the quest for christian unity and the ecumenical movement(1)

128
INTRODUCTION. This essay attempts to assist a Christian appreciate the relative position of Christianity to other contemporary religions. The assumption is that the reader is a born again Christian conversant with basic Christian teachings and that he or she is at least of senior secondary school level of education. It is also assumed that the reader has studied either Religious education or Moral education before; both of which have become compulsory subjects at junior secondary school level in most southern African countries. These subjects are taught with a multi-cultural and religious pluralistic bias based on a post-modern perspective. This necessitates a Christian to be articulate and confident about his or her world view. In our discussion, the Biblical religion will mean the religion revealed in the Christian bible as depicted in the Old and New Testament writings of the Judeo- Christian religion. The author believes that Judaism as a religion is not an end in itself but a developmental phase of the biblical religion that was meant to fruition into true Christianity. The name Biblical religion is meant to refer to authentic Christianity which in a broader sense includes Judaism of the pre- Christian era. Salvation will mean the Christian concept of being saved from the wrath (penalty) of God to a sinner, the power of sin in life and ultimately the environment of sin. Religion in this work will mean

Upload: victor-lukato

Post on 10-Feb-2017

89 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

INTRODUCTION.

This essay attempts to assist a Christian appreciate the relative position of Christianity to other contemporary religions. The assumption is that the reader is a born again Christian conversant with basic Christian teachings and that he or she is at least of senior secondary school level of education. It is also assumed that the reader has studied either Religious education or Moral education before; both of which have become compulsory subjects at junior secondary school level in most southern African countries. These subjects are taught with a multi-cultural and religious pluralistic bias based on a post-modern perspective. This necessitates a Christian to be articulate and confident about his or her world view.

In our discussion, the Biblical religion will mean the religion revealed in the Christian bible as depicted in the Old and New Testament writings of the Judeo-Christian religion. The author believes that Judaism as a religion is not an end in itself but a developmental phase of the biblical religion that was meant to fruition into true Christianity. The name Biblical religion is meant to refer to authentic Christianity which in a broader sense includes Judaism of the pre-Christian era. Salvation will mean the Christian concept of being saved from the wrath (penalty) of God to a sinner, the power of sin in life and ultimately the environment of sin. Religion in this work will mean in its loose sense a system of beliefs centred on trying to find meaning in life usually coupled with a belief in a Supreme Being or Spirit as one of the fundamental beliefs.

We will briefly explore what Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Baha’i Faith and African traditional religions have to offer in terms of salvation in a Christian sense. These religions have been selected on the basis of their being common in the southern African region thus representative of non-biblical religions in the global sense. Finally we will try to establish a biblical view of non-biblical religions grounded on perspectives of both the Old and New Testaments.

Admittedly this is only the author’s humble attempt with its limitations. The author is not a theologian but a practising Christian with a teaching experience in Religious Education at both senior and junior secondary school levels. Striving

towards academic objectivity has been the goal throughout this exposition. It should also be acknowledged that the subject of discussion is very wide and that only what is perceived to be related to salvation was explored so as to narrow the scope and focus the motif of our discussion. The views expressed about non-biblical religions would not be equivalent to what an insider of the particular religions would possibly give. This is, however, the author’s humble contribution to the debate which hopefully would whet the reader’s appetite to research more and come to an own bible informed decision on contemporary Christian issues.

HINDUISM

Hinduism is in essence a way of life. The name Hinduism is of European invention. Historians say it has been in existence for over 3,500 years. Unlike in most common religions, in Hinduism the existence of a supreme being is not a core religious issue. Generally Hindus believe in a triune God-Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. These Gods are the creator, the preserver and destroyer respectively. The religion has millions of gods and goddesses. The myriad gods and goddesses are said to be representatives of powers and functions of the supreme Spirit or God.

Over millennia of Hinduism’s existence, many religions have developed out of it and flourished within its ancient mythologies more so that it is equally a culture entwined to a complex religious system –within the dynamism inherent in culture. Scholars trace the origins of these mythologies to the Mesopotamian Civilisation. This religion has no doctrines in the Christian sense but has doctrine-like writings in ancient documents such as the Vedas, Brahmans, Mahabharata, Upanishads and the Gita.

