’s compare Neels Jackson’s statement with what the Bible says. Neelsie (not the gentle Neelsie of literary fame), but this loving and gentle Neelsie of Beeld, writes:
The question however is whether this, the dogma, is the heart of the gospel. After all, Jesus did not tell his disciples: “You must articulate the dogma precisely”. He told them: “Love one another.” My feeling is this is the gospel that is now at stake in the Dutch Reformed Church’s theological conversation “(Beeld May 28, 2009).
Where on earth did he get the idea from that Jesus told his disciples “You must [not] articulate the dogma precisely”? If Jesus did not want them to teach and articulate his dogma [doctrines] correctly, he never would have said: “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.” (John 16:13).
If God the Holy Spirit would not dare to say something different than what Jesus taught us, why would he expect his disciples not to articulate his teachings correctly? That’s sheer nonsense. I can ask Ferdie Mulder too: “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?” (John 16:13)
Ferdie also says that he personally phoned Dr Wynand Louw from England and told him not to get personal with the false teachers, ostensibly because the time has passed for investigations into heresies in the DRC. Is he saying that Ichabod has finally been written on the DRC or does he want to say that 2 Timothy 3:16 should be torn from the Bible? He writes:
As an example I pointed out to him that already in 2001 Professors Jan du Rand, AdrioKönig Jan van der Watt and Stefan Joubert wrote an extensive article for Kerkbode in which they showed that somebody like Dr Ben du Toit had “kept so little of the gospel” in his book: God? Geloof in ‘n postmoderne tyd, [God? Faith in a post-modern era], “that it was not even worth it”.
If the comments of four of the most respected international Dutch Reformed theologians (at that time) were not taken seriously, why would the DRC suddenly take a Dr. Wynand Louw’s criticism of Dr. Du Toit’s comments seriously? Then there was also the heresy hearings in 2006, which were, rightly or wrongly, all unsuccessful.
Meanwhile, some of the teachers, including Stephan Joubert who in 2001 issued a warning to the DRC, have also fallen into heresy. It is very tragic, but it shows us how easy high profile people can be drawn in when they are not vigilant. I want to end on this note by warning Ferdie Mulder not to become too buddy-buddy with these people. It can lead to his downfall also.
And he said to me, "Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak with my words to them. For you are not sent to a people of foreign speech and a hard language, but to the house of Israel-- not to many peoples of foreign speech and a hard language, whose words you cannot understand. Surely, if I sent you to such, they would listen to you. But the house of Israel will not be willing to listen to you, for they are not willing to listen to me. Because all the house of Israel have a hard forehead and a stubborn heart. Behold, I have made your face as hard as their faces, and your forehead as hard as their foreheads. Like emery harder than flint have I made your forehead. Fear them not, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house." (Ezekiel 3:4-9).love
