Mapinduzi

Nimerudi

2007-09-06T07:31:00.000-07:00

This is to announce the return of the Mapinduzi. They may kill us but they can't stop us

Whats With Kibaki's Campaigns for Narc Kenya!

2006-07-23T05:01:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, President Mwai Kibaki officially made his long awaited public support for Narc Kenya. The news Anchor at Nation TV announced: "its official that Narc Kenya has the blessing of Kibaki."

Now that does not worry me... it was clear from the start that this was another Pumbavu project. What bothers me, though, is the seeming silence that Kenyans have greeted this move. For lack of information i can't find anywhere where a sitting president ditches the party that houses his government and throws his weight behind an opposition outfit. This is outrageous. It is an outright rebellion against oneself! absolutely ridiculous... a kind that the whole world has never seen or heard.

That not even the learned friends have not sighted a discrepancy in this is even more buffling. We need to ask ourselves this question when there is still time. Lets be hypothetical and say if (an if clause,i.e. apodasis calls for a protasis to complete the sentence) Kibaki declares his candidature on a Narc-Kenya ticket Kenya will go for an election with the government conducting the election being minus a sitting president. What then could be the implications of this.... some wise learned friend should come out and help me on this. Can the president defect from his party and the party still continue to host the government? In legal terms what do we call that state of affairs? What is the AG's role in this? Could we hold him responsible for not informing the authority or is there a legislative procedure that can be evocked if this came to be? Rather How strong is our law? Can it protect Kenya from tyranny of this kind?... I am asking all this because I sincerely DON'T KNOW. Saidia!

Kibaki addressed a Narc-K campaign rally at Nakuru's Afraha Stadium and i find it rather stupid for a president to ask voters to support an opposition candidate because he was "the son of a dear friend". People of Nakuru, Is this reason enough for you to elect an individual? And to Kenyans does this man think we are gullible enough to accept such a proposal as the reason why our government can sell out the party that brought them to power. When Kenyans spoke they mandated NARC to govern them, not that we seem to be silent Pumbavu thinks that we are idiots. We shall see whio is Pumbavu... whether Kenyans or Pumbavu....You know the verdict. You made it in 2002, 2005 referundum and will confirm it in 2007. Go Kenya GO. One Kenya One People!
For God and My Country

The Same Old Kenya

2006-06-13T08:33:00.000-07:00

Sometime back in 2001 i was arrested somewhere along om Mboya street and charged with idling. Last year on August 24th i was arrested on Oginga Street in Kisumu and charges with idling. On Sunday 11th, this Month i was arrested somewhere around the National rchives and was accused of idling. Each of the times i was arrested the arresting oficers sweet-talked me into bribing them which i refused. .. and to Central police station i went. i bad night but the next day i had to plead to the charge of idling in the court. paid my fine and am now free.

This is the same old Kenya. When i arrived into the country on Sunday the 4th i thought much hasd changed...But NO. They can't arrest the offensive Arturs but they think i shoild be arrested. I don't know who else experiences this but i find my wonderful motherland sometimes quite obnoxious.

Is it only me who goes through this or other s too. Am leaving Kenya for a week and am sure no one will arrest me while i am away. But i'll brace myself for any eventuallity when i come back.
That is Kenya for you.............!!!
and boy tht was a good lashing to the president by the Standard newspaper..kudos to the editor.

I still smell a rat

2006-06-11T02:49:00.000-07:00

In a previous post i enquired the whereabouts of the Arturs... now i don't want to ask any more.
Something else still worries me over here. it is their relationship with some Wambui thing... i don't know what!
Nairobi is getting better by the day, i mean the city beautification project. At least Gakuo is doing some work. But some Kivutha is out to spoil his good work. No wonder he got his share, serves him right! The former activist has become the enemy of development, what a metamorphosis! Indeed power corrupts absolutely.

Home At Last!

2006-06-08T01:01:00.000-07:00

It s sweet to be home finally. Whoever said " home sweet home" must have been having my experience in mind. Its amazing how Kenya changes much ... and changes not too. what a paradox! When i last lef it was dry and hot, now most parts are green and rel;atively cool. I just like Kenya regardless.

Here i was again, being stuffed in a matatu like a bag of potatoes and full time argument with our mean looking makangas. I tell you, those concordies don't care a thing. Its also amazing, the last time i was in Kenya, the seat belts and speed governors were a religious Kenyan requirement, now all have changed. The speed oh boy! i saw my death come so close.. and many other, but still it is home sweet home. My mum and dad are just the same ones.. loving but telling the truth firmly and gently...i wonder how i was leading my life in their absense, funny isn't it?

Yeah, and the great Uchumi... the Goliath supermarket finally crambled down. I can't believe it but didn't they say, when you're on the top there is no place you can really go bu down down down.

Regardless, it is home at last and i like it.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Just Curious!

2006-05-30T19:53:00.000-07:00

Who is going to help me? Was just wondering... what became of the Armenian Brothers? The last time i heard about them somebody had threaten to sue them for unpaid rent/breach of contract or something...sijui. Please tell me!

NA MUKAE CHONJO

2006-05-30T15:58:00.000-07:00

Fellow kenyans and friends of Kenya, it seems to me that some people are not yet through with fleecing us dry. Not ashamed that our MPs have taken the little we had, these Obasanjolike nollyhood stars are also starring on my otherwise flat wallet.
Read for yourself this one who thought i was another ngombe to milk...

Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 02:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jane Cole" Add to Address Book
Yahoo! DomainKeys has confirmed that this message was sent by yahoo.com.vn. Learn more
Subject: GREETINGS IN JESUS NAME.
To: conceled

TÃ´i cÃ³ thÆ° má»›i!

BÃ¢y giá» báº¡n cÃ³ thá»ƒ gá»i thÆ° Ä‘iá»‡n tá» cho tÃ´i táº¡i: janecole1960@yahoo.com.vn

GREETINGS IN JESUS NAME.

I AM MOTHER JANE COLE FROM NETHERLAND A WIDOW TO LATE PATRICK

COLE I AM 61 YEARS OLD, I AM CHRISTAIN,SUFFERING FROM LONG TIME CANCER

OF THE BREAST, ALL INDICATION FROM MY DOCTOR THAT MY CONDITIONS

IS REALLY DETERIORATING AND IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS THAT I WOUDN'T LIVE MORE

THAN THREE MONTHS.ACCORDING TO MY DOCTORS,AND IN ALL INDICATION REGARDS TO

MEDICAL ANALYSIS, THIS IS BECAUSE THE CANCER DISEASE HAS GOTTEN TO A

VERY BAD STAGE THAT NO HOPE FOR ME TO BE A LIVING PERSON AGAIN.

MY LATE HUSBAND KILLED DURING THE HURRICAN DISESTER, IN NEW

ORLEANS AND DURING THE PERIOD OF OUR MARRIAGE WE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY

CHILD.MY LATE HUSBAND WAS VERY WEALTHY AND AFTER HIS DEATH, I INHERITED ALL

HIS BUSINESS AND WEALTH. THE DOCTORS HAS ADVISED ME THAT I MAY NOT LIVE FOR

MORE THAN THREE MONTHS, SO I NOW DECIDED TO DIVIDE THE PART OF THIS WEALTH, TO

CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH INAFRICA, AMERICA, ASIA AND EUROPE

ESPECAILLY CREATE SOLUTION TO PROBLEM OF LESS PREVILLAGEDONES AND ALPHANAGE

HOMES.

I SELECTED YOU AFTER VIEWING YOUR CONTACT ON A WEBSITE WHICH I PRAYED AND

FAST FOR THREE WEEKS OVER IT WITH ADVISE OF MY PASTOR, I AM WILLING TO

DONATE THE SUM OF $7.5M U.S DOLLARS, TO THE LESS PRIVILEGED.

PLEASE I WANT YOU TO NOTE THAT THIS FUND IS LYING IN A SECURITY COMPANY AND

UPON MY INSTRUCTION, MY ATTORNEY,WHO PRESENTLY IS IN AFRICA DISTRIBUTING

RELIEF MATERIALS TO AIR CRASH OF BELLVIEW AIRLINES,WHICH WILL FILE IN AN

APPLICATION FOR THE RELEASE OF THE MONEY IN YOUR NAME. LASTLY,I HONESTLY PRAY THAT THIS MONEY WHEN TRANSFERRED WILL BE USED FOR THE SAID PURPOSE EVEN THOUGH I AM LATE THEN, BECAUSE I HAVE COME TO FIND OUT THAT WEALTH ACQUISITION WITHOUT CHRIST IS VANITY AND I MADE THE PROMISE TO GOD THAT THE FUND WILL BE USE TO BUILD HIS TEMPLE. MAY THE GRACE OF OUR LORD JESUS

THE LOVE OF GOD AND THE FELLOWSHIP OF GOD BE WITH YOU AND YOUR FAMILY

I AWAIT URGENT REPLY.

REPLY EMAIL: cole_jc099@yahoo.com

REMAIN BLESSED

GOD BLESS YOU.

MRS JANE COLE

- Jane Cole

you may also want to read my response below:

Dear Jane,
Greetings in Jesus name. I read your letter with with much sorrow and
confusion. Let me put this forth on the on set. that i am indeed a
passionate evangelical believer as you put it. i also run a website where i
post articles concerning my faith as well as other issues i deem
relevant to thhe society today.
may i also say that i feel deeply sorrowful for the news concerning
your state of health... i can't but help to say a prayer to God.
However, even as i do so i take some precaution as to the veracity of this
information. Allow me to be a little skeptical on this for a moment for
the sages said 'once beaten twice shy'. i have in the recent past
received at least three emails with almost a similar content of information.
tthe difference is that they asked me for my account number and when i
tried to verify the truth i found out that i was dealing with
fraudstars. secondly, these people paused as businesness people who were out to
do some charity work. Now my philosophy of ministry is that i don't
solicite funds from unbelievers even if my ministry was bankrupt and i
had nothing to eat.
Now 2 things strikes me in your email are:
1) You say you are a Christian
2) You say you are down with cancer.
These two issues leave me in with no option but to get into prayer.
I want to take the earliest opportunity to thank you for your kind
gesture of love and passion for the Third world. Thank you for your
willingness to donate money for charity work in these regions. your guess is
right that i am in charity work but i am just perplexed at how you got
to know that...not limiting God though.
If it be true that God is behind your gesture then feel free to
contact me through the addresses provided below.

Dan Kidha Kidha
P.O. Box 1658
Kondele, Kenya.
Tel: +254-720-558-231

I would appreciate if you called me personally on my cell phone. i am
away from my country and therefore unreachable until Monday 05, June
2006. I however read my emails daily and therefore i can get any
information anytime.
If for any reason you cannot get in contact with me just send the
cheque addresses to Kidha Dan Kidha on the above address (no account
numbers please!).
Thank you and may God reward you duly. See you in Heaven
Sincerly yours,

Dan Kidha Kidha

Aptly Put: Kenya against Uhuru

2006-05-23T14:46:00.000-07:00

I Wouldn't have said it better. Oduor On'gwen has said what i have been looking for the right words to say, but in vain. His conclusion makes the Title of this post.

Open letter to Uhuru on his ditching of the ODM

By Oduor Ongwen

Dear Honourable Uhuru Kenyatta,

Three things have motivated me to communicate with you as a matter of urgency, Sir. The first one is your recent declaration that the party you head – precisely the faction of the party you head – needs no allies to fight next year’s general elections. The second is the emergence of the former president of this country, Mr. Daniel Moi, to chaperon you to presumed ascension to the Office of the President of the Republic of Kenya. The third is the lesson I have learnt from ethnisation of this country’s politics.

Grandson of Wambui, from the onset I wish to aver that no person thinks more highly than I do of the need for value and ideology-driven politics as well as your abilities to transcend narrow sectarian politics and intrigues. But different people often do see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful if, entertaining as I do, opinions of a character very opposite to yours, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and with minimal reserve.

Hon Kenyatta, this is no time for ceremonies. The matter before this country is one of awful importance for the people of Kenya. From where I stand I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be freedom of debate, which I must concede you not only liberally enjoy but of which you are the initiator.

Mheshimiwa, no one holds the key to the spring of truth. No mortal has the monopoly of wisdom and worldly knowledge. It is only by engaging in honest and unrestrained discourse that little truths we hang onto can incrementally lead to a bigger truth. The truth that will set us free! Should I elect at this critical moment to hold back my opinions, through fear of giving offence, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my beloved country, and of an act of disloyalty to its people, who supersede all earthly kings, presidents and party chairmen.

Mr. Kenyatta, it is natural for human beings to indulge in illusions of hope. So, when you aver that Kanu needs no alliances to go into elections next year, you are not being original. That’s exactly what your mentor, the self-declared "Professor of Politics" believed prior to the general election of 2002. We thought you were young and ignorant. Of course we couldn’t charitably credit your mentor with the same innocence, for he and your late dad were jointly responsible for all the afflictions that we today face as a nation – poverty, corruption, petty nationalism (ethnicisation of politics), exploitation of the majority by a tiny minority, repression and intolerance, to mention just a sample. But we Kenyans are not like the Judeo-Christian God, who visits the iniquities of the fathers to the third and fourth generations. So Honourable Kenyatta, you did not lose last elections. Kenyans voted against your mentor and what he stood for.

When Kanu was cleavaged during your coronation early last year, we thought you and the more progressive elements in that otherwise long-discredited party had embarked on the path of rehabilitation, reform and renewal. We thought total saboteurs to the Kenyan dream had gone with the Total Man. That’s why some of us were willing to give you and your largely untainted lot a chance, notwithstanding the fact that some of us are gaping wounds of Kanu’s long reign of terror.

Mr Kenyatta, May I remind you of the Greek poem, The Odyssey. As Odysseus is about to set off on a journey home from Troy, he receives a warning from Circe about the dangers that lie ahead:

"First thou shalt arrive where the enchanter Sirens dwell, they who seduce men. The imprudent man who draws near them never returns, for the Sirens, lying in the flower strewn fields, will charm him with sweet song; but around them the bodies of their victims lie in heaps. Therefore pass these Sirens by, and stop your men’s ears with wax that none of them may hear; but if you like you can listen yourself, for you may get the men to bind you as you stand upright on a crosspiece halfway up the mast. If you beg and pray to the men to unloose you, then they must bind you faster."

Though Odysseus was lured of the Siren’s song, he survived by following Circe’s instructions. The poem goes on to tell us that the Sirens were later vanquished by Orpheus – not through physical force, waxing his ears or restraint, but with a more melodious and compelling song. As he was sailing with Jason and the Argonauts in their quest for the Golden Fleece, Orpheus passed by the island and the Sirens sang their deadly song. Butes, son of Zelion, fell under their spell and leapt overboard never to return but before others could follow, Orpheus began to sing more melodiously. Vanquished by that new song, the Sirens lost their power and turned to stone.

We are apt to shut our eyes against painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men and women, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Sir, I only wish to remind you that the ODM was not created by Kanu and the Liberal Democratic Party. It represented the Kenyan people’s resolve against Narcist betrayal. By ditching it, you are that wave of betrayal.

And my friend, aren’t we glorifying ethnicity too much. The trend of voting in 2002 and during the recent referendum should have told you that Kenyans are capable of relegating their so-called irreconcilable ethnic differences aside.

This time round our collective wrath will not be against Mr. Moi. It will be against YOU.

Source:http://www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news.php?articleid=1143952936

Refuting the Claim that Hell Is not Eternal and the Doctrine of Annihilation

2006-05-15T03:51:00.000-07:00

During his weekly address to the general audience of 8500 people at the Vatican on July 28th, 1999, Pope John Paul II rejected the reality of a physical, literal hell as a place of eternal fire and torment. Rather, the Pope said hell is separation even in this life, from joyful communication with God. He noted that the Scriptural references to hell and the images portrayed by Scripture are only symbolic and figurative of the “complete frustration and emptiness of life without God.”

While this may appear to be a new controversy, history has it that there has been a subject of disagreement for as old as Christianity is. One would ask, does it matter whether hell is literal or not? Of what importance is this to me? For a biblical evangelical, this doctrine is very important, for it is precipitated by our view and understanding of the doctrines of sin and salvation. This post attempts to give a biblical solution to this quagmire.

Before getting into the great task of unveiling the truth from scripture, it is important that we have workable terms. Words such as literal, hell and annihilation must be defined within their context.

The Oxford Dictionary defines literal as an adjective 1. [esp attrib] (a) Corresponding exactly to the original, (b) concerned with the basic or usual meaning of a word or phrase: His story is incredible in the literal sense of the word (ie it is impossible to believe it). 2 (esp derog) lacking imagination, plain and simple: his interpretation of the music was rather too simple. This last definition is most workable for our context. When we talk of literal, it means just what is said and that it is subject to no other interpretation.

Literal must not be confused or interchanged with physical as has been done over ages. Physical majorly concerns those things that can be experienced through the five senses, eg touch or sight, rather than perceived through the mind or spirit: the physical world / universe. Water is basically a physical substance as far as our senses are concerned. But the word water can be used both literally and figuratively two mean two different things. Literally, water is a liquid substance that is composed of two hydrogen molecules and one oxygen molecule. On the other hand, one may speak idiomatically that an argument holds no water. While the former requires no interpretation, the latter must be interpreted for in normal language, arguments are not physical substances and thus have no capacity to hold water. Thus the water here must be interpreted, not as a compound made up of hydrogen and oxygen molecules but as that which has to do with logic or ability to be believed. This gives a figurative use of water, the opposite of which is literal and not physical.

The word hell used in the KJV in various places is a translation of one of our different words used in the original language of the Bible. Greek in the NT, Hebrew in the OT. The word translated”hell” in the KJV OT is from Hebrew word “Sheol” which signifies the unseen state of the dead. KJV sometimes translates this word grave or pit. In KJV, New Testament hell is used to translate one of the different greek words. Hades, Gehena, Tartarus.

Hades corresponds to Sheol in the OT and signifies the unseen state or to the state of the dead. Gehena was a garbage dump where refuse was burned in a valley outside of Jerusalem during the time of Jesus and where the Jews once worshipped the idol Molock. Children were roasted there as sacrifice (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It is not a place of ending torment(The Biblical Doctrine of Hell, the lake of Fire and Second death in Http//www.auburn.edu/allenke/univerthtml.) The act of reducing to nothing, or nonexistence or the art of destroying the form or combination of parts under which a thing exists so that the name can no longer be applied to it.

As noted earlier in the definition of terms, literal hell is not physical hell. This post argues for literal hell in terms of the reality of existence as said in the Bible as opposed to the figurative notion that the word hell stands for ( or rather represents) something else. This must be understood from the onset for it holds the key to the understanding of Bible’s use of the word Hell (γεένα) as explained in this post.

As distinguished in our definition, the hell described here is gehena, and not Sheol or Hades. As to whether this hell is literal in terms of “existence” or figurative thus requiring an interpretation is the task at hand. On the other hand as to whether hell is definite geographical location or just a state of being is subject to scrutiny in another work – not this one. Having declared so, we hereby embark on establishing the literal sense of hell.

To establish this fact, the following truths must be asserted. The Bible teaches that those who do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah and son of God shall die in their sins; and where he [Jesus] goes they cannot come (Jn. 8:24). Secondly, we are told that all men, both those who acknowledge and those who reject him will be raised from the dead, but to the one it wil be resurrection unto life, to the other a resurrection unto judgment (I Cor. 15:22, Jn. 5: 28, 29). It further states that to those who are factious and obey not the truth (Compare Jn 14:6; 3:18,19), but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; upon every soul of man that worketh evil (Rom. 2:5, 6, 8, 9).

Further still, those who know not God and obey not the Gospel will suffer punishment and eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might when he shall come to be glorified in his saints. Also, those not found written in the book of life shall be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:15).