Hinduism revolves around the centre of a belief in the law of Karma. Karma says that each soul passes through many rebirths or re-incarnations as human, animal or even vegetable. The whole religion is a search for liberation from the Law of

karma. The entrapping of reincarnation is called Samsara. Samsara requires each personal soul to strive to be good so as to unite with the supreme reality, the Brahmas. The Brahmas is some kind of a supreme spirit or God. The union with the Brahmas frees the soul from the cycle of re-births (reincarnation).In this union the soul re-joins the supreme spirit from which it originally came. This final union with the supreme spirit makes one attain the state of moksha. Therefore moksha is a somewhat equivalent of the Christian concept of salvation.

The Hindu society is basically rigidly divided into religiously determined social classes called castes. In the orthodox sense, the castes are stations from which each soul launches its strivings to moksha. The stratifications of the society are in order of closeness to religious perfection. In Orthodox Hinduism, occupations and social roles are pre-determined by virtue of caste one is born into. The positive strivings so as to unite with the supreme spirit makes the next rebirth more bearable when the soul is reincarnated. In Hinduism the release from the problems of life depends on one’s strivings rather than divine assistance to a soul in need. In a way, a person has to work hard to save oneself or be a victim of the interminable cycle of rebirths whose quality of existence depends on how well one lived the previous life.

A Hindu sees the liberation of his soul to moksha by following one of the paths availed to him in his religion or culture. These paths are all based on one’s effort and disciplined determination. These paths are called yoga. Some of them are briefly listed below:

Bhakti Yoga-This path can be taken irrespective of class, sex, or age. It involves devotion allowing emotions and desires to flow freely to moksha.

Ina Na Yoga-This is a way of knowledge that involves introspection, self-control and denial by philosophical knowledge.

Raja Yoga-This path involves postures and methods of exercises and repetitions of formula. It consists of the eight paths to moksha.

Karma yoga-This path requires discipline of action depending on one’s caste and stage in life.

It should be appreciated that Hinduism like any other religion is practised somewhat differently in different families, communities and even regions. Adherents may even choose their own family gods as it is commonly the case but the main beliefs remain the same. There are orthodox and liberal Hindus as it is the case in many other religions. Some Hindus do not even believe in any super natural beings.

There are a lot of similarities in moral values between the Biblical religion and Hinduism. The Mahabharata, a holy book considered to be the longest poem in the world, mentions a Hindu saviour figure by the name of Krishna believed to be an incarnation of god (Vishnu).He is some kind of an equivalent of the credentials of the messiah of the Biblical religion.

It is possible to positively acknowledge other religions while remaining a faithful Hindu. Mahatma Gandhi, a liberal Hindu icon renowned for his peaceful civil disobedience in his fight against oppression, saw similarities between Jesus’ teachings and the Gita (Hindu sacred writings).He said the “sermon on the mount” went straight to his heart. He also enjoyed reading the Psalms, Ecclesiastes and some of the prophets of the Old Testament (Fischer, The life of Mahatma Gandhi).

BUDDHISM

Buddhism like many other religions in the East branched off from Hinduism. Similarities between the two are therefore obvious. The founder of Buddhism is Gautama the Buddha. The title Buddha means the “enlightened one.” Gautama’s history is inseparable from legend though definitely a historical figure. Historians peg the origin of Buddhism to a period between 563 BC and 483 BC. Interestingly the Chinese records go back to 1000 BC; suffice it to say it is an ancient religion.

The Buddha is said to have understood the chain of causation-answers to the dilemmas of life. He claims to have found a way out of Karma of Hinduism to a

state called Nirvana by enlightenment. The “way” is contained in what he termed the “four noble truths.” Buddhism branched off from Hinduism by rejecting the Karma and injustices inherent in the caste system. The Buddhist way out of the entrapping of life as we know it is through Gautama’s “eightfold path to nirvana.” The eightfold path is also based on mental and moral discipline thus somewhat similar to the Yoga of Orthodox Hinduism.