Having cited some of the proof-texts to literal hell, it is deemed appropriate to raise and answer the questions that ensue henceforth. First, is the fire spoken of as the future penalty of sin literal fire? In answering this question, note the frequency with which the word fire and synonymous expressions are used: Mt. 7:19, Jn. 15:6, Is. 66:24, Heb. 6:8; 10:26, Rev. 20:15; 21:8.. In a parable we expect figures, but in the explanation of parables we expect the figures to be explained by the literal facts which they are intended to represent. But in the parable of the tares ( Mt. 13:30, 41, 42), everything is explained except the fire, but that remains the fire in the interpretation of the parable as well as in the parable itself. (Compare also Mt. 13: 47-50).

The following are the reasons advanced for nihilism. First, they give biblical references such as Phil. 3:19, I Thes. 5:3, II Thes. 1:9 and II Pet. 3:7 as argumentation for the biblical implication that the destruction of the wicked, which, some say, implies that they will no longer exist after they are destroyed. Secondly, they claim that there is an apparent inconsistency of eternal conscious punishment with the love of God. They further argue that there is an apparent injustice involved in the disproportion between sins committed in time and punishment that is eternal. Finally, they say that the fact that there is a continuing presence of evil creatures in God’s universe will eternally mar the perfection of a universe that God created to reflect his glory.

In refuting these claims, the following arguments have been advanced: to start with, the passages that speak about destruction do not suggest cessation of life. The word απωλεια in Phil. 3:19 and II Pet. 3:7 is the same word used in Mt. 26:8 to speak of the “waste” of the ointment poured on Jesus’ head. The oil did not cease to exist. Also in I Thess. 5:3 and II Thess. 1:9, another word, ολεθρος, is used of the destruction of the wicked, but again this word is used by Paul in I Cor. 5:5 saying deliver the wicked man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh – did his flesh cease to exist? (Grudem 1150).

As concerns the love of God, it is indisputable that God is both loving and holy. That he gave out his son out of his love to die on our behalf. (I Jn. 4:8-10; Gal. 3:10-17,Rom. 5:8). In fact, Christ himself will judge the world (Mt. 25:41).

In addition, it would be wise to answer some of the questions that bother the proponents of annihilation theory. They ask: Is the lake of fire a place of continued torment, or is it a place of annihilation of being, or is it a place of non-conscious existence? The answer is that the punishment of the wicked is spoken of as ‘death’ and ‘destruction’. What do the words mean in biblical usage? DEATH – I Tim. 5:6, “but she that lives in pleasure is dead while she lives”. Eph. 2:1, “And you have he quickened, who were dead in the trespasses and sins”. The word death is applied to sinners while still existing , but existing in a wrong way – while they have life in the sense of existence, but not true life, real life, in the sense of right existence (Compare I Tim. 6:19). Secondly, the death which is the final outcome of a life of sin and unbelief is defined in the Bible as a portion in the place of torment (Rev. 21:8). Finally, life is defined in the Bible not merely as existence but right existence, knowing the true God, the life manifested in Jesus Christ. Death, then, is not mere non-existence, wrong, wretched, debased, devilish existence.

DESTRUCTION – in the general use of the word, when anything is said-“to perish(the verb from which the noun commonly translated “destruction” and “perdition” is derived) it is not meant that it ceases to be, but that it is so ruined that it no longer subserves the use for which it was designed. (Thayer Gk – Eng Lexicon) – see also Mt. 26:8. In addition, destruction is clearly defined in the New Testament as the condition of being in a place of conscious and unending torment. That destruction does not mean annihilation is also evident from Luke 19:10 – “ for the Son of man is come to seek and save that which was lost.” Furthermore, Rev. 14:10,11 indicae that the ultimate condition of those who receive the mark of the beast is described as the condition of unending, unresting, conscious torment.

The third question is to whether the condition of torment is endless. Yes it is. Mat. 25:41, Rev. 14:11, I Thess. 1: 9,10 confirms that they are tormented day and night, forever and ever, and they have no rest day or night. What does for ever and ever mean? Literally, unto the ages of the ages. The expression occurs twelve times in the Book of Revelations. (Rev. 1:6; 4:9,10; 5:13; 7:12; 10:6; 11:15; 15:7; 22:5). Eight times it refers to the duration of existence or reign or glory of God and Christ. Once to the duration of the blessed reign of the righteous, and in the three remaining instances to the duration of the torment of the devil, beast, false prophet and the wicked.

The final question is when are the issues of eternity settled” in the first place, those who die in their sins cannot go where Jesus is (Jn. 8:21). Secondly, it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this face judgement (Heb. 9:27). Thirdly, all who are in their grave who have not done evil shall be raised into a resurrection of damnation/judgment. (Jn. 5:28, 29). Finally, between those who pass out of this world lost and those who pass out accepted of God, there is a great gulf fixed and no passing from one side to the other. The destinies of eternity are settled in the life that now is.

Annihilation contradicts the teaching of the Bible. There will be endless punishment “Hell is in contrast to heaven, the absence of God or banishment from his presence. It is an experience of intense anguish, whether it involves physical suffering or mental, distress or both.” (Erickson, 1242).

The idea of annihilation is self-defeating. It is amounts to double talk on the side of God if he indeed talks of punishing sinners and then he ends up making them non-existaent. Besides, where does the matter that composed these people go to when the are annihilated? God purposed a justification and a subsequent sanctification with a hope of future glorification. Arguing that God will annihilate the culprits would mean God does not understand his modi operandi for how could he institute something and not carry it out. What was the goal of justification if those who don’t follow it don’t get apprehended?

From these arguments, it is conclusive to say that the existence of literal hell is affirmed by the Bible. The Bible equally verify that there will be resurrection of the unjust just the same way as the just will resurrect (Jn. 5:29, Dan. 12:2). That the future state of those who reject redemption offered to them in Christ is plainly declared to be a state of conscious, unutterable endless torment and anguish. This conception is an awful and appalling one it is, however , the scriptural conception and also a reasonable one when we come to see the appalling nature of sin, and especially the appealing nature of the sin of trampling under foot God’s mercy toward sinners, and rejecting God’s glorious son, whom His love has provided as a savior.

Shallow use of sin and of God’s holiness, and of the glory of Jesus Christ and His claims upon us, lie at the bottom of weak theories of the doom of the impenitent-when we see sin in all its hideousness and enormity, the holiness of God in all its perfection, and the glory of Jesus Christ in all its infinity, nothing but a doctrine that those who persist in the choice of sin , who love darkness rather than light, and who persist in the rejection of the son of God, shall endure everlasting anguish, will satisfy the demands of our own moral intuitions. Nothing but the fact that we dread suffering than we loathe sin, and more than we love the glory of Jesus Christ, makes us repudiate the thought that beings who eternally choose to sin should eternally suffer, or that men who despise God’s mercy and spurn His son should be given over to endless anguish.

Works sited
Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Bakers Book House. 1983
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction To Biblical Doctrine. Leicester: IVP. 1994

Needhalm, Hellen I. The Future Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

The Biblical Doctrine of Hell, the lake of Fire and Second death in Http//www.auburn.edu/allenke/univerthtml.

Final Response to the Previous Post on SDA - Phase IV

2006-05-13T02:19:00.000-07:00

This is the final phase of the post responding to the argument thar the SDA Church is a cult. It has taken me this long to finalise thee work because of the freequent power rationing in Kampala. Nevertheless, it half a loaf is better than none: better late than never!
In the previous posts, i have been giving facts about SDA andd cultism without any critique of either. This portion is dedicated entirely to criticism of the Adventist doctrines and reflects the full views of tthe author on this rather controversial debate.

Critique of the Adventist Doctrine and Practice

End-Times predictions: With any such movements that attempt to discern the exact return of Christ, we must turn to the Scriptures themselves. Jesus tells his disciples, “no one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, not the Son but only the Father. Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come.” (Mark 13:33). And in what are practically his last words before his ascension, Jesus tells them, “it is not for you to know the times and dates the Father has set by His own authority.” (Acts 1:7) The fact of the matter is, the very presumption of some people to think they can know something that is clearly unknowable has been the foundation upon which all sorts of errors have been erected.

Seventh Day Adventism is no exception here. In fact, in order to maintain the Miller calculation, they have had to resort to fabricate a doctrine such as the investigative judgement, one that can be found no wherein Scripture. If the Adventists had simply, as Miller did, admitted their error and moved on from there, that may have ended things. But is holding to such a doctrine in itself ground for calling them a cult?

The writings of Ellen White: Its view concerning the position of Ellen White and particularly her writings is also for alarm for many SDA’s opponents who see her writings on par with Scripture, but this must be balanced by the official statements of the SDA Church concerning White’s works (Martin, pp. 439-440).
“We do not regard the writings of Ellen White G. White as an addition to the sacred canon of Scripture.”

“We do not regard them in the same sense as the Holy Scriptures, which stand alone and unique as the standard by which all other writings must be judged.”

“We have never considered Ellen G. White to be in the same category as the writers of the canon of Scriptures.”

“In his word, God has committed to men knowledge necessary for salvation.”

“However, it is our belief that the Holy Spirit opened to her mind important events and called her to give certain instructions for these last days…. We as a denomination accept them as inspired counsels from the Lord. But we have never equated them with Scripture as some falsely charge.”

“While Seventh-Day Adventists recognize the Scripture canon closed nearly two thousand years ago and that there have been no additions to this complication of sacred books, yet we believe that the spirit of God, who inspired the divine word known to us as the Bible, has pledged to reveal Himself to the Church and through the different gifts of the Spirit…. take the place of the word of God, nor does their acceptance make unnecessary the Scripture of truth.”

“Concerning the matter of Church fellowship, we would say that while we revere the writings of Ellen G. White, … we do not make acceptance of her writings as a matter for Church discipline.”

These are excerpts from the official statements from the SDA Church concerning Ellen White’s writings. It remains to be seen if this is in fact the practice of all SDA Churches. In other words, this may be nothing more than an example of “double talk” as we saw was one of the characteristics of cults (see phase on of this series). On the other hand, we cannot discount an entire denomination because some of its pastors or leaders do or teach some things other than the official position of the Church. If we did that, we could label virtually every protestant denomination a cult!

In this instance, probably is to give the SDA Church the benefit of doubt, yet with wary eye open to the possibility that the sole authority of scripture may be in question. If they were to hold on to this special ‘inspiration’ in all the writings of Ellen White, then we would rightly have to call this into question. But the simple fact is that, at least officially, they do not.

Their view of Hell: This is by no means a unique SDA doctrine, as cults such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses hold to it, a number of liberal, mainline protestant denominations profess it, and many today in the evangelical circles also flirt with the idea. Is it necessary to believe in a literal, eternal hell in order to be a genuine believer? This is a difficult question to answer, and although biblically one must use flimsy arguments to disprove a literal hell, certainly the idea of a loving God sending people for eternity to hell is not an appealing notion.

A simple view of Scripture on this issues shows us, though, that despite the fact that the idea of an eternal hell may make us uncomfortable, it is clearly taught in Scripture. For one thing, in instances when Jesus refers to both heaven and hell in the same passage (for example, Matt. 25:46, Mark 9: 42-48), for us to make his references there to hell as figurative while the ones to heaven remain literal is highly flimsy. It also ignores statements like “will be tormented day and night for ever and ever” (Revelation 20:10), “where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 8:12) and “where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:48), making them meaningless.

But the key issue to address when confronted with the “Annihilation theory of Hell” is the entire basis upon which it is based. In both Matt. 10:28 and 2 Thess. 1:8-9 we are told that those who do not follow Christ will suffer everlasting ‘destruction.’ This word destruction is the cornerstone upon which the doctrine of annihilationism is built. Those who state there is no eternal hell posit the annihilation, evaporation or destruction of the soul not an ongoing punishment of it. Unfortunately for them, though, this view fails to see the Greek meaning of the word translated destruction.

The root words in the Greek are in the Matthew passage ‘appolumi’ and in the Thessalonians passage ‘olethros’ which literally mean ‘running.’ It does not mean annihilation or complete destruction into oblivion, but to be undone. “The idea is not extinction but ruin, loss, not of being, but of well-being.” (Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, p. 164).

A simple example from everyday life may be helpful here. When someone drops a light bulb, it falls to the floor and shatters into many pieces. The bulb we say has been ‘destroyed,’ but is most certainly not annihilated. It has lost its useful function. Similarly, the words in the Greek translated ‘destruction’ or ‘to destroy’ have the same connotation. This, coupled with the other arguments above, makes the SDA doctrine of annihilation untenable.

The unique SDA Doctrines: The investigative judgement, the scapegoat doctrine and the view of Sabbath are controversial doctrines, but are they grounds enough to label Seventh-Day Adventism a cult? Many would say yes on the basis that they 1) diminish the complete work of Christ’s atonement, and 2) they demand that a works-righteousness necessarily creep into the salvation scheme of the SDA. But are these fair criticisms of the doctrines?

Some view the investigative judgement as nothing more than a tool to keep the SDA members in check, with the impending threat that you may be judged wanting now by Christ if you do not ‘toe the line.’ And with it comes the necessary conclusion that you can lose your salvation if you do not live a proper life. From the official SDA statements, “in view of the principles here set forth, it seems to us abundantly clear that the acceptance of Christ at conversion does not seal a person’s destiny. His life record after conversion is also important.” This is a striking statement. A “normal” protestant view of salvation at conversion would involve the receiving of the Holy Spirit at that time, “a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance.” (Eph. 1:13-14).

I say “normal” because there are certainly many Christians who believe they can lose their salvation. I am inclined personally to find it difficult to find a works-righteousness of sorts in such a belief, simply because if you can “work” to lose your salvation, by not doing certain things you can work to keep it. I think such a view is destructive to the security all believers in Christ should have. But is it an outright heresy? I’d say close, but mostly probably people have not thought through the implication of such a belief. And to condemn the SDA as a cult for holding such a view would leave us condemning many Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals and others as well.

We must also keep in balance other official SDA statements concerning justification by faith, such as: “the vicarious, atoning death of Jesus Christ once and for all, is all sufficient for the redemption of a lost race… Salvation through Christ is by grace alone, and through faith in his blood… nothing we can ever do will merit the favour of God. Salvation is of grace… we are not saved by works.” (Martin, p.426-437). Is this just another form of double-talk, saying in the same breath “we are saved not by works but by faith” and “you better lead a good life or you will lose your salvation?” A true biblical view of faith and works does keep in balance “salvation by grace through faith, not by work,” while at the same time maintaining that “faith without works is dead.” If the SDAs mean this in their doctrinal position, then we can have no problem with them.

Biblically, we find the entire doctrine of the Investigative judgment to be a fabrication. In fact, Scripture seems to teach directly against such a notion. “He that hears my word and believes him that sent me has everlasting life and shall not come under judgement but has passed death to life.” (Jn. 5:24) “When you were dead in your sins and in the circumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sin.” (Col. 2:13) That believers have yet to be judged completely and can in fact be judged to have fallen short in regards to salvation is clearly unscriptural. Scripture does teach that our works will be judged or tested by fire (1 Cor. 3:10-15), but this is already having built our lives upon ‘the foundation that is Christ.”

Adventists rely heavily on apocalyptic portions of Daniel and Revelation for this doctrine; something not considered all that wise a practice. There are plenty of eschatological passages in Scripture, which are clear to understand without going to the quite unclear passages to develop a doctrine quite important as this one to the SDA beliefs.

The question of Sabbath keeping is another thorny issue. Again, are the SDAs pushing legalism here? If you do not keep this day, you have the mark of the Beast and are condemned with the unbelieving? It is a clear fact of Church history that the early Church begun to worship on Sunday, the Lord’s Day, and not that this was a later imposition on the Church by the state under Christian emperor Constantine. And in any case, the Apostle Paul seems to bend over backwards in making it clear that to impose one day as special or sacred over another is nothing more than a vestige of the old law, since fulfilled in Christ.

“Therefore let no one pass judgement on you in questions of food or drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.” (Col. 2:16-17)

“But now that you know God – or rather are known by God – how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.” (Gal. 4:8-11)

“Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? …. One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special does so to the Lord.” (Rom. 14:4-6)

It is clear that to observe Sabbath is to observe part of the law already fulfilled in Christ and hence to turn back from the faith, something Paul makes clear in his letter to the Galatians. But it is also clear that some people still consider some days more ‘sacred’ than others, and in Romans Paul calls for liberty in this area. In short, if the Seventh-Day Adventists want to worship on Saturday, it is their freedom to do so. But if they want to say that true believers must do so, then they are clearly at odds with Paul. And even further, if they say that those who do not worship on Sabbath have or will have the mark of the Beast, in effect being owned by Satan, then their view should be flatly condemned.

It seems more clearly that the doctrines of Sabbath-keeping and the investigative judgement are kept not because they are biblical but because they are original beliefs upon which Seventh Day Adventism was founded. The fear may be that to turn away from these doctrines would cause the SDA to lose its distinctiveness and its roots. Unfortunately, though, maintaining clearly non-biblical doctrines only help to perpetuate the suspicions that most protestant denominations have in regard to the SDA Church.

As for the scapegoat doctrine, it seems clear that the SDA bend over backwards to state that Satan is not the one who atones for the sins of men. Christ accomplished this completely and finally on the cross. Yet, Satan must bear his own sins as a scapegoat, and given this view, although again it may be a strange doctrine, it does not detract from the work of Christ.

Conclusion: Is Seventh-Day Adventism a cult? It would be helpful to summarize the prominent reasons why some would answer in the affirmative to this question.

1. Seventh – Day Adventism has an extra-canonical source of authority (the writings of Ellen G. White).

2. Seventh – Day Adventism denies that salvation is solely by justification through faith (the doctrines of the investigative judgement and the keeping of Sabbath).

3. Seventh – Day Adventism diminishes the completed, atoning work of Christ (the doctrine of Satan as a scapegoat).

If indeed the official statements of the Seventh – Day Adventism are true concerning these controversial doctrines, then we should have no problem calling them another protestant denomination, albeit one with some strange views. But if these doctrines are indeed taught in such a way that they do yield the above three conclusions (and some, like Anthony Hoekema, having come from this denomination have made this claims) then we would be safe in calling Seventh – Day Adventism a cult.

History has shown that Seventh – Day Adventism has moved more from a strange sect to ‘just another’ protestant denomination. Is this a real change, or simply a disguise used by the SDA to attempt to give them more credibility with other Christian groups? Only time will tell!

Enough said. Enough exhibit has been laid on the table the verdict remains yours. Shalom

Response to the Previous Post on SDA - Phase III

2006-05-03T07:51:00.000-07:00

General Beliefs of the Seventh Day Adventist
It should be quickly pointed out that there are a number of orthodox doctrines on which the Seventh Day Adventists agree with other mainline protestant denominations. They wholeheartedly support the Trinitarian view of God, especially the deity of Christ. They believe in the sinfulness of man and his need for forgiveness and salvation. They believe in the divinely inspired word of God, inerrant and infallible, as the authority upon which the Church is built. They believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus and in his literal, physical second coming. In all these, there is no disagreement.

The SDAs would also say that they believe in the full and final atonement on the cross by Christ, as well as salvation by faith in this event, not by personal works of righteousness. But in both of these issues, we must look a bit closer at the distinct SDA beliefs before we can fully agree that they say the same thing that evangelical Christianity says.

The investigative Judgement: This is the cornerstone of SDA doctrine, coming as we have seen from the early Millerites and their unwillingness to admit error, and the subsequent vision of Hiram Edson. Reviewing a few official statements the SDA church make concerning it can best do an understanding of this unique doctrine. (Martin. P.49).

“The time of the cleansing of the Sanctuary, synchronizing with the period of the proclamation of the message of Revelation 14, is a time of investigative judgement; first, with references to the dead, and second, with reference to the living. This investigative judgement determines who of the myriads sleeping in the dust of the earth are worthy of a part in the first resurrection, and who of its living multitudes are worthy of translation.”

“In view of the principle here set forth, it seems to us abundantly clear that acceptance of Christ at conversion does not weal a person’s destiny. His life record after conversion is also important.”

“It is our understanding that Christ as High Priest, concludes his intercessory ministry in heaven in a work of judgement. He begins his great work of judgement in the investigative phase. At the conclusion of the investigation the sentence of judgement is pronounced. Then as judge Christ descend to execute or carry into effect, the sentence.”

“The blotting of names out of the book of life is, we believe, a work of the investigative judgement. A complete and thorough check of all the candidates for eternal life will need to be completed before Christ comes in the clouds of heaven.”

The Scapegoat Doctrine: The SDA have been accused of minimizing the complete and final work of Jesus on the cross as atonement for sins with its scapegoat doctrine. In short, using the notion of a scapegoat from the Old Testament Day of Atonement, SDA theologians teach that for each sin there is a twofold responsibility: first, the personal responsibility of the person that sinned and second, Satan’s responsibility as the instigator or tempter. Christ most definitely died as atonement for the first sin, but SDA doctrine also teaches that the consummation of all things will not come until Satan also bears his sins. It is from this notion that many opponents of the seventh day Adventism have accused them of making Satan the ultimate sin-bearer, thus diminishing the completed work of Christ. But although this scapegoat doctrine is a bit strange, the Adventists make it a point of saying that it does not mean that Satan bears the sins of believers. He only bears his own sins, for which no offer of redemption by God has been made.

The Sabbath: we have already reviewed the influence of John Bates on the Adventist movement. Again, a review of the official Adventist statements will help us here. (Martin, p. 430).

We believe that the Sabbath was instituted in Eden before sin entered, that it was honoured of God, set apart by divine appointment, and given to mankind as a perpetual memorial of a finished creation.”

“We believe that the restoration of Sabbath is indicated in the Bible prophecy of Revelation 14:9-12. Sincerely believing this, we regard the observance of Sabbath as a test of our loyalty to Christ as our creator and redeemer.”

In regard to the Revelation 14 passage, it there speaks of the mark of the beast, and the Adventists have been portrayed as saying that everyone who does not honour the Sabbath has the mark of the beast. And clearly in the past, certain SDA members have said exactly this. But again, we must turn to the ‘official’ view of the Church, and there it is clear that no one has yet received the mark of the beast. “But when the decree shall go forth enforcing the counterfeit Sabbath, and the loud cry of the third angel shall warn men against the worship of the beast and his image, the line will be clearly drawn between the false and true. Then those who still continue in transgressions will receive the mark of the beast.” (words penned by Ellen White).

View of Hell: Seventh-Day Adventism does not profess a belief in literal and eternal Hell. In fact, they hold to the notion that unbelievers will be annihilated, destroyed or simply made to cease to exist. They posit a number of reasons why, but the main ones would seem to be: 1) An eternal Hell detracts from the biblical view of a loving God; 2) an eternal Hell would serve as a constant reminder that God did not or could not in fact rid thee universe of sin; 3) the final consummation of all things envisions a “new heaven and a new earth” which would seem to necessitate against an eternal place of torment.

Watch this space for the fourth and final face of this series. It is a comprehensive critique and wraps up all that has been discussed afore.

Response to the Previous Post on SDA - Phase II

2006-05-03T02:30:00.000-07:00

Debate has raged from calling the Seventh Day Adventist a cult to just another protestant denomination. For our purposes, we will use it as a difficult case study concerning the issue of what actually makes a cult a cult and in so doing vindicate the actual standing of SDA in so far as this debate is concerned.

Brief History of the Seventh Day Adventist

Seventh-Day Adventism finds its route in the nineteenth century America as does Mormonism and the Jehovah’s witnesses. It did not come as a result of a split from an existing denomination, as many other denominations have done, but began from the beginning of one man, William Miller as he developed an eschatological expectation of the second coming of Christ. Using mainly the book of Daniel and it’s information concerning the ‘seventy weeks”, the “2300 days” and the ‘abomination of desolation’, Miller believed that the Bible clearly taught that the coming of Christ would be in 1843. he made this conclusion in 1818 and begun to share it with others with little positive response at first.

Miller became a Baptist minister in the early 1830s and began an itinerant preacher ministry. He became a popular conference speaker and his views concerning the coming of Christ began to catch fire. Still, many opposed his views and considered them far fetched, but Miler gained a number of powerful and wealthy supporters who publicized his views more widely. As 1843 came closer, the Millerites, as his followers had became known, became greatly excited at the prospect of Christ’s return.

New year’s Day 1843, Miller gave a message in which he boldly proclaimed, “this is the last year that Satan will reign in our earth.” And as has happened with so many other predictions and moments focused on the coming of Christ, the year came and went. The time was extended to March 21st, 1844, but still no Lord. Miller publicly admitted his error some two months later, but others would not give up hope. The seventh-month Movement arose whereby Christ was expected to return on the tenth day of the seventh month of the Jewish calendar, October 22, 1844. Miller again was caught up in the enthusiasm but this date, too came and went. It is this point that historians of the movement call “the great disappointment”.

The very next day, Hiram Edson and others met for prayer, asking the lord why these events had unfolded as they did. After this meeting, while walking through a fiel, Edson had a vision of heaven in which he saw Christ move from one “apartment” of heaven to the other. Miller’s prediction of the date was not wrong in the actual time but in the actual even that was to unfold at that time. Edson saw Christ move from the outer apartment, where the High Priest offers forgiveness to the people to the “inner sanctuary”, the Holy of Holies, to blot out the sins of believers who had die. This view would later yield the SDA doctrine of “investigative judgement” which we shall look at later. This could be considered ‘first phase’ of the development of seventh day Adventism.

The ‘second phase’ came in 1846 when a retired sea captain Joseph bates published a 48 page treatise entitled the Seventh Day Sabbath, a Perpetual Sign.” In it he argued that from creation through the Mosaic Law, god instituted worship on the seventh day, Saturday. It was the papacy that had changed this day of worship to Sunday, and as many regarded Roman Catholicism as the “Beast” of Revelation 14, the “mark of thee beast” was worshipping on Sunday.

This ‘third phase’ would involve the ‘the spirit of prophecy’, Specifically as it related to the prophecies of Ellen Harmon (White). Born in 1827,White came under the influence of the Millerite teaching and was struck with fear at the impending date. She reported having dreams in which Jesus would come and enclose her, butt it wasn’t until the great disappointment that her truly influential dreams and visions occurred. Two months after the Great Disappointment, the 17 year-old White experienced the first of her many visions. During a small home prayer meeting, she later testified began “rising higher and higher, far above the dark world,” where she looked down and saw Adventist believers on the road to heaven

White’s second vision was an answer to the question that had arisen given the Adventist view of the “inner sanctuary”. If Jesus had indeed moved to the Holy of Holies to judge the lives of the dead, the implication was that God had now closed the door of salvation to sinners. White’s vision, and a controversial one, confirmed the “shut-door’ belief. Her third vision controversial at the time, confirmed the teaching of Joseph Bates and the Sabbath. In it White testified that Jesus showed her the Ten Commandments on the tablet of stone, and the fourth commandment had “a short halo of light encircling it.” An angel explained to her the Adventist must keep the seventh day as the prerequisite to the Lord’s coming. In all three visions White placed herself and her followers in direct opposition of the moderate wing of the Millerite Movement.

Observers of white and her visions described the events as such. Upon falling to the floor, sometimes for a few minutes, others for hours, ‘she often uttered words singly, and sometimes sentences which expressed to those about her that nature of the view she was having, either of heaven or earth. …When the vision was ended … she was then limp and strengthless, and had to be assisted to her chair.”

In 1963, mainly due to the work of Ellen and her husband, the Seventh-day Adventist Church was founded. In just twenty years, its membership grew from four thousand to twenty thousand strong.

Up to her death in 1915, questions continued to surface from without as well as within the denomination as to the visions of Ellen White. Of particular concerns were the discoveries of “plagiarism” found in many of her over fifty books. In certain instances, what White had called information coming from a vision from God had been found word-for-word in other published works. Many begun to question if indeed her teachings had come not from God but from elsewhere. It should be noted that despite these problems Ellen White remained amazingly orthodox in her view. When the denomination had a reform movement in the early part of the century, calling for a re-emphasis of justification by faith not by works, Ellen White put her voice behind it. When issues of the divinity of Jesus were questioned, much like the contemporary Jehovah’s witnesses, Ellen White helped to steer the Church towards orthodoxy. And yet, many still questioned the authority of her teaching, seeing the Church as placing them on par with or higher in authority than the Scriptures.

Response to the Previous Post on SDA - Phase I

2006-04-30T13:22:00.001-07:00

I am trying to live up to my promise that i would give a detailed evaluation on the post on SDA. The allegations are quite hot and thus need careful scrutiny if the truth has to prevail. To make this possible, i have chosen to post the response in 4 phases. This will not only help me in taking my time to do the best job i can but also make the reading and comprehension an easy task to the readers.

In order to objectively evaluate the article on Adventism and Cults, we need to have a working definition of cults for it is only in so doing will we be able to objectively judge whether the Adventist movement is cultic or not. So what is a Cult? The term is dderived from the latin cultus, "worship". In this sense the cultic act is an act of worship involving external rights and ceremonies as well as attitudes of reverential homage.

There are three basic approaches to defining the term: sensational/popular approach; sociological approach and theological approach.

1. Sensational approach is built on journalistic accounts in the popular press which frequently focus on dramatic and sometimes bizzare aspects of cultic behaviour.

2. Sociological approach includes the authoritarian, manipulative, totalistic and sometimes communal features of cults.

3. Theological approach involvees some standards of orthodoxy, in which case, basic issues of truth and error are involved.

Unlike secular sociologist who is unconcerned about the truth of a particular belief and unlike the typical person whose religious naivete precludes any serious interest in doctrinal matters, the Christian must be able to distinguish truth from error.

A theological definition of cult must be based on a standard of christian orthodoxy. Thus using the Bible's teachings as a focal point...a cult is any religious movement that is organisationally distinct and has doctrines and/or practices that contradict those of the Scriptures as interpreted by traditional Christianity as represented by the major Catholic and Protestant denominations, and as expressed in such statements as tthe Apostles' creed.

To be more specific, a cult is a perversion, a distortion of biblical Christianity and/or rejection of the teachings of the christian Church. It is a group of people polarized around someone's interpretation of the Bible and is characterized by major deviations from orthodox Christianity relattive to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, particularly the fact that God became man in Jesus Christ.

Theological concerns in the study of cults therefore are:
The person and work of Christ
Human nature and sin
Salvation
Trinity
The nature and role of the Bible
We must note that due to religious diversity, counterfeits of biblical Christianity are well disguised. Unorthodox religious groups often use the same terms christians use BUT they re-interprete statements of doctrines and biblical passages. they seek to overwhelm with false scholarship, and they might even willingly deceive or not reveal their whole theology.

General Characteristics of Cults

Not every cult necessarily has all of the following characteristics, but most have many of them.
1. New truth - almost all calim some new truth or revelations, their founders considering themselves to have reclaimed that which was lost by the apostate, Christian Church (ex. John Smith and the Mormons, Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church, Baha'u'llah and Baha'ism)

2. New Interpretation - In line with new truth, most have their own understanding of the Bible, many times complete with their own translation of it (ex. JWs and the New World Translation).

3. Non-Biblical sources of Authority. They have both Static Sources eg, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Dynamic Source (usually ongoing interpretations of the Bible by Church leaders) eg, "The Watchtower", "Awake!"

4. Another Jesus - They rejecct the deity of Jesus as being equal in essence with God. In other words, their Jesus is different from the Jesus of orthodox Christianity.

5. Rejection of orthodox Christianity - this is charaterised by disdain for cchurch history, isolationism, in which they teach adherents not to associate with other religious groups and Exclusivism - theirs is the only true Church and/or the only way to be saved.

6. Double Talk - Many publicly proclaim they believe one thing while secretly they teach something else. Closely asociated with this is the redefinition of Christian words and terminologies to make it appear that they talk the same language as other Christian groups.

7. Changing theology - Closely tied in with false prophecy, theology that was supposed to have been revealed by God is later changed, again per revelation of God (ex. Mormonism with polygamy).

8. Authoritarian leadership - Beliefs, behaviour and lifestyle dependent on the leadership, simply because the leadership claims to speak for God. Closely associated with this is mind control. characteristics of this group include a hierarchical understanding of authority and spirituality where people are taught to ask their elders' and leaders' opinions on just about any small decision before proceeding. Other characteristics are people being isolated from outside input like TV, Newspapers, friends and family; excessive use of peer pressure, shame, public confession and shunning, breaking of people's personal habits, mannerisms, personalities,hobbies, interests, career and goals.; breaking of people's wills, self initiative and independent thinking; sleep deprivation, forcedd early morning prayers, forced street or door-to-door evangelism, forced money making and fund-raising; isolation of men from women.

9. Salvation by Works:
a).Must believe and practice completely what is taught by the Church in order to be saved.
b).Strange legalism - Peculiar rules and regulattions that MUST be obeyed. (ex. JWs: no blood transfusion, no celebration of Christmas and birthdays; Mormons - no hot drinks). Many times, the items listed under authoritarian leadership are justtified under the guise of legalism.

10. False Prophecy: They make cclaims about the future that never come true (ex. JWs no less than seven times have predicted the Seccond Coming of Christ; JWs predicted before 1914 that Christ would visibly return in 1914; now say he did but secretly).

I am not able to cover everything about cults in full. I hope that the general characteristics can suffice as a reference point upon which we evaluate all claims of 'truth' that we come across. As it is said, we don't need to study every counterfeit currency to tell that they are fake, all we need to do is to study the real money so that when we come across the counterfeit we will be able to tell it.

Apostle Paul warns:"But even if we or an angel from heaven shouldd preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! Galatians 1:8.

having established the definition and general characteristics of cults, we can now move to evaluating Seventh Day Adventism in light of the same. This will form the basis of the ensuing phases.

This man just excites me

2006-04-28T16:35:00.000-07:00

i just loved the mandevus...reminds me of Dr. Fowler my philosophy leccturer from Australia. his mandevu was just too long, you can't even see the mouth.

The Charismatic Equation

2006-04-28T15:49:00.000-07:00

Some things that the charismatic movement is dangerous. He/she gives the following reasons:
1. The Charismatic Movement is willing to accept tongues, interpretation of tongues, visions, dreams, prophecies, etc. as being messages from God to His children. This is a very serious danger. Once you accept "extra-Biblical messages" (those which are in addition to the Bible, but not necessarily contrary to the Bible) it will not be long before you will be accepting "anti-Biblical messages" as being valid (those which directly contradict Gods Word). The Charismatic Movement has done and is doing exactly that!

In reality, all "extra-Biblical messages" are "anti-Biblical messages" because God's Word specifically warns against adding to the Scriptures.

"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you (Deuteronomy 4:2)."

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plaques that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book (Revelation 22:18-19)."

The Charismatic Movement defends these "extra-Biblical, anti-Biblical messages" on the basis that new winds of the Holy Spirit are blowing (John 3:8). They say, "Who can tell what the Holy Spirit may do?" (see John 3:8 "canst not tell")

Let us not forget that the Word of God is a complete revelation and was given by the Holy Spirit (II Peter 1:19, Timothy 3:16). We can be sure of one thing--that the Holy Spirit will never contradict Himself (John 14:17 "Spirit of Truth"). It was the Holy Spirit who warned about adding to the word of God.

Therefore, as Jesus said, if someone tells you something contrary to the Word of God, "believe it not (Matthew 24:26)." See Galatians 1:8-10. The Mormons speak in tongues and have, obviously, accepted extra-Biblical revelations.

2. The Charismatic Movement encourages its followers to stay in churches and denominations of different beliefs in order "to win them over." (See Galatians 2:4; Ephesians 4:14, about "lying in wait to deceive".) Also God's Word plainly teaches believers that those who preach another gospel are "accursed"- (Galatians 1:6-9), and those who fellowship with false teachers are partakers of their evil deeds (II John 10-11). The Charismatic Movement is promoting the Ecumenical Movement and may possibly be the "glue" that joins all the churches together for the Antichrist (Matthew 24:24-25)

3. The Charismatic Movement places undue and unscriptural emphasis on physical healing. This causes many believers confusion and agony who are falsely taught that it is always God's will to heal. The Scriptures plainly teach that God may use physical afflictions for refining, correcting, and chastening the believer (II Corinthians 12:7-10; Hebrews 12:3-11; Job 23:10). The Scriptures leave no doubt as to the ability of God to heal. But it is wrong and dangerous to teach that God must always heal.

4. Worldliness (I John 2:15-17; Romans 12:1-2). The Charismatic Movement is fostering and encouraging a spirit of worldliness in the church, and in the individual believer. The Charismatic Movement seems to be trying to out-do the world in being worldly in speech, dress, hair, music, entertainment, etc.

5. Women Preachers, Evangelists, etc. It is strange, inconsistent and sad to hear Charismatics using I Corinthians 14 to justify " speaking in tongues" as a gift of the Spirit for our day when that very same chapter says plainly, "Let your women keep silence in the churches (I Corinthians 14:34)." This results in disorderly homes and disorderly churches with women in places of leadership in direct violation of the Word of God. This movement is encouraging women to forsake their God-given place in the home and in the church.

6. "Coming under the Power" or being "slain in the Spirit". The Charismatic Movement promotes and encourages an experience where the leader "lays hands" on the individual, causing the person to "faint, slump, swoon, experience the power, etc." and thereafter remain unconscious or semi-conscious for several seconds or longer. The Charismatics have no Scriptures to justify and defend their practices. There is No Scriptural precedent, example, or command for this experience, which borders on hypnotism and occult.

7. The Charismatic Movement glories in "miracles and signs" (See Matthew 24:24-25). A sign (tongues for example) or a miracle (such as physical healing) as a basis for validating a person's message or practices are unscriptural. This is extremely dangerous, and the Scriptures plainly teach us that the last days will be full of great deceitfulness (II Timothy 3:13). God warns that the Antichrist will usher in a time of "all power and signs and Lying Wonders (II Thessalonians 2:9-11)." The False Prophet will deceive men by the use of miracles, even having power to give life to an image (Revelation 13:11-18). The validation of a man's message and methods today are not "miracles", but the WORD OF GOD (Isaiah 8:20).

8. What about salvation? This is the real issue, and I find most Charismatics have a false plan of salvation. 99% of them will say, "YES" when asked if they can lose their salvation. Whenever anyone says that they can lose their salvation, they are trusting in WORKS! What they are really saying is that if they live the Christian life until they die they will go to heaven. But, if they backslide and die they will go to hell. This makes them the savior and not Christ, because salvation is dependent upon their actions or works in the end. Christ becomes a helper or a partner NOT A SAVIOR! Salvation is received at the moment of belief by an act of faith and it is eternal life (See John 5:24). We are never told in the Scriptures that salvation is a process, or that we are to wait until after we die to see If we have attained it. Salvation is the gift of God (Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8-9). Jesus never said, "I and You" are the way! Jesus Christ ALONE is the Savior! Unfortunately, most Charismatics, because they are trusting in their works, are not saved. Jesus will say to them, "I NEVER KNEW YOU!" (See Matthew 7:22-23). Jesus never says, "I ONCE KNEW YOU AND I LOST YOU." That is impossible! Those in Matthew 7:22 are boasting in LIVING THE CHRISTIAN LIFE. This is their claim to salvation. Jesus says to them, "I NEVER KNEW YOU." They were trusting in works and not Christ!

WATCH OUT DON'T BE DECEIVED!

CHECK IT OUT IN THE WORD OF GOD!

THE CULT OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISM

2006-04-28T15:22:00.001-07:00

I found this out somewhere andd just pasted it here. i will be giving my personal everluation quite ssoon.