Nirvana is an indescribable state as no Buddhist can describe it comprehensively. Scholars say the etymology of the name implies “going out like a flame.” It is believed that in nirvana evil perishes. The state of nirvana unlike moksha of Hinduism is attainable in this life. A person who attains nirvana becomes “Arhat” and gets into the final stage when the body dies. Some scholars say the concept of nirvana “is close to the Christian sense of the concept of God or close to the concept of the kingdom of God or even heaven purged of all symbolism.”

The attainment of nirvana by a Buddhist is therefore some kind of salvation. However, it should be appreciated that Buddhism is practised differently in different countries and regions of the world but the main tenets are retained. Northern Buddhism teaches salvation by faith. This is sometimes called “the gospel of half Asia.” This gospel of half Asia teaches universal salvation by Yama, believed to be the “one true vehicle.” He is said to be a saviour of all beings. This teaching is contained in the “Lotus Scriptures.” Scholars say this gospel is of late invention as it contradicts Gautama’s words (Parrinder, E, G. What World Religions Teach, p64).

In Japan, the pure land sects of Buddhism preach a saviour by the name of Amida believed to be the only saviour. Amida is believed to have vowed to save all beings and transfer his merit to them. He seems to be a messiah figure, a Buddhist equivalent of the Judeo-Christian Christ. Amida is believed to justify and

sanctify believers in the Christian sense of the word! Generally Buddhists believe in the next Buddha to come whom they refer to as the Maitreya.

ISLAM

Islam unlike Hinduism and Buddhism is a post –Christian religion. The name Islam means submission. The founder of Islam is the Prophet Mohammad. The essence of Islam is a total submission to Allah. The prophet Mohammad is believed to be the last prophet to mankind. Muslims believe that their religion is the culminator of God’s revelation to faithful Hebrews and Christians. They believe in the one and only God called Allah. The religion is relatively light on theology but very heavy on practice.

The Koran is the Islamic Holy Scriptures. It is believed to be a collection of truths revealed to the Prophet Mohammad by Allah through the angel Gabriel. The source of doctrine in Islam is threefold: The Koran, Hadith or Sunnah and the Sharia. The Koran contains some semblances of the Torah (Books of the law) and mentions some of the prophets of the Old Testament. Muslims accept the virgin birth of Jesus and his genealogy. The crucifixion of Jesus is seemingly denied but the resurrection and ascension are confirmed. Islam teaches that the Torah and the gospels as they appear in the bible were distorted through time and are therefore no longer God’s word. The Hadith is a collection of deeds, utterances and silent approval of the prophet Mohammad fixed in a form of record of actions. The sharia is a canon law based on principles of the Koran. It gives Muslims guidance in entirely all aspects of life-religion, politics, and social life.

Islam teaches that the biblical Adam was the first prophet. The other prophets include Abraham, Moses and Jesus Christ. Jesus is believed to be a mere prophet and not a divine being or incarnation of God as most Christians teach. In Islam salvation is a result of total submission to the will of Allah. This involves listening

to the teachings of Mohammad. Listening is manifested by expression of one’s inner attitude to the teachings by showing good works. Muslims teach that there will be a day of judgement for all mankind after the resurrection. The faithful will be rewarded by going to heaven whereas the condemned ones will go to hell.

Islam is traditionally divided into Sunni and Shiite Muslims on the basis of the true succession of Prophet Mohammad. Besides these major divisions, there are many sects of Islam the world over. This is because there many obvious various interpretations of the teachings. Some sections of Islam interestingly have down the ages expected Jesus to come and reign and convert unbelievers before the end of things. Other Muslims believe in the coming of the guided one called the Mahdi who is some kind of a saviour. Islamic mysticism as found in Syria, Iraq and Iran accepts other religions as possible ways to God. Some Islamic reformers say that true Islam and true Christianity are the same. The authenticity implied is what demands definition. Islam has a global mission and current (2013) statistics show it as the fastest growing religion in the world.

BAHAI FAITH

Baha’i Faith is an offshoot of Babi religion. Babi is a breakaway from Shiite Muslims. This schism occurred in Persia, present day Iran. The founder of Babi religion is Mirza Ali Mohammed who was executed by Persian authorities in 1850. Mohammed was succeeded by Bahaullah who was banished from Persia and finally settled in Israel.