Founder: Ellen G. White
Date Founded: 1863 (According to General Conference of S.D.A.'s)
Writings of Ellen White:
1. The Great Controversy
2. The Desire of Ages
3. Patriarch and Prophets
4. Steps to Christ
5. My Testimonies

Other Major Writings:
1. Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh Day Adventists
2. Questions on Doctrine (700 page book)

Periodicals:
1. "Bible Readings for the Home Circle"
2. "Life and Health"--national journal
3. "Signs of the Times"--deals with prophecy
4. "These Times"--deals with morals of individual
5. "Liberty"--deals with religious freedom
6. "The Children's Bible Story"--10 volume set

Radio Program: The Voice of Prophecy
Television Program: Faith for Today
Publishing Houses: There are 5 in the U.S., & over 50 worldwide. The 2 largest in the U.S. are:
1. Southern Publishing in Nashville, Tennessee
2. Review and Herald Publishing Company in Washington, D.C.
Home Headquarters: Washington, D.C.

Early History and Its Leaders:

1. William Miller (1782-1849): Although William Miller was not an S.D.A., the history of the cult grew from his teachings. Miller was born in Pittsfield, Mass. He was raised in a deeply religious family, but he soon became a skeptic and rejected the divinity of the scriptures. After some time in the army and later a period in which he was a farmer, he was converted to Christianity and for the next two years after his conversion, he studied scripture with only the help of a concordance. This began in 1816.

In 1818, Miller came to the conclusion that Christ would return to earth between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844. Obviously, ignorant of Scriptures such as Matthew 24:36, which says, "of that day or hour knoweth no man," Matthew 24:44, "in such an hour as ye think not the Son of Man cometh," Matthew 24:42, Matthew 25:13, Mark 13:33, and Acts 1:7,-Miller and his followers suffered a great disappointment at the failure of Christ's return.

One of Miller's followers, Samuel S. Snow, began a "Seventh-month movement." He convinced all the people that the period was to end in October of 1844 instead of March. As the time came closer, excitement again grew only to again be disappointed. Many, as did Miller, gave up the Advent faith. William Miller, was never a S.D.A. and stated that he had no confidence in any "theories" that grew out of his Millerite movement.

How Miller Calculated His Date:
· In Daniel 9:24-27-prophecy of 70 weeks from the commandment to build Jerusalem, till Christ is cut off.
· In Daniel 8:14-2,300 days till sanctuary cleansed.
With these two scriptures, the following data was calculated:
1. The cleansing of sanctuary meant Christ's return to earth.
2. The 2,300 evenings and mornings meant 2,300 years.
3. The starting point for the 70 weeks was given in Ezra 7:11-16 at 457 BC
4. Again, in Daniel 9, one day equals one year, therefore 70 weeks=490 days=490 years.
5. Finally, the 2,300 years start time as the 70 weeks.

NOW:

· 457 BC-starting point date. 490 years-AD, as Daniel told.
· 457 BC+2,300 years=1843 AD (You get this by remembering that the years are dated till Christ's birth as BC, then start again after AD: 2,300-457=1843).
2. Hiram Edson: On October 23, 1844, the morning after the great disappointment, a group of Millerites met and prayed at the home of Hiram Edson of Port Gibson, N.Y. After prayer and breakfast, Edson and a young student of O.R.L. Crosier started across a field to go comfort others of their clan when a vision (Galatians 1:8-9) came upon Edson, "heaven opened and I saw Christ enter into the holy of holies." In the light of this vision they now realized that there was a heavenly sanctuary that corresponds to the earthly temple and that Christ's ministry in heaven had two phases. Instead of coming to earth, Christ moved from one part of the heavenly sanitary to the holy of holies. Crosier later rejected this view.

3. Joseph Bates: Joseph Bates from Fair Haven, Mass., became convinced that the keeping of the Sabbath was God's seal upon HIS children. The Sabbath, Bates argued, was to be kept and observed by Christians on the seventh day of the week as ordained in Eden and confirmed at Mt. Sinai. His scriptural mis-conclusions came from these texts:

· Revelation 14:6-12--Believing the Pope to be the beast, Bates concluded that the mark of the beast would be on those who worship on Sunday (1st day of week).
· Revelation 7--7th says Sabbath keepers were sealed by God and there were only 144,000 of them. (Today there is said to be 1,500,000 Adventists).

4. Ellen G. White: As in many religious cults there is always a predominant figure, and Ellen White is the one for S.D.A. Over a period of 23 years, she had according to her husband, over 200 visions, and as she grew older these visions became dreams. Almost every aspect of the belief and activity of the S.D.A.'s was encouraged or inspired by the visions or word from Ellen White, till her death in 1915.

Born Ellen G. Harman, she married elder James White on August 30, 1846. As a young child while going home from school, she was hit in the face by a rock thrown by another girl. She was unconscious for three weeks, with a broken nose and disfigured face. A doctor stated that the shock to her nervous system and complications to her illness continued for years resulting in epilepsy and constant fainting spells. A Seventh-Day Adventist doctor, William Russell, wrote from his Battle Creek, Michigan office that "her visions were resulting of a diseased organization of her brain and nervous system." Dr. Fairfield, another Adventist, also stated, "her visions were hysterical trances." Nevertheless, Regardless of the Doctor's diagnosis on her, she collected many followers to the new found "spirit of prophecy."

The following are some of her most important "VISIONS":
1. The first vision in 1844, she saw Jesus leading a group of Adventists along a lighted pathway to the city of God.
2. The second vision told her she was to encounter much unbelief and harassment.
3. In 1845, she had a vision of Christ entering into the holy of holes to confirm Edson's vision.
4. In 1847, she was taken into the holy of holies where she saw a halo around the Sabbath commandment.

Mrs. White's writings and visions have come under a great deal of attack and criticism and rightfully so. Although she was a dedicated lady, the following proofs show her not only human, but definitely not "God inspired."

1. She herself admitted she was wrong in her writing of Testimonies.
2. An ex-Adventist, Dudley M. Canright proved conclusively that she used plagiarism in many of her writings.
3. In his book, S.D.A. Renounced and the Life of Mrs. E. G. White, Canright opens to the public numerous errors and contradictions in both areas.
4. Mrs. White stated that S.D.A.s were not to purchase life insurance (Testimonies Volume 1, pg. 549), yet today many do.
5. She gave a vision about not eating red meat, yet she ate meat all of her life.

Is S.D.A to be considered a cult?
1. Walter Martin and D.G. Barnhouse after much probing came to the conclusion that S.D.A.s are not a cult.
2. Christian leaders like Talbot; DeHaan; John Rice; Hoekema, A; VanBaalen, etc. say they are a cult.
3. In Hoekema's book, The Four Major Cults, he classifies a cult as one who fits into the five following areas:
a. Extra-Biblical authority
b. Denial of justification by grace alone
c. Devaluation of Christ
d. Only group saved
e. Group's central in eschatology
4. Unfortunately, not all S.D.A.s agree with the general teaching of the General Assembly, so you must deal with the individual.

source: http://www.biblelineministries.org/articles/basearch.php3?action=full&mainkey=THE+CULT+OF+SEVENTH+DAY+ADVENTISM

Of Paul and James on Faith and Works

2006-04-25T03:28:00.000-07:00

Evangelical biblical Christianity teaches that salvation is by grace throgh faith. other Christian sub-groups argue that works has a place in salvation. Two apostles, Paul and James taught was has been argued by many as contradicting bible truths. Are they apostles contradicting each other? Is Do works have a place in salvation? is there anything we can do to earn our salvation?

James must have meant that faith alone justifies, but not faith, which is alone. There is no contradiction between Paul and Peter. The two writers are discussing totally different subjects. Paul is justifying the reception of the Gentiles into the church without circumcision whereas James is discussing the problem of the failure of works of charity within the church. Paul’s implication is that the performing works of the laws of Moses without embracing the gospel truth cannot earn man righteousness. Justification is by faith only and genuine faith in God alone makes one acceptable. On the contrary, James writes of justification by works before other human beings, who need outward evidence because they cannot see into the heart. He is not contradicting Paul, who writes of justification by faith before God, Who does not need outward evidence because he can see into the heart.

James was not arguing for two salvation requirements: faith plus works, neither was he contradicting Paul as though Paul taught salvation by faith, and James taught salvation by works. What James was contrasting was true faith, which inevitably produces action because it is alive, versus a mere claim to faith, which is profession only and has no life-changing power – such claim is spiritually dead, it is powerless to produce any works. It is not a faith that entrusts the soul to God’s provision of grace in Christ. Such a faith is not only outwardly unproductive but is also inwardly dead. It is not a matter of adding works to such a faith. It is rather the wrong kind of faith. A faith that has no accompanying works is dead as measured by its own barrenness. Thus, it is shown to be lifeless. True faith will be energetic in displaying itself by its fruits, but a merely claimed faith without any observable effect is dead. It is instructive here to considerLk.23: 43.The penitent thief had no time left for works; and faith had no time in which to die. James would not have dissented from this. He sees faith as having had time for expression in works but the opportunity was not taken. Faith ‘worked’ along with works (and not vice versa). The works were not secular morality but deeds of faith; as a result of works, faith is shown really to exist (vs.18), to be living or ‘vital’ (vs.17) and fruitful (vs.20), i.e. completed, perfected, mature. True faith thus combines beliefs (of doctrine), trust (in Christ), and moral action (works of love).

Surprisingly as it may seem, Pauline justification is abstract. The doctrine has been sharpened, emphasized and isolated in thought as a result of the conflict of faith and works. But justification itself is abstract in the sense that though we may consider it by itself as a doctrine, the experience does not occur by itself. There is no case of ‘pure’ justification. No man ever existed who was justified without something else happening at the same time. At the moment of justification he is born again, receives a new nature and is incorporated in Christ. So far James would not be unsympathetic.

But now a new factor enters – the time element. At least some period must elapse, however small, between ‘first faith’ and good works. Paul’s point is that god accepts a man as soon as he believes. James is considering a man who believes but who has neglected every opportunity for good works from the time of his ‘first faith’. James looks for fruits and finds only leaves. Paul understands this (cf. Gal. 5: 6) but at the moment of conversion, faith for him is everything; and James says that the word must be received (Jas. 1: 21). During the subsequent Christian life the believer’s ‘walk’ must avoid sin, which is not merely the negative ‘sins of omission’; he should obey God (cf. Rom. 6: -4, 13, Eph. 2: 8-10). This Pauline emphasis on good works is reflected in the view of James that faith without works is worthless (2: 14); it is not faith at all, certainly not Christian faith. These two positions are not inconsistent. Paul thinks especially of the beginning of Christian life; James thinks of its continuance. At the beginning all that is needed is faith; if faith is genuine works will follow.

Rather than proclaiming a doctrine of faith plus works, James was arguing for a different kind of faith, a faith that is fully alive and shows its vitality by the things it does. It is faith that saves, whether it is the initial trust in God by the sinner or the more fully developed faith of the mature believer. The important feature is that it be genuine trust, not just mental assent. Abraham’s faith brought God’s promise of justification long before he offered Isaac, but it came into full flower when he demonstrated his vitality during trial. He thus sees in all this the fulfillment of Gn.15: 6. Abraham really believed. It was a work of faith. Thus, a man is justified by faith, and justified by works. The faith must be living and the works inspired by faith. They are distinguished in thoughts and must be united in fact. James, therefore, was not discounting faith but was proclaiming the fact that true faith is active, while mere profession has no life whatever.

Dialogue on the Highest Good a Human Being can Attain on Earth

2006-04-25T01:54:00.000-07:00

The whole article is fictious. however, i believe that it captures the woorldviews so presented. The names are not eexact representations of anybody in particular, with excception of Kidha who is myself. If it by any chance it corresponds to your name, i am sorry but i didn't mean you. Now get on and read for yourself, the verdict is yours.

Persons of the Dialogue
Kidha (Christian Philosopher) who is also the narrator
Oloo Aguambo (ancestral representative)
David Humes (Atheist)
Abdul Osman Min Mandela(Muslim Philosopher)

And others who are mute auditors

The scene is laid in the house of Abdul Osman Min Mandela; and Kidha narrates the whole dialogue the day after it took place to Gustafson, Dejong and Kibor (My university lecturers).

I went down yesterday to Mavivye with Oloo the son of Aguambo, that I might offer my prayers to Jehovah; and also I wanted to see in what manner …………….

Kidha: It is very encouraging that all of us made it in time as agreed. Let us continue being good stewards of the same by starting our discussion straight away. I will start by posing this question to Abdul Osman. What do you perceive as the highest good a human being can hope for?

Abdul: It all goes without saying, being a righteous and God-fearing man through submission to Allah because he only is God. It is in his power to bless us or to destroy us.

Humes: That isn’t all you would call the highest good, I suppose.

Abdul: Certainly.

Kidha: That seems too cheap an idea for me to buy. Please clarify what submission to Allah means to you.

Abdul: Islam has laid down some universal fundamental rights for humanity as a whole, which are to be observed and respected under all circumstances. To achieve these rights Islam provides not only legal safeguards but also a very effective moral system. Thus whatever leads to the welfare of the individual or the society is morally good in Islam and whatever is injurious is morally bad. Islam attaches so much importance to the love of God and love of man that it warns against too much of formalism. Sura 2:177 of the Holy Quran gives a clear and beautiful description of the righteous and God-fearing man. He should not only obey salutary regulations, but he should also fix his gaze on the love of God and the love of his fellow men. We are given four heads: Our faith should be true and sincere, we must be prepared to show it in deeds of charity to our fellow-men, we must be good citizens, supporting social organization and, our own individual soul must be firm and unshaken in all circumstances.

Aguambo: What a vague and misconceived understanding of the highest good! It sounds quite highly unattainable? Indeed, that is not what I would prefer to hold on as my highest good. Rather, the highest good is to live in harmony with my ancestors. Since they are never visible, reverence for them is portrayed in the way we live with others. This lies in the philosophy that “I am because we are”. I need to be happy and make my ancestors happy. The joy of everyone else is the joy I want to have. Happiness is only happiness when everybody else shares the same feelings with the others. It is rather happier to mourn with the mourners than to rejoice with those who rejoice if at all the option of mourning is available. This is so because the consciousness of mourning once conceived in the mind remains disturbing even while you seek pleasures in other ways as rejoicing. Thus, the issue of rejoicing is pushed aside because it will obviously fail to materialize as a genuine act and feeling. Therefore, in order to make the rejoicing a reality that is felt in act and mind undisturbed, the sharing of sorrows with those in sorrowful moments is given the first priority as a prerequisite to enjoying happy moments with those who are happy. In other words, it is a moral obligation for every individual to know the weight of one another’s burden and this is only possible through carrying of one another’s burden. This is not an issue of choice but an obligation. Whoever fails to obey is administered to the necessary disciplinary actions equal to his conduct. This is done by the relevant authorities: the ancestors: also called the living dead. The punishment is often severe and ranges from inflicting pain on the offender to even causing his death.

Humes: Abdul echoed some sentiments that to me are improbable to think of. How do you expect me to think of a God who does not exist? What slightest evidence do you have for the existence of Allah?
Abdul: There is more evidence than I can give for the existence of Allah. The simplest that I believe you’ll quite easily understand is that of the way he delivered the Quran to Mohammed through angel Gabriel.
Humes: Wait a minute a minute. Do you mean to talk about what my good friend Kidha would probably call miracles? The transgression of the law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or the interposition of some invisible agent?2 Forget it. That is very a cheap and an untested theory. Miracles don’t really occur. It is that you people have just mistaken natural events for supernatural events. These people who talk of miracles have distorted or misinterpreted what they have observed. Either, their senses are poor. Or their emotions are worked up, or they need a miracle and thus project their inner wishes into some otherwise ordinary events. These things you call miracles can be perfectly explained by ordinary laws of nature, which have not yet been discovered. After all, there is much about the world we do not yet understand. Therefore no events need to be explained by appeal to the supernatural, no matter how much they go against what we know as the law of nature. The simple reason is that it is intrinsically impossible for natural laws to have exceptions3. To wind up dear friends, I feel that anyone who accepts the report of miracle as true and thus believes in God, must do so on the basis of pure faith and against what his reason and the evidence tell him.

Aguambo: You sound very rebellious and unreligious Humes. Who made you? You haven’t told us your highest your highest good too.

Humes: Nature. I was able to develop a belief system based upon respect for truth and knowledge, questioning all assumptions backed by a sense of morality because of the culture I have grown up in. I am not a rebel; I have not rejected huge chunks of our society's basic values despite the fact that we live in a culture that pays lip service to respecting the rebel. I have adopted a subculture that respects freedom of thought as being one of the highest values. This has been relatively pain-free for me compared to for example, a white woman from Mississippi taking up Islam or a Peruvian becoming a Hindu. Indeed I can claim some credit for my choice of atheism. But that does not matter, the truthfulness of a proposition is not affected either way by the number of people who adhere to it or the level of sacrifice they endure to propound it. You could martyr a billion nuns and they would still be just as misguided. The highest good is a mental tranquility, freedom from disturbance. Pleasures of the mind, the joy of beauty and friendship are most preferred to me above all.

Kidha: Your objection on the existence of God based on miracles is rather shallow. My counter - objection is based on the fact that your approach seems to be purely arbitrary. How do we know that miracles are impossible? If it is merely a dogmatic assumption, what reason is there to accept it? Who are we to legislate what reality can and cannot do? It would have been better if you asked how we account for it. Still, I beg to prove to you that God exists by saying that the very concept or idea of God implies his reality. If a person can clearly conceive of God, then he ought to be able to understand that God must exist. Even for the fool who says in his heart that there is no God, I say that to deny the existence of God, the fool must understand the idea of God. God must exist at least as an idea in the understanding of the fool. And to Whom God is I say he is the greatest conceivable being: that which none greater can be conceived. It is greater to exist in reality than merely to exist in the understanding. Since God is the greatest possible being, it is impossible for God to exist only in the understanding of the fool. For in that case, a greater being than God could easily be conceived, namely, a being that exists both in understanding and reality. Having explained the existence of God, I beg to give an explanation of the highest good a human being can hope for. Man’s highest good is to know God and enjoy fellowship with him forever. Love, then, is the highest virtue, for it is the kind of love (agape) that has its source and its end in God himself.

Abdul: Kidha is partially right on the issue of God. However, I beg to differ with him in one or two points of his belief in God. I believe in one God called Allah. Allah is united and is only one. He is not three as portrayed by the Christians in the name of trinity. This is the jargon that I fail to comprehend, how one God is said to be three and the three is one at the same time, as Kidha supposes it to be. It beats the logic and is self-contradicting unless he can convincingly argue it out; I strongly feel that his understanding of God is ill advised and misconceived.
Aguambo: I don’t see us progressing in this discussion if we keep at this pace. Moreover, I have a commitment elsewhere so I must be out of here in the next one hour.

Humes: It seems as if everyone’s perception of the highest good takes totally different directions. Perhaps we can redirect this dialogue by posing the question “how can a person achieve this greatest good?” Aguambo, you may want to bring around the conversation?

Aguambo: Just as I had indicated earlier I wish to assert that being happy and doing good to everyone else. “Do good do for yourself; do bad do for yourself” so goes an old saying in my village. The only way to achieve the highest good is by living interdependently with others. Living as if you depended on everyone and as if everyone depended on you. Making everybody feel happy whenever you cannot avoid it. This way the ancestors will be happy and you will be guaranteed good life both now and later when you become an ancestor. By being good you secure yourself chance of being a good spirit when you graduate from the ancestry.

Humes: Knowledge, as I had stated earlier is the highest good one can hope for. The idea of God does not have a place in my thinking.

Abdul: I do not understand what you mean.

Humes: Then I must make you understand; and perhaps I may be more intelligible if I put the matter in this way. It is obvious that we have no perception of God by means of our senses. We are to imagine that we could discover effects from their causes by the mere operation of reason, without experience. We should let the ideas of the world exist in their own right. It is simpler and more empirical.

Aguambo: That too I do not quite understand

Humes: I fear that I must be a ridiculous teacher when I have so much difficulty in making myself apprehended. Like a bad speaker, therefore I will not take the whole of the subject, but will break a piece of in illustration of my meaning. Everything is reduced to the subjective experience of the moment and the fading memory traces of past experience. Ideas of God, matter, casualty or self have no foundation in sensory experience. Thus, there is no justification in believing them. We cannot help in life believing in many things. The point is that there are no solid reasons for accepting any of those beliefs. We need to make use of our common senses.

Kidha: Pardon my intrusion sir, I’m questioning whether this world you are describing would have any element of truth in it.

Humes: It will certainly be a truer world. I mean people would have a truer view of the world. I think it would probably be a better world. I think people would be less ready to fight each other because so much of the motivation for fighting would have been removed. I think it would be a better world. It would be a better world in the sense that people would be more fulfilled in having a proper understanding of the world instead of a superstitious understanding.

Kidha: Don’t you feel like a vacuum when you live like you depended on your own.

Humes: I feel no vacuum. I mean, I feel very happy, very fulfilled. I love my life and I love all sorts of aspects of it, which have nothing to do with my science. So I don't have a vacuum. I don't feel cold and bleak. I don't think the world is a cold and bleak place. I think the world is a lovely and a friendly place and I enjoy being in it.

Abdul: So how do you prepare for this highest good?

Humes: You prepare for it by facing up to the truth, which is that life is what we have and so we had better live our life to the full while we have it, because there is nothing after it. We are very lucky accidents or at least each one of us is - if we hadn't been here, someone else would have been. I take all this to reinforce my view that I am fantastically lucky to be here and so are you, and we ought to use our brief time in the sunlight to maximum effect by trying to understand things and get as full a vision of the world and life as our brains allow us to, which is pretty full.

Abdul: Actually, according to the Quran and Sunnah a Muslim has to discharge his moral responsibility not only to his parents, relatives and neighbors but also to the entire mankind, animals and useful trees and plants. For example, hunting of birds and animals for the sake of game is not permitted. Similarly cutting trees and plants that yield fruit is forbidden unless there is a very pressing need for it. Thus, on the basic moral characteristics, Islam builds a higher system of morality by virtue of which mankind can realize its greatest potential. Islam purifies the soul from self-seeking egotism, tyranny, wantonness and indiscipline. It creates God-fearing men, devoted to their ideals, possessed of piety, abstinence and discipline and uncompromising with falsehood. It induces feelings of moral responsibility and fosters the capacity for self-control. Islam generates kindness, generosity, mercy, sympathy, peace, disinterested goodwill, scrupulous fairness and truthfulness towards all creation in all situations. It nourishes noble qualities from which only good may be expected.

Kidha: I wonder whether you will agree with this different remark that occurs to me?

Aguambo: What may that be?

Kidha: Faith. The means of attaining the highest good.

Humes: How does that work?

Kidha: Christian faith turns on the reality of God’s existence, his being there. It also turns on an acceptance of the fact that man’s dilemma is moral and not metaphysical. Each person must face these two things on his own level as a matter of truth. A Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “What must I do to be saved?” they answered: “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shall be saved, thou and thy house. The answers of Paul and Silas were not spoken in a vacuum. Because of the earthquake and the way Paul and Silas behaved in the prison, the jailer had a reason to be aware of the existence of a personal God - one who acts in history, answers prayers, and gives men reality in their lives. True Christian faith rests on content. it is not a vague thing which takes the place of real understanding, nor is it the strength of belief which is of value. The true basis for faith is not the faith itself but the work, which Christ finished on the cross. My believing is not the basis for being saved. The basis is the work of Christ. Christian faith is turned outward to an objective person: “Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved” once the truth of God’s existence is known to us, and we know that we have a true moral quilt before a holy God, then we should be glad to know the solution to our dilemma. The solution is from God’s side not ours.

Humes: It was clear from the onset. You Christians would always take the slightest opportunity to make others feel how most right you are. You are going round and round. Please tell us how faith achieves the highest good.

Kidha: I was coming to that. Every nation without a rule is like a tree without the roots. I had to build a basis for my belief, otherwise without the roots, like a tree, it would collapse. As man is faced with God’s promises, Christian faith means bowing twice: First, he needs to bow in the realm of Being – that is to acknowledge that he is a creature before the infinite Personal Creator who is there. Second, he needs to bow in the realm of morals – that is, to acknowledge that he has sinned and therefore he has true guilt before the God who is there. If he has a true moral quilt before an infinite God, he has the problem that he, as finite, has no way to remove such quilt. Thus what he needs is a nonhumanist solution. Now he is faced with God’s prepositional promise, “believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved. In conclusion, I am saying that salvation is the means of attaining the highest good. From salvation other great promises that accompany it will follow. But without salvation, whatever they are may be more of fantasies to you because they are unseen but just hoped for.

Aguambo: You have just complicated issues and I suggest that you should not be let off to continue with such unpolished sentiments. A man of your age should leave in reality. Talk of confirmed things like the experiences often had with the ancestors and not just what you think will cool your head off the many worries that escalate from you incompetence in managing your daily affairs. You are just escaping from responsibility.

Kidha: Why am I especially not to be let off?

Abdul: Why? We think that you are lazy, and mean to cheat us out of a whole chapter which is a very important part of the story; and you fancy that we shall not notice your airy way of proceeding; as if it were self evident to everybody, that the matter of goodness and its attainment have all things in common. Faith is quite illusionary. You are in a dreamland. You must simply be good, do most good and least evil and you then anticipate the highest good in heaven if at all Allah deems it appropriate.

Kidha’s argument is based on William’s philosophy of William Frankena, a contemporary philosopher who adopted the term “agapism “ to refer to an ethical theory that reduces morality to one principle, the principle of love. The word comes from a Greek word for love used in the New Testament to refer to love that is unconditional and willed on the basis of need rather than merit. The same ethic is summarized in the words of Jesus according to Matthew 22: 37 – 40. Thus, to Frankena, this is the principle from which other ethical duties spring from5

BIBLICAL RESPONSE TO THE EASTERN RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF REINCARNATION, PANTHEISM AND THE LAW OF KARMA

2006-04-10T14:13:00.000-07:00

The Eastern belief in the pantheism, karma concept and reincarnation is a delusion. The three ideas are faulty and inconsistent with the biblical doctrines, to name but a few: theology proper (doctrine of God), biblical anthropology (doctrine of man), harmatiology (doctrine of sin), soteriology (doctrine of salvation), etc. while on the surface, they appear to get biblical support, a proper investigation reveals otherwise.

The purpose of this article is to show from Scriptures, the delusion in the eastern worldview. I will review these ideas in the light of the major biblical doctrines mentioned above.

Pantheism
This teaching that all is God and that God is all does not go well with evangelical Christian theology. Genesis 1:1 - 2:25 gives an elaborate detail of creation. God is clearly depicted as the creator. This passage supports the fact that God existed before anything else and that out of nothing God created everything (ex-nihilo). Therefore to argue that God is part of the created order is tantamount to denying the truth of God as the creator. For, logically speaking, there is no way God can be an infinite creating being and at the same time be a finite created being. That is total nonsense.

The Bible teaches about the Supreme Being who is both transcendental as well as immanent. The pantheists, on the other hand, assume the immanence of the same, thereby overlooking his transcendence.

Consequently, the pantheists overlook the cultural mandate (Gen. 1:26-30) given to man by God and his superiority over all the created order – whereas all that God created was good, man was found to be very good (Gen. 1:31). There is thus a hierarchy overlooked by the pantheists when they claim that God is all and all is God. For God reigns high as the creator, and he has secondly, appointed man to rule over the created order. These three groups are distinct and one only needs to look at nature to see the truth.

In addition, pantheism does injustice to the character and attributes of God. For God is holy and man is sinful, the two cannot be one. Man is inherently evil whereas no evil is found in God whatsoever, for if it were so, then, God would cease to be God. Since God is God he is not evil and neither does he have the potential to be evil. Furthermore God is omnipresent, personal, infinite, eternal (Ps. 90:2) and unchanging. The pantheists who consider god to be finite and changing overlook these stark realities. How on earth can a changing God be trusted to fulfill the promises he made (Heb. 13:5b) sometimes back if he cannot remember what he was yesterday? Yet god says he is unchanging (Heb. 13:8).

Thee bottom line in pantheism is idolatry, an outright denial of the true God, and the worship of other gods (images). Making everything else, including oneself to be God is as old as the sin of Satan. Pantheists make themselves gods and include everything else in the process. This is contempt for God and amounts to gross insubordination. It refutes the claims of Jesus. Since everything is god, Jesus has no right to impose upon the created order, his lordship for all are equal. But john 14:6 declares only one saviour. In the Bible, all who impersonated God were punished forthwith – Nebuchadnnezzar (Dan. 14:1) and Herod (Acts: 12:20-23) are classic examples.

Reincarnation
Reincarnation is the endless cycle of birth and rebirth to which each soul is subject to until it obtains liberation (mukti or moksha) in Brahman. John Hinnells adds that in reincarnation, “the part of thee individual which is immortal passes at death to diverse heavens and hells where it works out its ‘karmic’ debts and is then born reborn in the form it deserves.

The first problem with this worldview is that it outrightly opposes the doctrine of mortality of all men (Heb. 9:27). It further devalues the human body, which God made with honour and not as a prison or punishment resulting supposedly from our past mistake in earlier reincarnations. Human body, on the contrary, has eternal value as is evident in physical resurrection. This notion is clearly debunked in the scripture. Heb. 9:27 affirm the fact that humanity has no chance/potential for future reincarnation. Apostle Paul labours in 1 Cor. 15 to explain the reality of future resurrection – a central claim of the Christian faith.

Jesus taught about resurrection. He told off the disputing Sadducees the inevitability of human resurrection and judgment (Matt. 22:30-33). He also predicted his own resurrection (Jn. 2:19), physically resurrected from the dead (Lk 24:39) and promised to physically come back for his Church (Jn.14: 1-6).

Reincarnation does not acknowledge the biblical doctrine of harmatiology and providence. In the case of the man who had been blind from birth (Jn. 9:1-3), Jesus told his disciples that the blindness was not caused by anyone’s sin or fault but that the man was blind so that “the work of God might be displayed in his life” (vs.3), and indeed it was done. In verse 7 we are told that he went home seeing and those who saw marveled at the work of God while he went on testifying. This teaches clearly that our current status has no relation to any previous existence, thereby refuting the idea of the reincarnation.

Attempts to work out reincarnation were condemned by God as evil (1 Sam. 28:9). It further kills the reality of the imago Dei (image of God) in man. God created man in his own image and likeness (Gen. 1:27), man thus, is not the same substance with other things, which were created by word/speech “…let there be…and it was.” Reincarnation is a result of one working out his karma, this depicts man’s personal effort to gain his salvation and is opposed to salvation by grace through faith – sola fida.

Karma Concept
This law is often used to explain peoples’ current status or situations. Every good turn deserves another and vice versa is the principle guide in the karmic worldview. If one accumulates good karma by performing good actions, he or she will be reincarnated in a desirable state. If one accumulates bad karma, he/she will be reincarnated in a less desirable state. It is all about trial and error.

This belief is as a result of poor theology of the state of man (anthropology), harmatiology (the doctrine of sin) and soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Rom. 3:23 positively declares that all have sinned – this addresses the sinful state of humanity. Rom 6:23 highlights the consequence of our fallen state – death. Since we are helpless we need the saving Christ (Jn. 3:16; 10:10).

Jesus declared that he is the way, the truth and the life, and that no one goes to the father except by him (Jn. 14:6). Belief in karma, thus shows that man can work out his own salvation thereby abrogating the vicarious death of Christ on the cross. It undermines the essence of the incarnate Christ, his death and resurrection, consequently atoning for humanity’s sins. It is basically being apostate and rebellious. It is prideful, taking the place of God in securing our redemption. Moreover, it is foolishness, since by trying to work out our own salvation we are pursuing an exercise in futility, while on the other hand; somebody has offered to do it for us perfectly well and at no cost.

Belief in karma also shows that sin is done against oneself, since he is god, and not to the Holy God of the Bible. Conversely, we know that sin is disobedience to God (Ps.51: 4; Rom. 3:23). Belief in karma further undermines the judgment to come. To them, the thought of future life does not determine immediate behaviour/conduct since acquisition of merit through following dharma is an end in itself. Yet the Bible speaks of future judgement. The judgement will be whether one acknowledged Christ as lord or not, and not as to whether one got himself into the right caste. Salvation is by grace through faith and not by works – no amount of work done by man can free/save him. It doesn’t matter how much you sweat or bleed, you cannot save yourself or even others. Man needs Christ, and Christ alone.

In conclusion, I wish to state categorically that the Orientals’ belief in pantheism, reincarnation and karma are inconsistent with biblical truth and should rejected en toto. As observed, the Bible finds these ideas void and wanting – and as such are irreconcilable with the ‘true truth’ of God, paralleling the major doctrines of biblical Christianity.

Armenian Thugs Using Presidential Jet?

2006-03-23T06:29:00.001-08:00

A myriad accounts have been given on the who, what, why how and when of the Armenian duo.BUT one thing remains hidden to Kenyans: that they have been using the preesidential jet to make their trips across the continent. no wonder fitting explanation has been given on how the other goon got to JKIA.

Mara he came via KQ (and minister Konchellah contradicts himself on the flight number), mara via private plane; so which is which?
I won't play tune to the oooh, sijui hii, sijui that... But will let you read from the source: that THE BUSTERS HAVE BE USING PREZOS JET
From: pozo - Wed, Mar 15, 9:49 PM
These busters , Armenians have been using kenya presidential jet for the past 2 months going to and fro Uganda , DRC, Angola. Raila informed the police yesterday. He asked office of the president to substanciate why kenya presidential jet landed 4 times in Uganda without the president and twice in DRC without the president. Its was carrying 3 white people according to DRC intelligence. The truth shall set it self free

source: http://jukwaa.proboards58.com/index.cgboard=general&action=display&thread=1142534626

Check it out for youselves. Could this latest revelation shed some light? the verdict is yours.

From the same blog, i could't resist this:A Dead End For The Kibaki Regime? read it for yourself

Mob stuff baadaye

The Doberman’s Force Replaces the Thuggish Kenya Police

2006-03-21T01:29:00.000-08:00

This kubafu even had the audacity to say he is a Christian. What Christian displays that degree of arrogance and pride? In his bling (I don’t have any beef with that save for the fact that they make him look like an evolving teenager), looking like an advanced hawker he hopes around declaring his ‘messianic’ mission to Kenya: to save the poor. Proudly he declares that he can fund the country’s budget (no problem) and counts a range of business ventures he is undertaking in the country. The irony is that he refuses to be specific. He hinges everything on his delicate security…poor he of the Doberman fame. How insecure can he be?

This shameless ‘Christian’ does not mind his dogs unleashing terror on the Kenyans he came to save. He dares even the highest security personnel in the land to trespass into his private property and he ‘will see’. Excuse me, is this the only private property in Kenya… and by the way, how easy is it to import Dobermans from Dubai? I suggest that the government gives me the tender to supply them with these dreaded officers – dogs. I’ll not only get wealthy in a day, but it will also be cheaper and efficient having a police force that takes orders from only one person and executes it to the letter.

This would be of great convenience to the taxpayers. One, they’ll not have to pay any salary to policemen who will rob them on the roads and streets. The budget for the police force will be greatly reduced right from the recruitment exercise, which will cease, through to purchase of the fuel guzzlers, vuta pumzi’s,uniforms, guns (which they lend out to robbers) etc. instead, we will contact that Dutch woman (I have forgotten her name), the one that wanted to deliver some dog food to ‘starving’ children in Mbita.

Dr. Mutua will only have to change his mind... ooops his words (I forgot he’s never spoken his mind, that’s if he even had one) and say something to the tune: “the Kenyan government gladly accepts your timely offer of dog food with gratitude and pleasure…” the budget for the police force can be diverted towards feeding the poor children in Mbita as well as in other parts of the country. Whereas the dog food meant for Mbita can be fed to the government dogs…. Or was it not a government of animals? Na hiyo sio corruption.

Somebody is asking whether the retrench police will resort to crime. The answer is a big NO, at least not in Kenya. They know better than any Kenyans what kind of replacement the Armenian has brought – so far only they have been the victims – even the police commissioner is dared to try them. Man, it’s no joke! But I can suggest that with their retirement benefit they can buy some bling bling and relocate to some other country as mercenaries, after all don’t they have the military orientation? I advice that they MUST not go to Congo DRC for those people are the blings themselves.

For those who are dependants of the police, our kubafu said ‘fanya kazi’. You could apply for the position of a dog feeder. If you don’t succeed try gardening for the kubafu’s of Armenia. But don’t worry much; a mkenya cannot kosa what to eat today and hee can sort out kesho baadaye!

So why can’t Gumo and Ndolo make good their threat to evict that Caucasian teenager from our home. Then we can borrow his security ideas to enrich ourselves. Remeember, it’s a simple idea with great results! Then we can say like Joseph of the Bible: they meant it for bad but God meant it for good! Au sio?
I promise, if I get the tender:
1. I will not get a loan from the Armenian thugs
2. I will not buy myself any blings
3. BUT I might consider taking on Nyamunga for the Nyando constituency seat come 2007
Till then, Nyamunga, you can continue enjoy your sleep… I am harmless

When God Messes with Your Plans! Matthew 1:18-25

2006-03-10T01:00:00.000-08:00

Fella's, can you remember those days of your engagement? You had fallen in love with the dream of your life. And what was even better, SHE HAD FALLEN IN LOVE WITH YOU TOO! There came that time when you made up your mind to ask her to marry you... AND SHE AGREED!

Today, I want to speak about the marriage of Joseph and Mary:

WHEN GOD MESSES WITH YOUR PLANS!

Engagements were handled differently in those days than they are now. Marriages were pre-arranged by the parents, often when the kids were only infants. But, there had to come a point, when the couple became aware of the engagement, and began to make their plans!

I imagine young Joseph. The wedding date is approaching, and he is making preparations.I can see Mary. The date every young lady lives for is just about here. She is so excited as she and her parents make the wedding plans. She and Joseph have such dreams for their lives together. But then,

GOD MESSED WITH THEIR PLANS!

It was not ever in their goals for Mary to become pregnant before their wedding night. And certainly, the idea of becoming pregnant miraculously and giving birth to the Lord Jesus Christ was not the foremost of their thinking. Mary's reaction to the news was one of perplexity. She asks in Luke 1:34;

"How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?"

Joseph's reaction was a little different. He has a decision to make. Should he believe that Mary has been faithful to him and that she had miraculously become pregnant with the Son of God? Or should he decide to break off the engagement? Of course, you know the rest of the story. They did get married, did give birth to the Messiah, and the rest is history!

Let me make three observations based upon this Biblical scene:

I. GOD DIDN'T ASK JOSEPH AND MARY-HE TOLD THEM!

I do not note any passage where the angel announcing God's plan, asks Mary or Joseph if this is acceptable with them! God simply told them His plan and will for their lives!

"How many of you are doing what you planned on doing when say, you were in 7th grade?" (Most of us aren't doing what we thought we would be doing when we graduated from High School!) I have found that the majority of the plans I had as a young person are radically different than what has really come to pass.

****Some of the plans have changed because I have changed my decisions and desires.
****But other plans were changed because of circumstances beyond my control: God!
And God has never asked me when He has chosen to put those circumstances into my life!

Listen, God has a plan for your life. He made that plan before He created the world and He has no intention of asking your permission to proceed with His plan! Now, you can choose not to obey His will, But you cannot change His will for your life!

I note secondly,

II. GOD'S PLAN FOR MARY AND JOSEPH WAS NOT AN EASY ONE.

Sometimes we think that if we are in the will of God, everything will be a bed of roses and life will be without trial or difficulty. That was not the case for Joseph and Mary. Consider the following:

1. Why didn't God work it out so the Tax was collected either before Joseph and Mary were married, or after the Baby was born? He could have done that couldn't He? I mean,having a woman who was so pregnant that she just barely got to Bethlehem before she had the baby travel by foot, camel, or donkey, WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN EASY! Surely God could have worked things out better than that!