Bahaullah wrote a book entitled “Al Kitab al aqdas “meaning the most holy book. Baha’i Faith has no clergy and neither do they have rituals. The central belief is that God revealed himself to man by means of “divine manifestations” that include Abraham, Moses, Krishna, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad and Bahaullah. These messengers or prophets are believed to have been sent to

mankind in such a way that guidance is received in an evolutionally process. Babi is therefore believed to be the initiator of a new era for mankind. In this case the Baha’i Faith is believed to be the fullest revelation of God’s will that leads to the unity of the world.

The Baha’is believes in the brotherhood of man and equality of women. They teach that all world religions are of divine origin, basically the same, and in complete harmony. The differences evident in the world religions are believed to be but non-essential aspects of doctrines. Baha’is do not believe in the existence of angels, the Trinity, and the fall of man from perfection. The concept of salvation in the Christian sense is therefore irrelevant to Baha’i Faith.

AFRICAN TRADITIONAL RELIGIONS

African religions are in a way as many as there are different African societies. The major beliefs are similar and can therefore be discussed as one religion. The apparent differences in the many African religions are just in reality modifications of the otherwise common beliefs when closely examined.

Most western scholars depict African religions as polytheistic because of the many gods and spirits characteristic of these religions. The reality is that African religions believe in a Supreme God the creator of the entire universe. The many gods and spirits are intermediaries in the communication between the living and their God. In African religions, God can be approached directly or through the medium of spirits, gods or even elders. Women and children are also considered some kind of mediums in some societies as they are viewed somewhat sacred.

In African religions every aspect of life is religious-culture and religion are in essence the same thing. Similarly the concept of conversion doesn’t exist because one is born into religion. Birth initiates one into religion and the whole life experiences including death are religious experiences. There are no set doctrines in the biblical sense though general beliefs exist that are passed to initiates as part of socialisation or formally taught during initiation rites.

Most African societies believe that God created and sustains the universe. Some myths hint at a paradise lost when man sinned. Sin however is viewed slightly differently from the Christian sense. God is considered too holy and reverent to have close contact with man thus the importance of intermediaries in the relationship most of the times. Equally, elders, ancestors, spirits or gods are revered because they facilitate this important communication with the supreme God. Sin is viewed more as an alienation that is consequent of the disapproved conduct that brings shame and some kind of separation from the community-clan, elders, spirits, the recent dead and ancestors in a moral sense. To an African acceptance by one’s people seems more important than acceptance by God because he is often perceived as being very distant from sinful human beings.

Certain African cultures have myths of tribal saviours or messiahs expected to come and restore lost societal balance in terms of relations in the community or restoring the pride of the society perceived to have been lost. There is however no belief in a saviour in the biblical sense of salvation from the penalty, the power and environment of sin. A possible view of salvation does not seem to be apparent in most African societies and if any, it would include acceptance by the community, protection from evil powers and possession of life force. (O’Donovan, W.1996 p101).

African societies have close union between the living and the dead especially the recently dead or “living dead.” Those who are distant departed ones are believed

to be spirits or even gods in some cases. The communication between the dead is through the oldest members of the society or in some cases through some shrine priests. At the centre of the African religious set up is the maintenance of a balance amongst God, gods or spirits and the living. The imbalance in the inter-relationship bring misfortune or suffering to the individual or society. This seems to be central in the African understanding of sin and poses a spiritual challenge in the perception of sin in the biblical sense to many African Christians.

African religions are cognizant of the intrinsic moral weakness of mankind. The emphasis is not on a need for a saviour but the development of a religious experience on a daily basis centred on a good relationship with God and the relevant intermediaries. A good religious life is not so much of a result of super natural power in the life of the believer but a result of good discipline and respect for the religio-societal values. African moral values though not existent in written form are nevertheless not very different from the Judaeo-Christian ones. There is a general understanding of the reward and punishment aspect of God’s judgment that is in both the present life and life after death in the spirit world.

Interestingly, there is some kind of re-incarnation alluded to in most African societies when performing some birth rites. Names are given to babies in a somewhat ceremonial manner that seems to suggest that the spirit of the ancestor whose name the baby is given finds its habitation in him. Therefore ancestors who are considered to have lived a good life usually have more descendants named after them while those perceived to have lived evil lives have very few named after them if any.