2. The baby was born in a manger because there was no room in the Inn. Again, I can see the young couple's frustration as, after travelling that far, Mary is exhausted and ready to deliver, AND THEY CAN NOT FIND ANY PLACE COMFORTABLE EVEN TO TAKE HER!
Now, God is a sovereign God. He is able to do anything He wills. He obviously has willed that there is no room in the Inn! He isn't making it easy for them, even though they are obeying the will of God for their lives.

3. Why were they forced to flee Bethlehem to Egypt because of the threat of King Herod. Again, we can see the hand of God at work because He warned them of the danger so they could flee. Why didn't he just make the King's heart soften so they would have to flee at all? Especially since all the babies 2 years old and younger were killed by Herod's men after Mary and Joseph were gone. The Baby was about 2 year's old when they went to Egypt. And that would not have been an easy trip to make!

4. Then, after all of this, somewhere between when Joseph took his family back to Nazareth and when Jesus became 30 years old, Joseph died. Jesus had to become the head of the home, taking care of his mother and his half brothers and sisters. We make a terrible error in our concept of Christianity when we believe that God makes life easy when we are in is will and that the easy way is God's way. Take for instance Jesus' message about the two roads:

---The broad and easy way that almost everyone takes is the way that leads to destruction.
---The straight, narrow, and more difficult way, is the way that leads to eternal life.

When we choose the way that looks the easiest, we aren't necessarily choosing the
way that is the will of God! Christ chose a path that led to the cross. Paul chose a path that led to imprisonment and execution. But both chose paths that were in the plan of God for them! God does not promise us an easy trip. He promises to be with us as we take it!

Need a verse? Isa 43:2 "When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee."

Observation Three:

III. THOUGH THINGS WERE DIFFICULT, GOD DID BLESS.

I see it in two thoughts:

1. They wondered at the child as he grew.

Look at these verses in Luke 2:52
"And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man."

Luke 2:49-51
"And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart."

Luke 2:40
"And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him."

Luke 2:33
"And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

It must have been a joy beyond belief to raise Christ as he grew up! Just that blessing
would have been worth it!

2. Ultimately, Jesus grew up to be a blessing to the whole world! Any parent is blessed when their child grows up to be a person of influence and importance in the world. More parents are blessed if their kid grows up to do something good for mankind. I realize Joseph was gone by this time, But can you imagine the blessing Mary must have experienced when her firstborn son, Jesus Christ, rose victorious over death and the grave? Can you imagine what she must have felt like as she watched Him ascend visibly, bodily, and gradually into heaven! Can you imagine the excitement in her soul when she realized in a tangible way,

THAT HER SON HAD OPENED THE DOOR TO HEAVEN FOR ALL WHO WOULD ACCEPT HIM AND RECEIVE HIM AS SAVIOUR?

God's plan for our lives isn't always an easy one. But it is a plan that will lead to our being a blessing to many. Even if His plan is an early death. He is going to use that in some way ultimately to bring more people to a saving knowledge of the truth. God's plan for Fanny Crosby was that a doctor would give her the wrong medicine when she was a baby, resulting in her blindness. Rather than growing bitter, Fanny Crosby used her condition to make her more spiritually sensitive; She wrote some of the most beautiful hymns we sing.

God used the death of H.G. Spafford's children to inspire him to write one of our favorite hymns. Spafford's wife and kids were one a ship to England, and he was going to join them there in a short time. However, the ship with his family on board sank. His wife as saved, but his kids all died. Back home, Spafford awaited news as to the fate of his family, and when it finally came, it was a telegram from his wife simply saying, "Saved, Alone." Spafford, while mourning their deaths wrote these words,

"When peace like a river attendeth my way.
when sorrow like sea billows role.
Whatever my lot thou has taught me to say,
it is well it is well with my sole!"

God didn't ask Spafford if it was ok to make that part of his plan for him. And I am sure Spafford didn't plan it for himself. But as difficult as God's plan was, it has resulted in something that has blessed countless numbers of suffering souls since it was written! And, while you and I may not think our lot is nearly that tragic. nor our influence nearly that broad. The truth of it is:

IF WE WILL AGREE TO FOLLOW GOD'S PLAN, NO MATTER HOW DIFFICULT, ETERNITY WILL RECORD A FAR REACHING IMPACT FOR GOOD BECAUSE OF IT!

by
Pastor Marvin McKenzie
Astoria, Oregon

Do We Have Prophets Today?

2005-12-14T07:15:00.000-08:00

Article by Mike Scott of Mt. Vermon Church of Christ

Q. Are there Apostles in this century, functioning as the Apostles in the early Christian Church?

The clear Biblical answer to your question is an emphatic NO! The apostles were appointed by the Lord himself for a limited period of time. After the death of our Lord, the original group of apostles needed to replace Judas who had committed suicide. Peter lists the qualifications necessary to be added to the group in Acts chapter one:

Acts 1:21-26 21 "Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us-- 22 beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us--one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection." 23 So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen 25 to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." 26 And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.

From the above passage it is clear that in order to "qualify" to become an apostle, one must have been with the disciples during the entire time that Jesus taught (verse 21), beginning with the teaching of John the Baptist (verse22), until His resurrection.

It would be impossible for anyone living today to meet these qualifications. There is only one exception to this "qualification" list, that of the apostle Paul (Acts chapter nine). He received a "special" revelation, and qualifications, however there is not another exception to be found in the New Testament.
Furthermore, the New Testament reveals that the purpose for the work of the apostles has ceased.

Ephesians 4:11-12 11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;
Here we have the ancient order (apostles and prophets) and the modern order (evangelists and teaching pastors). The purpose for these "offices" in the church is to "equip the saints for the work of service." Modern day preachers and teachers are to use the teaching of the apostles and the prophets to accomplish God's will in this regard. There are not "latter-day" revelations since the Word of God is His complete guide to life and godliness:

2 Pet. 1:3 "seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence."

This knowledge was revealed through the apostles and prophets of the first Century and recorded "once for all time" (Jude 3) in order that we might have an objective, written document of the will of God. His will is the same for all men of every age.

Therefore, for these reasons and many others, according to the teaching of the New Testament there is no such office as "apostle" in the church today.

Love: Romans 12:9-21

2005-12-12T22:11:00.000-08:00

On the peak of his majesty
On his permanent ice
Among the clouds
Which pass to and fro
Above the highest peak of the world
Looms up a word
Love

Love, I shout your name
You are sincere
Love abhors evil and clings to good
Be devoted to one another, shouts love
Love upholds honour unto others
It echoes zeal and keeps spiritual fervour
Love inculcates joy in hope
And hospitality shouts aloud
Love

When persecution soars up
Love will shout blessings
In love rejoice with the rejoicers
And mourn with mourners
Live pleasantly with others
Do not be pompous
For it is not the way of love
But associate with the lowly
People of God shout
Love

Love does not pay evil for evil
But carefully does aright
Making amity with everyone
And taking no vengeance
People of God shout
Love

People of God
Do not be overcome by evil
For love implore you
The echo looms up
From his majesty
And soars up
From South to the vast extent of the North
East, west, Centre, North and South
People of God
Live together in love
Because they all shout
Love

© Kidha Kidha 2004

Proverbs 7: A Biblical Approach to Sex

2005-12-12T21:57:00.000-08:00

Tim and Beverly Lahaye made a very remarkable statement in their book "The act of Marriage". They say that the act of marriage is a beautiful and intimate relationship shared uniquely by a husband and wife in the privacy of their love - and it is sacred.

Scripture affirms that, indeed, God designed them for that relationship. Proof that it is a sacred experience appears in God’s first commandment to man: "Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth" (Gen. 1:28). That charge was given before sin entered the world; therefore, lovemaking and procreation were ordained and enjoyed while man continued in his original state of innocence.
This necessarily includes the strong and beautiful mating urge a wife and a husband feels for each other. Doubtless Adam and Eve felt that urge in the garden of Eden, just a God intended, and although we lack any written report for proof, it s reasonable to conclude that Adam and Eve made love before sin entered the garden (see Gen. 2:25).

The idea that God designed our sex organs for enjoyment comes as a surprise to some people. Nevertheless, it is an irrefutable fact that God created all pars of the human body. He did not create some parts good and some parts bad; he created them all good, for when he finished his creation, he looked at it and said, ‘it is all very good’ (Gen. 1:31). Again, this occurred before sin marred the perfection of Paradise.

Yet with all this impeccable truth, many people have the erroneous idea lurking in their minds that something is wrong or dirty about the act of sex. Admittedly, the unwillingness of many Christian leaders through the years to talk frankly about it has called into question the beauty of this necessary part of married life. As I write this paper today, most of my fellow students are questioning what’s gone wrong with my mind.

In the Context of Proverbs
The chapter gives an immediate impression of a literary unity in spite of the fact that, form critically speaking, the central section (vs. 6-23) falls outside the normal pattern of the discourses in chs. 1 to 9 of Proverbs.4 There is the familiar introduction that commends wisdom by means of a string of imperatives and then in v. 5 moves to the specific threat to life in the form of the "loose woman." The concluding section (vs. 24-27) is clearly marked by the initial adverb "and now," and the repetition of an explicit addressee. The familiar warnings (ch. 5:1-6, etc.) are again issued in the imperative style. However, the main interest of the chapter focuses on the extended description of the harlot at work in seducing her victim, which is related by an unobserved narrator.

The description is a literary masterpiece. An old sage watches the city street from the privacy of his window as dusk begins to fall. A young man catches his attention from among the others who move along the street. He is not pictured as an evil, corrupt, or stupid fellow; rather, a young, naïve, inexperienced youth, without discernment, and thoughtless. The Hebrew calls him "simple"; he "lacks sense." He walks along aimlessly with no fixed intention, but unwittingly he passes near "her corner," strolling along "her street." The unmodified pronoun anticipates the introduction of the loose woman which is to follow, but serves to heighten the suspense by its veiled allusion. The narrator knows more at this moment than the simple youth who remains unsuspecting at the cool of the evening, when the heat of the day has subsided.

Then the narrative tempo shifts. Suddenly a woman moves swiftly out to meet him. Both her dress and her behavior portray her profession. Without appreciably slowing down the story’s pace the narrator pauses momentarily to picture the harlot. With a quick stroke he produces a vignette of calculated, restless activity. Wily and cunning, garrulous and brazen, she is much too impatient to wait for her customers. She must be out, stalking her game, flitting from one street to another, into the market and back to her corner. The contrast between the aimless, unwitting simpleton and the designing adventuress is complete.

She sights the slow-moving figure and hastens to meet him. In the darkness of the night she accosts him, seizing him. Had he perhaps sought to retreat? In an instant she smothers any inhibitions with caresses, throwing herself at him. She has just come back from the temple -- she is one of those harlots with a sense of religious duty -- and her table is already prepared with the meat for a luxurious banquet. Of course, not prepared for just anyone, but "for you." "I have come out to meet you, to seek you eagerly, and I have found you." But the feast is only the beginning. The couch is ready, decked with the finest of Egyptian linen, dripping myrrh and aloes. The air is thick with heavy perfume. The sensuous appeal to taste, smell, sight, and touch fuses together in one voluptuous revelry of delight. "Come, let us saturate ourselves in love until the morning."
Still he hesitates. The simpleton does not speak, but his reaction is mirrored in her running conversation. She anticipates the resistance and deftly overcomes it. He need have no fear of discovery. "The good man is on a trip" -- she does not mention her husband by name. "Surely he will not return for days."
She beckons, "with much seductive speech she persuades." Then all of a sudden he finds himself accompanying her:

"Like an ox being led to the slaughter . . .
Not knowing that it will cost him his life."

The sage has finished. He concludes with a word of advice. "Now, my sons, listen: do not stray into her path. . . . Her house is the way to Sheol, going down to the chambers of death." He does not mount a theological argument, nor appeal to sacred tradition, but from the world of experience he relates what he knows of the world. This is simply the way it is. Such action always leads to death. So, my son, do not be a fool!

The passage, in spite of its unusual literary style, presents a theme that is typical of Wisdom Literature, both within and without the Christian canon.5 The contrast between the way of wisdom leading to life and that of folly leading to death is illustrated, above all, in the repeated warning against the loose woman. The teaching of the sage is designated as "commandments." It possesses an authority that goes beyond simple advice. Yet it does not rest on prophetic inspiration nor cultic sanction, but rather reflects the tested observations of wise men on the ways of the world. Nevertheless the imperative of these teachings has already been equated with the sacred tradition that bears the claim of direct, divine revelation. Like the Decalogue of Deut. 6:4, these instructions are also to be "bound on the fingers" and "written on the tablets of the heart." Like obedience to the word of God (Ezek. 3:1ff; 18:32; 33:10ff.) the observance of these teachings leads to life. Again, these words function as the law in keeping a young man from going astray (Ps. 119:9ff.).
Besides the major theme of the passage, which warns of the dangers of folly and points to life on the path of wisdom, several other features reflect elements of theological interest. The passage describes in detail the psychology of temptation, portraying with great sensitivity the delicate mechanism of influencing the will toward evil. Again, the understanding of the fool as one inexperienced, lacking in discernment, and without inner resolution is repeatedly pictured as exposed and helpless before evil which is described as cunning, alert, and aggressive. Lastly, the inevitable connection of the deed with its effect is assumed by the writer as part of the order of the world.

If one now attempts to place the passage within the context of the book of Proverbs, several important observations can be made. First of all, the theme of wisdom contrasted with folly continues with great consistency throughout the other discourses in chs. 1 to 9, and, in slightly varying form, in chs. 10 to 31. Repeatedly the theme of the loose woman personifies the life of folly. She is one with "smooth words," who has forsaken "the companion of her youth," who has forgotten "the covenant of her God," and whose "house sinks down to death" (ch. 2:16ff.). She is noisy, takes her place in a public place where she can tempt all passers-by (ch. 9:13ff.). The sage warns against infatuation, of being captured by her beauty, and spells out the risks involved (ch. 6:25ff.). Yet, surprisingly enough, the same vocabulary of the harlot is used throughout Proverbs to describe the activity of "Lady Wisdom." 6 She also cries in the streets (ch. 1:20), stations herself in a public place where she can accost all (ch. 8:3). She allures, calls, beckons with outstretched hand (ch. 1:24). Her way is pleasant (ch. 3:17). She also has slaughtered her beasts and set the banquet table (ch. 9:2). She seeks to be loved (ch. 4:6) and embraced (v. 8).
The effect of using the one set of imagery serves to intensify the struggle between the way of wisdom and the way of folly. Wisdom like folly is active, aggressive, and persistent. Both offer the rewards of happiness and pleasure. Yet one leads to life and one to death. The decision lies in the hands of man. The stakes are high; his life is laid on the line.

There is a second movement that one discerns by placing ch. 7 within the larger context of the book. In ch. 5:15ff. the sage admonishes his son:
Drink water from your own cistern, Flowing water from your own well. . . . Rejoice in the wife of your youth, A lovely hind, a graceful doe. Let her affection fill you at all times with delight, Be always infatuated with her love.

In contrast to the false infatuation with the loose woman, the sage commends love for one’s own wife with enthusiasm. The ideal of monogamy is already fully explicit. He is to be "infatuated with her," "filled with delight," and to rejoice in her beauty. Once again, a similar vocabulary is used to describe the sexual attraction for one’s wife and the infatuation aroused by the adventuress. The issue is obviously not between sex and celibacy, which is a polarity totally foreign to the Old Testament, but between misused sex that leads to destruction and sex that belongs to the fullness of life and blessing. Nowhere in the discourses of chs. 1 to 9 is this latter thought developed, but it is assumed as essential to the good life and commended as a delightful antidote to the temptations of folly.

Broadening the Context
Now the task is to move beyond the confines of Proverbs and view the passage within even a larger context, if possible, within the context of the whole canon. How is this move made when there are no explicit quotations in the other witnesses that would indicate how the text was heard and used? As has been suggested in an earlier chapter the method that is being suggested for Biblical Theology is not confined to the use of explicit quotations. The occurrence of citations serves only as one useful aid when broadening the context by which to establish the perimeter of the Biblical witnesses and by which to determine with considerable precision the specific axes along which the reflections of Scripture moved. Above all, this method allows the interpreter a means of measuring how the same text functioned in a different context which is far more difficult to ascertain when one moves directly to the study of motifs or themes. However, a variety of other means are available by which to achieve a similar goal when broadening the context within the canon. The present objective is to explore one of these other alternatives.

An exegetical move that is akin to the use of citations is one that seeks to discover in other Biblical material the use of a cluster of similar vocabulary that functions in a coherent manner. By concentrating on similar vocabulary the interpreter assures himself of a linguistic control in determining that the subject matter being investigated is closely related. The study of vocabulary, as in the use of citations, brings far more precision to bear in delineating a common subject matter than does simple conceptual analogy. Again, by seeking a cluster of similar vocabulary one avoids the inherent danger of individual word studies, which arises when the word is treated apart from its role within the sentence.7 Moreover, the stress on coherent function assures that the peculiar shape the material has assumed will be recognized. This control guards against the tendency of word studies to isolate words from their genuine context. Yet it affords a check to larger conceptual constructs that are not congruent with the Bible’s own inner movement. Lastly, the use of function instead of concentrating on meaning affords the interpreter a more reliable guide in tracing the change that occurs within the same material when serving in different settings.

Having delineated a methodology, we return to the problem of broadening the context of Prov., ch. 7. An analysis of the chapter revealed that the call to wisdom was contrasted with the way of folly. The latter was most clearly illustrated by the enticement of the loose woman. However, already within the book of Proverbs a positive role of sex was set over against the negative, although this side of the issue remained undeveloped.

Now the question arises as to whether there is another use of the language of Prov., ch. 7, one in which a cluster of similar vocabulary functions in a coherent manner. It should come as no surprise to find the greatest concentration of erotic language in the Song of Songs. Whatever may have been the original setting for this material -- and no scholarly consensus has emerged -- the book now consists of a series of love poems in which the speaker is at times the woman addressing her lover, and at times the situation is reversed with the man courting the woman. The remarkable feature is the way in which the same erotic language used in Prov., ch. 7, by the harlot to entice the simpleton on the road to death is now employed by the lovers without the slightest negative overtones. Indeed just the opposite! Throughout the whole book their words reverberate with the sheer joy of unrestrained delight in their mutual sexuality. "Love is strong as death" and the greatest treasure of human life (Song of Songs 8:6 f.). Like the brazen harlot who goes forth to "seek and find" her victim (Prov. 7:15), "now in the street, now in the market" (v. 12), the lover of the Song of Songs pursues him in "the streets and square" (Song of Songs 3:1), calls after him (v. 1), and seeks to lead him back to her house (v. 4). When she finds him (v. 4), she holds him fast (v. 1), and would kiss him outside (ch. 8:1). Like the harlot who entices her victim with the invitation of love upon perfumed couches until the morning breaks (Prov. 7:18), so the lover in the Song invites her lover to her couch at night (Song of Songs 3:1) to remain until the morning comes (ch. 4:6). Her hands drip with myrrh (Songs of Songs S:S; Prov. 7:17); she is compared to a garden filled with aloes and cinnamon (Song of Songs 4:14; Prov. 7:17). Her lips "distil nectar"; "honey and milk are under the tongue" (Song of Songs 4:11), which parallels the harlot in Proverbs whose "lips drip honey" and whose "palate is smoother than oil" (ch. 5:3). Whereas the sage warns the youth of the dangers of the harlot’s beauty who captures a man "with her eyelashes" (ch. 6:25), the lover of the Song of Songs confesses that his heart has been ravished with "a glance of your eyes" (ch. 4:9). Continually physical beauty is exalted and human passion ignited by sexual attraction (chs. 4:1ff.; 5:2ff., etc.).