All Africans born in Africa would almost obviously believe in God. Generally Africans have a very strong faith in a God who cares for his creatures and answers prayer so long as he is approached appropriately. Organised worship is often in

form of special requests, thanks giving and result oriented prayers for such things as rain and forgiveness of sin for individuals or society.

THE BIBLICAL RELIGION.

The Biblical religion has its origin in Jehovah’s revelation to mankind rather than man’s search for a way out of the predicament of sin. God directly intervened at his own initiative and provided a “way” out of the mess of the consequences of rebellion against his authority. Man’s condition is such that he is incapable of finding a way out. All the undeserved favour involved in extricating man from the effects of sin on his current existence is what constitutes the grace of God. Man’s role is to respond positively to God’s only way of saving him by trusting God fully.

The fundamental beliefs of the Biblical religion run from Eden through history and have their full revelation in the person of Jesus Christ the incarnation of Jehovah-Immanuel (Isaiah7:14; Hebrews1:1-3; John3:16).The religion was first revealed to man in the Garden of Eden when man sinned. In the real sense it is eternal (Revelation 13:8).God’s Church has been the darling of the Godhead throughout eternity. The salvation of man was not an afterthought as Jesus is “the lamb that was slain before the foundation of the world.”

In their perfection Adam and Eve worshipped God the creator for what he is- worth- ship. This true worship of God was natural to the essential relationship between God and man; God created man in his image for his glory. In the same way sinless beings in heaven worship God, Adam and Eve worshipped God lovingly before the advent of sin (Isaiah6:1-3; Revelation4:8).

The worship of God included the aspect of salvation following the fall of man from glory (righteousness).It now included God’s plan to save man. It is this Biblical

religion that Adam and Eve passed on to their posterity as evidenced in Cain and Abel’s sacrifices (Genesis 4:3, 4). The biblical record reveals that this was passed on from generation to generation orally until the time of Moses when written records were kept for future generations’ records. The Israelites as heirs to God’s promises to Abraham became the custodians of the oracles of God. They settled in Palestine (Canaan) as Jehovah’s ambassadors to the entire world. The bible in certain texts suggests implicitly that there were other true worshippers of Jehovah besides Abraham and his descendants. In the book of Genesis 14:18—21, Abraham is said to have had paid tithe to the priest-king of Salem. One would assume that there were worshippers of God in and around Salem for a priest to exist there.

In Canaan the Israelites often apostatised and compromised their faith but prophets always helped in the restoration of the fundamental truths. Admittedly with time religious beliefs of the surrounding nations naturally filtered into the Biblical religion. The subjugation of the Jews by such nations as the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Persians, Medes, Greeks and Romans influenced some of the religious beliefs and teachings through history. With time these foreign inclusions were indistinguishable to the unschooled minds.

History shows that there was never a time when the Biblical religion was compromised without an equally radical restoration of the truth. The fundamental beliefs were always preserved by a faithful remnant even after unbelievably long centuries of tumultuous occupation of Canaan by different peoples opposed to the Biblical religion. The long lists of Old Testament prophets attest to this fact as most of them if not all were reformers.

Central to the Biblical religion’s beliefs is the promise of the messiah or Christ-the God- man who is the full revelation of God. The first advent of Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the Law and the prophets of the Jude-Christian religion (Galatians 4:4;

Matthew 5:17).The coming of Jesus Christ purged the Biblical religion of all human inventions that had crept sometimes imperceptibly into the religion (Matthew 5:19).The advent of Jesus was paradoxically the fulfilment as well as the foundation of the Biblical religion. The Old Testament is the New Testament “obscured” and the New Testament is the Old Testament “revealed.”

The New Testament is not new but a progression from the shadow as manifested in the types and symbols-rituals and sacrifices, to the substance manifested in the ministry of Jesus Christ to whom all the Jewish economy pointed. The core of the Biblical religion remained intact in the transition from Judaism to Christianity in the first century of the Christian era. The remnant of Israel heralded a new era of salvation to both Jews and Gentiles in fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant. Those who accepted the good news of salvation in the messiah were nicknamed Christians because they lived and ministered like Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.