Moreover, there is an additional use of the erotic language in the Song of Songs which goes beyond the perimeter of the Proverbs, but which constitutes an essential part of the poem’s function. In Proverbs the misuse of sex is described with the harlot’s aggressively seeking the man. In contrast, the man in Proverbs exercises the active force in the relation of properly used sex, and his needs are placed at the center (ch. 5:15ff.). How strikingly different is the Song of Songs at this point. Not only is human, physical love praised and exalted, but the relation of the man to the woman is completely mutual. At times the initiative is assumed by the man when courting the woman, but even more frequently, the passionate yearning for her lover is the woman’s. Far from being a delightful antidote to the temptations of the flesh, love is inextinguishable, a "vehement flame," "strong as death," the most valued of all human prizes.
Moreover, the Song of Songs is even more radical in its approach to erotic love, in fact so radical that the average Christian hesitates to recognize it as Scripture. The book of Proverbs had commended in one place love for one’s own wife. Within this framework it was able to find a positive role for erotic love. In the Song of Songs there is no mention of marriage or the institution of the family. The love that is exalted in the Song is not between husband and wife, but simply between lovers. This greatest of human joys, this cruel and vehement fire, is described on its own terms. What is binding is love itself without any sociological or religious function. In itself, and for itself, it is prized and feared.
To summarize up to this point: By placing Prov., ch. 7, within the context of the whole book an important theological movement emerged as dominant and typical for the Wisdom Literature. Man is called to seek wisdom and eschew folly. Particularly is the loose woman to be avoided who exemplifies par excellence, the latter path. How much wiser to be satisfied with one’s own wife. We then turned to the Song of Songs and traced another use of the same erotic language. That which appeared as a minor note in Proverbs, namely, the positive role of sexual love, became the major theme of the Song which portrayed the full dimensions of human love completely apart from any utilitarian function that it might serve.

What is the effect of reading Proverbs in the light of the Song of Songs, and the Song of Songs in the light of Proverbs? Does the juxtaposition of these two books within the canon exercise any influence on their interpretation? First, by reading Proverbs in the light of the Song of Songs the polarity emerges with even greater sharpness between misused sex as foolish self-destruction and rightly used sex as a joyous possession of the wise. The witness of the Song of Songs corrects and opposes the tendency within Proverbs to view the positive value of sex chiefly in its function as an antidote to sexual incontinence. Rather, human love is recognized and acclaimed for itself. The physical and spiritual sides of love form an inseparable unity. Love unleashes the deepest of all human feelings. It can be cruel and deadly in terrifying bursts of jealousy. It is strong as death itself and most to be valued among all human achievements.

Conversely, the reading of the Song of Songs in the light of Proverbs exercises an important canonical control in another direction. Proverbs testifies that wisdom is a divine order and true human knowledge of the world leads unswervingly back to God. Because God’s order provides the framework for all human activity, the "fear of God" affords a guide to the wise man for leading him to the fullness of life. Proverbs places human love within the established order of the world, and relativizes its function by confining its scope. Love is a human attribute; it does not provide the bridge to the divine. Nor does it remove the major ethical imperatives constitutive to the good life because the call to wisdom is also the path of righteousness (Prov. 4:10-27).

Again it is necessary to pause and reflect on the next exegetical move. What does one do when he has exhausted the study of those passages which allow for linguistic control such as is provided by a citation or by a cluster of similar vocabulary? Clearly if one is to do Biblical Theology within the context of the whole canon, there is a necessity for broadening the subject matter beyond the confines of material which is suitable to such linguistic tools. Once the area has been outlined in which a Biblical approach to a subject moves, and once the inner motion along its characteristic axes has been traced, then it is necessary to enlarge the context by means of conceptual analogies and affinities of subject matter. However, right at this point great care is needed lest the precision of the earlier steps in remaining close to the text be sacrificed in the broadening process.

There are some negative controls that aid in moving correctly from the area of linguistic parallels to similarity of subject matter. First, the similarity of subject matter must be one that is integrally related to both the inner and the outer movement of the original Biblical passage. This test is not to serve as a rigid structure into which all subsequent material is forced; rather, its function is to assure a genuine relationship instead of an incidental parallel. To illustrate the point: The loose woman in Prov., ch. 7, speaks of having just performed her cultic duties. One might wish to see a relation between this text and Isaiah’s condemnation of sacrifice and immorality (Isa. 1:13ff.). But the fact that the relation of sacrifice to immorality is not integral to Prov., ch. 7, but tangential to its purpose, would speak against developing this connection.

Secondly, the similarity in subject matter must be one that shares more than one point in common. There must be at least two points of contact in order to establish its relation to the movement of the original passage. Often a Biblical word, image, or concept is used in a variety of ways to address distinct issues. If the Biblical theologian follows every movement that an image allows within the whole Bible, the sharp lines of the distinct Biblical movements are lost. For example, Prov., ch. 7, portrays a harlot tempting an Israelite to sin. Now the imagery of the harlot is used elsewhere to depict Israel’s disobedience to God, particularly in the prophets (Hos. 2:1ff.; Jer. 3:1ff.; Ezek. 16:1ff.). However, the similarity lies chiefly in the word "harlot." The prophetic use of the term belongs to another Biblical theme and is not to be related to the use in Prov., ch. 7.

Thirdly, there must be a functional as well as conceptual similarity to establish a genuine parallel between passages. Even though two passages might reveal similarity of content at several points, a radically different function in nonrelated contexts would afford a major obstacle in establishing an integral relationship. For example, I Tim., ch. 5, in the context of outlining family responsibility of children for parents, warns of the danger of young widows gadding about the city. There is a certain parallel here to the description in Prov., ch. 7, of the loose woman prowling about the city while her husband is on a trip. But clearly the New Testament setting in which the warning is given is so different that one would be ill-advised to draw any lesson that could bridge the diverse contexts of the passages.

Keeping these strictures in mind, we now attempt to broaden the context in which one reads Prov., ch. 7, to include material that is only conceptually related. The story of Potiphar’s wife in Gen., ch. 39, affords an immediate parallel of subject matter but without a close linguistic connection. An unfaithful wife attempts to entice the young Hebrew into committing adultery. The setting is not far removed from that of Prov., ch. 7. The woman is portrayed as aggressive and deceitful while Joseph, up to this point in the narrative, is described as a naïve, sheltered-youth who has carried his father’s special favor. The nature of the temptation is carefully portrayed in the story. Potiphar is completely detached from the affairs of his household. Indeed, he may well have been a eunuch.8 Joseph has charge of the entire household. There is no chance of discovery (Gen. 39:11), and the temptation is constantly repeated.
However, the Genesis story adds several new elements to the pattern that goes much beyond Prov., ch. 7. First, the focus in the story now falls on Joseph’s response. Not only does he refuse to be tempted, but voices his reasons in a theological confession. He expresses his loyalty to his master, Potiphar, who has entrusted him with his possessions. Next he reminds the woman of her position: she is his wife and as such has a position unique in the household. Lastly, and above all, Joseph refuses to yield because of his commitment to God in whose sight adultery is a great wickedness. His reference is not to Yahweh, God of the covenant, nor does he draw a warrant from a divine commandment of the law. Rather, his appeal to God is fully congruent with the wisdom schools in Proverbs that relate God to the moral order as the world’s creator. Nevertheless, the confession of personal commitment by Joseph to God reflects the influence of covenant theology and points to a close union in Israel between the two originally diverse theological approaches. The additional motif of the story that Joseph was willing to suffer an unjust punishment adds the note of the suffering righteous servant of God which lay close to the heart of Israel’s piety. While von Rad 9 is probably correct in seeing the strong influence of wisdom on the Joseph stories, it must also be said that it is a form of wisdom that has been joined to the center of Israel’s faith in Yahweh.

There is another closely allied point that should also be made. The wisdom teacher and the lawgiver brought a different set of sanctions to bear in condemning sexual vagrancies. The Decalogue forbade adultery in an apodictic prohibitive that arose from the covenant demands laid upon Israel as the people of God. Leviticus, ch. 18, grounded its prohibitions of sexual abuse in the community on God’s attribute of holiness which was contained in the formula of self-introduction: "I am Yahweh your God." However, in spite of the differing vantage points in approaching the subject, the end result in terms of ethical response issued in a unified imperative. The whole Bible remains unswervingly consistent in condemning adultery as a threat to the individual and corporate life of Israel. The story of David and Bathsheba with its detailed commentary by Nathan (II Sam., chs. 11 and 12) makes it absolutely clear that even kings are not exempt from God’s order.

The New Testament Context
When one turns to the New Testament, there is no direct use made, either of the text of Prov., ch. 7, or of its peculiar idiom. Nevertheless, there are several passages in which similar subject matter is treated in a way that reveals that the writer moves along the familiar lines of the Old Testament. Indeed, the case can be made that the New Testament makes such little explicit reference to the subject because the Old Testament’s understanding of the role of sex has been simply assumed as normative. In I Thess. 4:1ff. Paul instructs the congregation in the "will of God." A Christian has been called to a life of holiness that abstains from immorality. Each man is to have his own wife and live in holiness, not according to the "passions of lust like heathen.," The apostle concludes by alluding to the judgment of God against immorality by means of a catchword from Ps. 94:1.

Paul reflects his inherited Jewish revulsion against the sexual abuses that he identifies with the heathen. When instructing Gentile converts in the manner of the Christian life, Paul does not need to develop a new Christian approach to sex and marriage. Rather, he assumes the Old Testament teaching to be normative. The will of God has already been made clear in demanding a life of holiness commensurate with God’s holiness. Nevertheless, the context in which Paul spoke has effected several changes in the tradition that he inherited. He characterizes the relationship to one’s wife as demanding "holiness and honor" in contrast to the heathen whose relationship he describes as dominated by "passions of lust." One notices increasingly the tendency of certain New Testament writers to identify sin with concupiscence (I Tim. 6:9; II Peter 1:4, etc.; cf. Heb. 11;25). In the Old Testament the contrast was between proper and misused sex. The New Testament does not contest this distinction, but the passage in I Thess. does shift the emphasis by sharply denigrating misused sex as lust in contrast to the proper relationship that appears in a form completely devoid of erotic overtones. The wife is to be treated with "holiness and honor," whereas the term "love" (agape) is reserved for the Christian community (I Thess. 4:9f.). Of course, the New Testament does contain explicit imperatives instructing husbands to love their wives (Eph. S:S; Col. 3:19), but still this does not offset the general tendency of the New Testament to assign sexual passion to the category of heathen immorality, or at least to regard it as a danger to be extinguished (I Cor. 7:9).

In the Pauline discussion of the problems of marriage in I Cor., ch. 7, the general tone of Paul’s advice is roughly akin to the stance of Proverbs in emphasizing marriage as an antidote to the misuse of sex. Nevertheless, the negative side has been pushed considerably beyond anything in the Old Testament. The seeds of asceticism are certainly present with abstinence seen as a higher way of life. Once Paul’s remarks were cut loose from their Old Testament setting in the process of Christianizing the Greco-Roman empire, a new stance to sex and marriage emerged that was completely alien to the Old Testament.

The Pauline discussion of the role of sex and marriage is a good illustration of the need of the theologian to understand the New Testament in the light of the Old. Two obvious, but faulty, hermeneutical moves are thereby avoided. Either one seeks to absolutize the Pauline teaching for Christian ethics in every age or one dismisses the Pauline teaching as a distorted and time-conditioned human judgment. By insisting on its place within the normative tradition, and yet subjecting it to the criticism and balance of the other witnesses, another theological alternative is opened up for the serious handling of Scripture in the life of the church.

Kidha's Resume!

2005-12-12T21:27:00.000-08:00

Name: Kidha Dan Kidha
Date of birth: 07th October 1980
Nationality: Kenyan
Contact: P.O. Box 6158, Kondele
Kisumu, Kenya.
Tel: +256-75-335196, +254-720-558231
Gender: Male

Objective: Seeking to utilise my work experience and education to build a career in Christian outreach ministries, and utilise the skills within the same.

Education
2001-2005; Scott Theological College:
Bachelor of Theology Degree (B.Th.)
Major(s) - Christian Education
Supporting course - Counseling

1999; Masogo Secondary School:
Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE)

1995-1997; Onjiko Boys High School

1987-1994; Muhoroni Success Primary School
Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE)

Other Qualifications
Computer Literacy

Experience
1. September 2004- July 2005; Africa Inland Church - Jericho
Position: Youth Pastor - Internee
Reporting Structure: to the Senior Pastor
Primary Responsibilities:
Planning and facilitating Youth Service
Organizing Youth groups
Discipling and mentoring Youth leaders
Liaising with Church departments, peer organisations, and other partners in the ministry.
Organizing and Teaching seminars

2. May - August 2004; Baptist Student’s Centre, Uganda
Position: Internee
Reporting Structure: to the Centre Director
Primary responsibilities,
Development of programmes, events, and strategic work plans.
Facilitating Students’ recreational activities.
Preparing and Leading Bible Studies.

3. September 2003- April 2004; Machakos G.K Prisons
Position: Chaplain (Student Internee)
Reporting Structure: to the Prisons Chaplain
Primary Responsibilities,
Teaching and Preaching to the prisoners
Counseling the prisoners
Planning and implementing Worship services with the prisoners.

4. September 2002- July 2003; Shalom Hospital
Position: Chaplain (Student Intenee)
Reporting Structure: to the Matron
Primary Responsibilities,
Teaching and Preaching to the patients
Counseling the patients and their family member
Planning and implementing Worship services with the patients and hospital staff
Doing discipleship and Bible study with the hospital staff

5. November - December 2000; National Examination Council
Position: clerk
Reporting Structure: to the Center Officer
Primary Responsibilities,
Issuing marking equipments to examiners
Receiving and recording marked papers
Filing and putting all document in order
Returning equipments to KNEC offices

Competences
Excellent writing and communication skills
Analytical, mentorship, facilitation, and lateral thinking abilities
Ability to work effectively and efficiently with students to uplift their academic performance
Competence in Curriculum Developmant and Implementation
Proficient in MS Office, and Interne
Fluent in English and Swahili (spoken and written)
Ability to consult and network with individuals and organisations
Skills in community mobilisation efforts, and teaching

Profile
Skills in proposal/project writing and management
Skills in policy development and research
Skills in tertiary teaching

Interest
Reading, writing, traveling, Playing hockey, drama and adventure

Referees
1. Mr. Arthur Raten’g
Director, Technical Education
P.O. Box 60209, Nairobi
Phone (+254) 733 803 332

2. Mrs. Mary Mumo Kisau
Lecturer, Nairobi International Scool of Theology
P.O Box Nairobi, Kenya
Phone (+254) 733 966 327

3. Mrs. Joyce Muasa
Academic Registrar, Scott theological College
P.O. Box 49, Machakos, Kenya
Phone: (+254) 733 930 841

I certify that the information affirmed in this resume is true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I authorise your organisation/institution to verify, if necessary all the information stated herein.
Signed___________________, Date____________________,

It Was a Contemplated Suicide!!!

2005-12-12T21:24:00.000-08:00

When disolving the cabinet, The president said he was re-organizing his "...Government to make it more cohesive and better able to serve the people of Kenya." On December 8th, 2005 the re-organized cabinet was put into place, and cohesive it was: ready and better able to serve the people of Kenya. An who might they be? Mwenje, Kalembe Ndile, Kiraitu et al. What a pity! So a re-organized cabinet in Kibaki's language is the old faces minus the ODM-7and an inclusion of other public noise-makers like Koigi and Kalembe. For heavens sake, No other was found than Kalembe? The prophet said:you will be ever hearing but never understanding you will be ever seing but never perceiving (Isaiah 6:9).Unfortunately, the same might be true of Mr. Mwai. After what the referendum yielded, he still cannot figure out what the people's wants are. In his very own eyes he saw the unpopular banana project go down like a sack of matoke. This came to be despite the fact that the banana community had the state machineries at their disposal, and of which they used to the maximum. If after all this, the president can't still see the fallacy that lies in his brigade's loyalty then he is blind. However, it is my humble opinion that the president knows better than anyone else that the people's power has caught up with him and that he is soon going down. I beg to be corrected, especilly, by what history will prove of my five pence worth opinion. I am strongly convicted that Kibaki knows of his imminent fall, and like Satan of the old, he is not planning to go down alone. He surely must bring down with him the buggage that misled him into his political oblivion. Just like Satan and a third of the angels went down, and so is Kibaki and the likes of his loud-mouthed Kiraitu and Mungatana who despite being professional lawyers cannot be distinguished from Kalembe (whose academic credentials are the most dubious in the cabinet).How and why on earth would you equate kalembe with economic recovery and still boast about it as the best choice.I still argue that Kibaki's intent is to go down with betrayers... but before that he has to feed them well. That is why the Koigis had to be elevated. What disturbs me in this equation then is: Why did he leave out Murungaru? Isn't he worthy of eating too? and hasn't he fought hardest to ensure Kibaki's confusion sees the light of the day? My take is Yes, he has done his best. In fact, having outdone the rest (albeit anglo-fleasing) he has taken enough for the rest of his life. Let therefore the Koigi's not die (politically) for nothing. Give space for them to get their pensions! After all, have they been labouring for nothing? No!One more thing about Murungaru: His continued being in the cabinet would block the very source of their pension. Remember he is an outlaw (actually a 'fugitive') in the UK and US. That being so, his presence would be the reason for these DONORS not sending more money for another Afro-fleasing this time round... or oriental-fleasing... whatever! In fact Murungaru is not a casualty, he is the first beneficiary of this political megalodrama. He has much more time to enjoy his stolen goodies than the rest. Acually, he took most and needs more time to consume the stuff, otherwise "illegitimate" children will inherit his property.. thats the fear!I am inclined to think like i have because it is the only thing that makes sense to me. For what reason would a man attempt suicide? I know of two:1. When a man has given up and life has lost meaning to him.2. When a man believes that he is championing a course. eg the suicide bombing.In our scenario the latter is out of question. The only person with an apparent religious inclination is surprisingly Koigi of the Mungiki fame, a former seminarian. But he also seems to have lost faith, at least he is no longer seen sniffing snuff in public with the same religious assurance and fanatism that he used to before. He probbly must have seen the light. Yes, none of the people in this team or even in ODM have a course to champion to the extent that they would readily lay down their lives. That much i know. I know the heart of man ... too deceitful and egoistic and often asks the question 'whats in it for me' or 'what do i gain in this' before they attempt any manouver.Thus the other option is most perfectly plausible. Kibaki has given up hope on his future political career. Not after making a series of mistakes, with a confirmation of one after another. He has lost the mandate. Indeed after seeing the post-referendum crowd at Uhuru park, like Old Moi, he knew his fate has been sealed. Thus the rest of his days in state house are just but a mere formality, and he knows it.I would be surprised if he declared his candidature for the 2007 general election. That would be stretching the joke too far. Being one who is not known for jokes (even the pumbavu thing has never been one), he would be confirming that he is a bufoon - i don't think even if Amin resurrected today he would contemplate it at all. The sign is too clear! It would be an exercise in futility.This suicide of a confused cabinet was bound to come, and to me it is God sent. Why? It is the beginning of the end. How, when their is going to be increased evil? So be it so that God's wrath would fall on the unfaithfull. It is then that the faithfull remnants will call on God to give them a new Kenya that is free of cronism, corruption, fleacing, bananaism, kilifieeing etc. Till then I remain praying.So then what is in it for Kenyans? First, the bitter option, i.e. the Orange alternative, must gear up to take the challenge to guide Kenyans through the democratic path and economic revolution - nothing like an economic recovery. It has never been there... My grandather has been a poor man since the times of Fredrick Lugard and his cronies, and still is, today. Infact, he passed away peacefully in his poverty on 29th last Month poorer than i first saw him. And here i am too, too poor even to attend his funeral at Ombeyi, Nyando from Kampala.That is why i pray for The ODM brigade. Though i fear the unknown, i am looking upto them with pure optimism that God has finally sent them to salvage the remaining Kenya. My joy therefore is that Kibaki did not include the ODM group into the suicidal cabinet. They now have all the time they need to consolidate and put up an interim government that will ultimately usher us into 2008. During this time, they must not squable or wander seeking for self-glory and big titles (those they left for the NAKists in NARC), instead, they should spend this time finding out the real needs of the mwananchi and seeking ways of solving the problems. They should come out with a sure altruistic constitution that serves other Kenyans first before them. For this the need to take time... and they have it! Kenya must be their agenda and the dictatorship must be returned to the people not the cabinet! Isn't that what democracy is?For political reasons, i would allow them to, once in a while, disorganise the NARC agendas in parliament if need be. But this should be done with caution and discipline. But they should know that their sole prerogative and mandate is to seek the good of the people. We need a devolved govenment, an executive office that has its powers checked and not prone to abuse.I don't mind if Kenya formed tha first ideal government in the world. We can. It doesn't matter whether other countries haven't, we can be an example. We need jobs and an elaborate education system. We want rights that can be respected and validly implemented... and not just documented theories. Right to speech must mean just that and freedom for association, likewise. arbitrary arrests, murder and torture of kenyans for political reasons must go! Political conmanship must go too. I know that Kibaki is not ready for these challenges.He neither has the will nor tha capacity to undertake these very urgent ly needed reforms. All he knows is that the economic environment must be favourable for his Muthaiga club pals, and so may it be. Its very temporal.One day the sun will shine. As Sarafina said, 'our time will come', it shall surely come.The Question is: ODM, will you take the Challenge? Are you leading us towards a rebirth or our ultimate death? As a Biblical believer, by faith i know that change is bound to come and it will be terrible when the wind blows away the chuff. But even God in his love and compassion does not tolerate sin and never hesitates to punish it. Time is coming when virtue (truth) will triumph over evil. Are you ready? Fellow Kenyans, May God bless you all who seek to do His will in our lives.

Besyige: Saro-Wiwa the Second?

2005-12-12T21:20:00.000-08:00

On November 10th, 1995, Ken Saro Wiwa was executed by the Military regime of Sani Abacha. When Saro - Wiwa wrote "Africa Kills her Sun" he knew with certainty that his death was inevitable. What i don't know for sure is whether Dr. Kizza Besyige really knew the catastrophie that awaited him when he left his humble aboard in South Africa for Kampala. But one thing is certain: the trial of Dr. Kizza Besyige reminds me of the trial and execution of Kenule Beeson Tsaro-Wiwa.Saro Wiwa a Nigerian, author, television producer and environmental activist was a member of the Ogoni, an ethnic minority whose homelands in the Niger Delta have been targeted for oil extraction since the 1950s. He was president of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), an office which he used to lead a nonviolent campaign against environmental damage associated with the operations of multinational oil companies.Just like Saro-Wiwa served in the Rivers State Cabinet, but was dismissed in 1973 because of his support for Ogoni autonomy. So was Dr. Besyige who served as a cabinet minister in the Ugandan government before he retired from the military and the cabinet. In 2001 he sought presidency and lost to General Museveni albeit massive rigging, so it is said. He sought political assylum in South Africa in the same year after unsuccessfully lodging a post-election suit against Museveni's incubency citing election irregularities and manipulation. In January 1993, MOSOP, under Saro-Wiwa organised peaceful marches of around 300,000 Ogoni people - more than half of the Ogoni population - through four Ogoni centres, drawing international attention to his people's plight.Saro-Wiwa was arrested and detained by Nigerian authorities in June 1993, but was released after a month. In May 1994, he was arrested and accused of incitement to murder following the deaths of four Ogoni elders, believed to be sympathetic to the military. Saro-Wiwa denied the charges, but was imprisoned for over a year before being found guilty and sentenced to death by a specially convened tribunal. The trial was widely criticised by human rights organisations.Ten years later this history is repeating itself in Uganda when Dr. Kizza returns from what the government calls a self-imposed exile. He enters Kampala via Entebbe amidst pomp and glare and proceeds with a meet-the-people tour around the country. This throws the otherwise underrating government into confusion.He is arrested and with charges of treason, consealment of treason and rape, all of which he has categorically denied. Interestingly, like Saro-Wiwa, Dr. Besyige is being tried by a dubious court which his ardent supporters have labelled a 'kangaroo Court'.A petition has been filed challenging the legality of the court. As to whether they will overcome the state forces and machineries is a question not worthy of any conjecture especially in a country where the government has never lost any battle. This is further complicated by the governments vested interest in the case, with the president himself penning down his three pence worth conviction of Besyige's guilty status.If found guilty he faces a death sentence. Surely, isn't this another case of trial and execution for political convenience? Saro-Wiwa must have seen beyond his time when he wrote 'Africa kills her Sun'. He actually meant that Africa kills her son, her men, her people, those with the potential to shine and succeed and attain real happiness.Significantly enough, Saro-Wiwa like Saul-turned-St Paul uses his context (prison) to enlighten the people of their predicament. He writes: "It’s the guard and you the living who are in prison, the ultimate prison from which you cannot escape because you do not know that you are incarcerated. Your happiness is the happiness of ignorance and your ignorance is it that keeps you in the prison, which is your life."In other words, to Paul and Saro-Wiwa, their imprisonment and imminent death is not a big deal. They are in fact sympathetic to those remaining on earth - those used by the devil (read Paul) or the evil governmental forces (read Saro-Wiwa). Significantly, Kizza could say/write the same to the Mamba aka urban hit squad establishment. Whilst he might soon be freed of the earthly miseries, he will be leaving behind in the prison of ignorance being used and dumped like an hotel towel or plate.Saro-Wiwa gives us a character that is very complex. Intelligent. Immoral. Lucid. Deluded. Experienced. Naïve. Bana is aware of history, of his culture, of society. His defense is both well grounded and contrived.In our unfolding drama live at Luzira, we find another complex character in Besyige. First he chooses not to beg for amnesty from the government, claiming that he was never guilty. Yet on the other hand, he justifies the possibility of using force to drive out an illegal government. Though he denies any link with the alleged rebel group, he refuses to denounce their activities and subsequently denies their existence. Paradoxically, he does not rule out their means of fighting for freedom saying that the current government is illegal and force is a viable means of sending them away.Bana, our Besyige character in Saro-Wiwa's story admits that he robbed and that it was a choice and that he does not regret it. Do we believe him? He probably does not regret it, but who knows? So, is it significant that he made a choice that he supposedly freed himself from the daily prison his fellow Africans live in? That he was not forced to commit these crimes.Besyige on the other hand denies the charges of treason but says he anticipated the arrest. So why did he come into the hands of the government that was more than willing to incancerate him yet he knew it? Does he regret it? He says no! but who knows? He may or may not.However, what strikes me in Saro-Wiwa's short story is the reality that meets the common citizen on the streets. The citizens who say yes when they mean no. the citizens who will be intimidated by the mamba and give in without any resistance. The citizen who thinks he is walking freely on the streets while indeed he is economically impoverished. The one who must pay tax to watch the President address him on his TV set. The citizen who cannot express his otherwise differing opinions from the establishment's because he fears that he might lose his freedom. It is this Free African citizen that is a slave: the one who is captive to the stale government's opinions.Yes, Bana aka Saro-Wiwa is dead but he is not a slave. Even while in prison he was not a slave. the slave were the misused guards et al. And in my humble opinion, i think Kizza is not the Ugandan slave. The slave is me and you. If they find him guilty and execute him he will have his rest, but you and i will remain living in fear. Fear of most of everything and alot of nothing. Fear of death. As if we were promised life for ever on earth. Who will not die? or which one is enviable: a dead Hero or a living coward? Choose what you want to be but be rest asured that you will die one day.Whether by the barrel of a gun or malaria, or old age or execution or HIV-Aids. The bottom line is that you will die. .. And guess what, a dead King and dead peasant are the same. They only differ in their eternal destiny based on the values they held and championed while on earth. If you think am lying, ask Obote or Amin or Mobutu or Arafat. But it will be too late to change your values because you can only ask when you get there. till then enjoy your freedom in slavery...

Mr President, Just ask for Pardon and Start a fresh

2005-12-12T21:18:00.000-08:00

By Barrack MulukaYou have seen the list from the Big House on the hill. Joseph the dreamer of dreams did not make it to the list, after all.The Mzee who sits in the Big House on the hill and dispenses goody goodies is not Nebuchadnezzar the Great of Babylon.For Nebuchadnezzar was a man who loved to see his Courts overflowing with dreamers like Joseph of Egypt. He liked to have around him other dreamy types like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshack and Abednego, so we read.On account of the importance of the application made to the Big House two weeks ago, you will indulge me – just this once – to employ this space to address the little matter of my dashed State House hopes.I want to say to the old man in State House, ‘Mzee, You have no doubt read in the Good Book where it is written: "Then the king ordered Ashpenaz, the chief of his Court officials, to bring young men from among the Israelites, without any physical defect, fair, showing aptitude for every kind of learning, well informed, quick to understand and qualified to serve in the king’s palace. He was to teach them the language and literature of the Babylonians." (Dan 1: 3 – 4). Mzee, me I was willing to learn the language and literature of the Babylonians, as may be spoken in your royal Courts. In point of fact, I flatter myself with the belief that I know quite a bit. I was privileged early in life to interact with Jomo’s Facing Mount Kenya.I dip into this gem from time to time. Besides, I learnt all about the amoeba, the paramecium and the spirogyra in the language of Babylon, as a stripling in Ofafa Jericho Primary School and in Langata High, in the 1970s. Still, I understand perfectly well why you left me out. No hard feelings, Mzee. I accept.What’s more, Mzee, I know that royalty rarely mingles with vegetable-eating and water-drinking youths of the Daniel type.The old man of Babylon was also like that. Additionally, he loved fashioning things out of gold and assorted precious stuff and asking people to prostrate themselves before them. Mzee, some people are saying around here that like the good old man of Babylon, you have recently created a statue of sorts.That like Mzee Nebuchadnezzar once long ago, directed all and sundry to prostrate themselves before his golden images in the plain of Dura, you have had your own ka-statue.They say you are upset because Kenyans rejected the ka-statue. This latter day statue, they are calling "the Wako Draft".Now, all those Wapumbavu who refused to bow before the Wako Gold have had to face the fiery furnace, just like a dreamer boy called Daniel did once long ago, in Babylon. To be quite truthful, I am a little saddened that I will not – after all – be interpreting the big dreams in your State House.I will not interpret to Your Excellency strange writings on strange walls – so much the worse for everybody. When your Excellency should see a vision – such as you are now seeing – of a strange human hand writing strange words on the wall: "Mene, Tekel, Peres," I will not tell you what the words mean. I will not say to you, "Mzee, I wish that these words applied to your enemies and their meaning to your adversaries!"I will not say to you, Sir, "This is what the words mean: Mene – God has numbered the days of your reign and is about to bring them to an end." Nor would I say, "Tekel – You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting." Nor even, Peres – Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians (Dan 5: 26 – 28), whosoever you may perceive the Medes and Persians to be." I will not say these things to you, Sir, because of what some people have been saying.They have been saying to me, " That place is not for people like you, poor village buffalo. It is for people who can lie to the king, about how beautiful his dress is, even when they know that the king is swaggering about the palace and in the streets in the nude – all his external anatomy evidenced for all and sundry to study as they will."Mzee, these people are talking about the hubris.I am hearing that the Big House has been overtaken by the Greek hubris. They say that State House holds the Kenyan voter in utter contempt; that this is why you work with people without a popular constituency, while spurning the ambassadors of the truth. Mzee, these people are rude! Imagine they say that you break all rules to ensure that you are surrounded by sycophants, assorted praise singers and chest thumpers. Sir, me, I don’t know whether these things are true or not.But Mzee, would you consider dressing yourself up in humility and talking to those whom your advisors don’t like? I have heard that you can still salvage your reign if you should embrace contrite respect for the Kenyan voter. Our people say that when the gods want to mess up with you, they first give you the appetite and hubris of a tortoise with borrowed feathers and wings.For your defence, they plant around you horns with human faces and mouths that talk boastfully. When you are in the grip of the hubris, you can actually read your political death warrant from the Big House, all the time imagining that you are announcing your new Cabinet. These people are saying that this is what you did on Wednesday. That you have read the writing on the wall, "Mene, Tekel, Peres" and that you are putting your bags together, in readiness to go back home in Othaya and to Muthaiga, to eat yams and drink milk with your grandchildren?Is it true, Sir, that you were actually reading to Kenyans your letter of notice while only pretending to be naming the Cabinet? That those you named are supposed to retire with you in 2007 and stay away from power tene na tene – maybe till 2425?Mzee, beware the hubris.Sir, me I think this mess is unnecessary. Why don’t you just ask the good people of Kenya for forgiveness and start afresh?You know, stop messing around with Kanu and Ford People; talk to the legitimate representatives of the people and that kind of stuff? Thank you, Sir. See you next week. Na uji enjoy . . . Eh?’The writer is a publisher based in NairobiSource: http://www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news.php?articleid=33431

East African Revolution: Not a Coincidence

2005-12-12T21:15:00.000-08:00

That the son of Kaguta is pursuing another term is not new. The signs were clear and Dr. Kizza saw it before most of us. Addressing students at Makerere last Month, One of the FDC strongmen Jack Sabit narrated how Dr. Kizza talked them into seeing M7's lie of leaving presidency come 2006. It was humbling for such an elderly man to admit failure and call upon the young generation to right the wrongs of his generation.This old story always starts in the same way, "give me five more terms and i'll assure you of a huge economic growth" Stalin used the same language several times. Hitler, branded his distractors as propagandists out to thwart a good course. Yes, they often seem to be charting a course, whose end, apparently, is never met.Back in Uganda, it was 2001, then 2006 now 2013. Who knows, next time it will be, forever? Even forgetting the reality of human mortality.The animals' farm captivates the scenario quite splendidly. A constitution was put in place, then followed a series of documental mutilations in the name of constitutional ammendments. The epitome of which was the kisanja advocacy. Who is interested in being lied to year in year out, please! Why underestimate the human intelligence in this land?When asked, the good old shepherd says, the people have asked. What a confused people! A real coincidence that the same people saying yes are the same ones saying No! So was it found that only one person is the wisest and most apt to lead the Ugandan democracy. Don't bore us with that fallen communist doctrine, its outdated.This micro-kisanja project was bound to fail. it will! the masses showed it on the streets. When time for change comes, nothing can be done apart from letting it see the light of the day.Another growing dictator is Kibaki!. His case is quite laughable since his very own have finally got the audacity to tell him NO! As i write, he is currently swearing in a fraying cabinet, 1/3 of whom have declined their appointments. Just like Kibaki was warned of a political Tsunami so was the son of Kaguta. Tht ODM was bound to take charge was clear written on the tablets. ... and so is FDC, who is in all ways comparable to ODM with the only lacking ingredient as intra-party cooperation. Otherwise they have a strong leadership body, men and women full of charisma and whose mandate cuts accross their national boundaries.This is What we have been waiting for in East Africa: a people with a common course. If only the revolutionaries tried harder with least violence then shall we see new political liberation. If the East African regional intergration thing is to work, then the dictators must go. As for now, who wants to beunder the rulership of a power hungry megalomaniac. another war lord and dictator?Mkapa has shown by example yet he is the oyungest of the three. If Mkapa can honourably retire without much fuss or ado, why not M& and Obako?Only a new crop of leadership can salvage the region.this is just but a tip of the ice berg, the storm is yet to come! Brace yourselves for there is nothing as sure as the peoples' uprising. The peoples' voices without guns and bullets will heal the region. the power of the ballot shall be manifested.For our heroes, the Odingas, The kizza's, Musumba, Kamya, Balala, Kikwete, Kalonzo, Uhuru, Muntu, Ruto et al. Do not sleep. it is still early. bado mapambano. Let the East African uprising come out simultaneaously and the World shall hear our voice. It is time to push harder than ever! God bless Kenya, God bless Uganda, God bless Tanzania!

The Animals' Farm: The Kenyan Equivalent

2005-12-12T21:12:00.000-08:00

A comparison of the Soviet Union has been given. I am still working on the Kenyan equivalent. Meanwhile check out what they say of the former soviet Union. http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/go-animal_farm.html#AF-Char-Humans Truly some of these characters and events are true of Kenya; Both the old and the new.

Downplaying call for dialogue unwise

2005-12-12T21:07:00.000-08:00

Story by Anyang’ Nyong’o Publication Date: 12/08/2005The call by members of the Orange Democratic Movement for dialogue is deliberately being distorted and downplayed by a self-seeking group around the President.We in the ODM have proposed that a dialogue among the parliamentary political parties is the only viable option for charting the way forward out of the present political impasse. Any short-cut based on personality politics will simply erect a political edifice as weak as the famous house of cards.The propagandists during Hitler’s time knew very well how to do it when it came to blaming the victim and exalting themselves. They would say how petty the complaints of their victims were and how the good they were trying to do to the whole human race was not being appreciated. In the end, many people kept quiet and swallowed the excuses. The spin had worked.It is strange, and perhaps even arrogant, for anybody to argue that the ODM is an "amorphous body" not worth discussing with. It is amorphous, they argue, because it is not registered. Something is going wrongI wonder whether groups that have been entering State House of late show their registration certificates at the gate before they appear before the President. The Electoral Commission of Kenya has done business with the ODM, and the body made the announcement that the ODM did carry the day at the referendum. So far the ECK has not asked us for our registration certificate in order to validate the results. But let us come down to earth where the citizens live. These people vote in elections. They have their leaders, and they listen to these leaders. These leaders, in turn, listen to the people. When the leaders fail to listen to those who elect them, something always goes wrong. I do believe that something is going wrong as I write this piece. The President’s advisors seem to be telling him that the powers he has in the current Constitution are all that matter in making a Cabinet. Secondly, that he should not discuss anything with the ODM because this is an amorphous group.These two fallacies have led these advisors to fail to understand the significance of Mr Raila Odinga's article that called for dialogue with the President in order to chart the way forward. He cautioned the President not to make the mistake of not consulting with political parties as he did when he trashed the MoU. This, I think, is not arrogance. These are issues that must be put in the public domain if we are to work together for the prosperity of our nation within democratic politics.It took the Germans three months to come up with a new government after their recent elections. Ms Angela Merkel and Mr Schroeder had to discuss with all the German political parties’ leaderships to come out with a proper grand coalition. These discussions were not just on personalities to be included in government but on issues, programmes and agenda. What the ODM is calling for is nothing different. Kenyans have come a long way since the collapse of the Forum for the Restoration of Democracy (Ford) in the early nineties. Those of us who were involved in this nationalist coalition know what we now need to do. Kenya has travelled far on the democratic road since the formation of Narc and the trashing of the MoU. It would be foolhardy to make the same mistakes again. Kenya will travel even further towards the third liberation if we wake up to reality and know that the ODM is now part of our political process and cannot simply be wished away.There is another mistake that the presidential advisors are making. They are too preoccupied with winning the presidency in 2007 rather than ensuring that President Kibaki leaves behind an honourable legacy. Vice-President Awori once said that Narc had taken Kenya very far away from the politics of tribalism in 2002. It would have been one of President Kibaki’s achievements to leave a solid legacy of issue-based politics. As things stand now, this legacy is very elusive.Vanquishing the ODMIn his inaugural address at Uhuru Park, the President promised Kenyans a new Constitution and zero-tolerance for corruption. These are two other legacies the President must strive to leave for Kenyans. The preoccupation of his advisors on "fighting Raila" and "vanquishing the ODM" are a recipe for disaster. These two "preoccupations" cloud their sense of judgment and send the President along a path with a dubious destination. Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o is the MP for Kisumu Rural and the immediate former minister for Planning and National DevelopmentSource: http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=62946