The religion of the Bible does not only reveal to man what has to be done to be saved but it is in essence God’s unmerited favour- love, mercy, and justice to mankind; the mystery by which sinful humans can be transformed into holy subjects of God’s kingdom of glory. It is the true and the only way back to what man lost when he transgressed God’s holy law. The human race is incapable of extricating itself from the mess of sin and its consequences. God in Jesus Christ extricates man at a great cost to himself in the incarnation and man in desperate need is only required to cooperate by trusting God fully. The method is God’s and the price is for God to pay. This is what constitutes grace, amazing grace! The gospel is eternal-the same to Adam, Abraham, Moses and the most modern sinner. Those who accept the good news of salvation are recognised by their transformed lives that defy all human philosophies. The saved sinners are identified by their obedience to God’s requirements through the Spirit of God working in their lives.

The biblical religion respects other religions but does not endorse a pluralistic approach to the salvation of man. It uncondemning invites all to accept what God

in Jesus Christ has offered for the salvation of mankind. Jesus Christ is exalted as the only way to God (Acts 4:12; John 14:16, Rev13:8).

THE BIBLE AND THE ADVENT OF OTHER RELIGIONS

The question that naturally pops up at this stage is, “If God himself revealed the biblical religion to mankind as the only way back, how did the other religions come into being?” The bible does not directly account for the origin of other religions. This is not surprising as the bible is the revelation of God’s saving love and not a textbook of religions. The bible simply reveals

God’s offer of salvation to man. The other religions show up only when adherents confront the believers of the biblical religion. Jehovah (Yahweh) does not try to prove his religion right but simply vindicates his sovereign authority as the only true God.

The biblical record somehow alludes to the possible advent of non-biblical religions. A logical understanding of the covert mushrooming of other religions is possible by the allusions in the scriptures. A variety of clues are available to help us appreciate the proliferation of religions after the fall of man.

Cardinal to understanding the scope of the message of the bible is the full appreciation of the fact that there is a cosmic war for souls. This cosmic controversy is of eternal consequences and it involves God and his Christ on one side and Satan and his devils on the other side. This controversy strangely started in heaven and then shifted to the earth where it has been raging until God and his Christ are eventually convincingly victors (Revelation 12). The initial phase of the conflict on earth claimed Adam and Eve as the first victims of the villain’s onslaught.

The sowing of the seed for the harvest of the many non-biblical religions is encapsulated in the serpent’s pseudo-gospel to Eve in the garden discourse. The Devil’s subtle statement constitutes the core to the fundamental beliefs of all non-biblical religions. A careful study of Genesis 3:4-7 exposes the origin of these

religions. In Genesis 3:4, the serpent (Satan) told Eve that the eating of the forbidden fruit would not result in death. Even when the consequences of sin were so obvious immediately after eating the forbidden fruit, man has been hooked to the lie that the real man-the spirit, is immortal. The Devil has continued harping on this string even after the disastrous consequences of the disobedience.

All non-biblical religions still hold to a core belief that the real man never dies as the soul or spirit is immortal. The Bible clearly teaches that the wages of sin is death – physically and spiritually (Romans 6:23). The scriptures clearly teach that man is unconscious in death. (Ezekiel 18:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5 and Psalms 146:3-4). Strangely the belief that the soul is immortal even found its way into the biblical religion in the post-exile era of Israel. The bible clearly states that only God is immortal (I Timothy 6:16). This belief about the immortality of the soul found its way into Christianity from Judaism in the first century of the Christian era. The belief has its source in its current refined form in Greek philosophy. The Jews adopted it during the Hellenization period. The deception has created an inroad into Christianity for spiritualism and supposedly communication of the dead with the living that has confused certain quarters of Christianity. The doctrine links Christianity to paganism thereby encouraging demonic deception apparently vindicated by reports of after death experiences now common even in Christian circles.

In the Garden of Eden discourse the serpent also promised Eve divinity as a result of transgressing God’s commandment. The Devil told Eve that, “You will be like God.” This promise suggested independence from God for those who would disobey. To the contrary, God created man to be dependent on God. Only then would man’s life be fulfilling as man was created in God’s image and for his glory. The desire to be independent of God has remained the natural characteristic of man since Adam and Eve sold out in the Garden of Eden. This characteristic has remained a trademark of all non-biblical religions. The adherents are quite often encouraged to tap the potential to be holy or good from within their nature.

Most, if not all non-biblical religions emphasize some kind of striving, discipline, meditation and good works to liberate the soul or spirit from the dilemmas of life. Contrary to these methods, the religion of the bible reveals a loving God who has done all to reconcile sinners to himself. He has offered his divine Son to die for man and provide his supernatural power to all who are willing to accept what he has provided to restore mankind to the lost glory. In the Biblical religion sinners go to God as they are and then God remakes or regenerates them. Obedience and discipline are gifts given to them by faith in Jesus Christ.

The Garden discourse also painted the forbidden fruit as “desirable for gaining wisdom.” The serpent here alluded to trusting in man’s enlightenment or intelligence as a beneficial consequence of going against God’s commands. This has continued to be a significant false promise of a number of religions and atheistic philosophies. A number of religions were founded by men who purported to have had some special knowledge or enlightenment. The Bab of Babi religion is the ‘gate’ and Buddha of Buddhism is the ‘enlightened one’. These are but a few of the founders of religions whose very names try to illustrate the point. These insinuations are but echoes of the serpent’s subtle promises which mankind in his desperate and gullible predicament is very eager to hear.

The third chapter of Genesis helps to enlighten believers as to the possible source of non-biblical religions’ beliefs. The reader needs to appreciate that these religions are a product of spiritual deception. Therefore debate perse is not enough. There has to be divine intervention as behind these religions are principalities and powers in higher places bent to mislead. The goal is to prevent needy humans from coming to a saving knowledge of God.

The fourth chapter of Genesis also provides some insight into the existence and development of non-biblical religions. In this chapter we are confronted with the concept of acceptable and non-acceptable worship of God. The story of Cain and Abel illuminates the mind. Both Cain and Abel were sons of Adam and Eve and assumingly received the correct knowledge about the true worship of Yahweh from their parents. However, Cain offered a sacrifice that could not be accepted. Instead of introspection, Cain possibly blinded by sibling rivalry, concluded God

was playing favourites. He slew his brother; a reaction that suggests that he stubbornly believed his innovative worship was just as good. Therefore Cain was religious but not a true worshiper of Yahweh. He had a form of worship similar to the Biblical one but not according to God’s revealed way.

Early in the history of mankind, the bible confronts us with a religious outlook somewhat similar to the religion of the bible. There is a possibility that Cain’s religious outlook was passed on to later generations. Interestingly in Genesis 4:19 we find the first recorded polygamist in the line of Cain’s descendants. Possibly Lamech like his ancestor, thought an innovation in the marriage relationship would add some flavour and the monster of polygamy has ever since tormented human societies.

In contrast, Seth, Adam’s third son, seems to have passed on the essentials of the Biblical religion to his descendants. Noah, a descendant of Seth was a true ambassador of God to the ante-deluvian world. It appears; the effects of the aberrant religious practices weakened the morality of the ante-deluvians, possibly due to intermarriages between the religious innovators and the obedient worshippers of Yahweh. The Lord eventually allowed the deluge to cleanse the world. Rebellion seems to have contributed to the rise of non-biblical religions.

The dawn of the post-deluvians world also suggests the process of proliferation of religions. Following the great flood, Noah’s descendants increased in numbers and developed ‘spiritual amnesia’ as they scattered over the world (Genesis 10:32). The bible record indicates that the plain of Shinar became a mega-settlement of materially prosperous people. The biblical location of Shinar suggests a region within Mesopotamia. Interestingly some history scholars also cite the same region as the possible source of most beliefs of some great eastern religions. The Shinar people built themselves a great tower, the tower of Babel. The record says the tower was built to make a name for them- remember the serpent promised grandeur to the disobedient! The project also served as a way of protecting themselves from any possible deluge of Noah’s type (Genesis 11:4).

The tower of Babel project ran counter to God’s revelation. The builders mistrusted God. God entered into a covenant of mercy with Noah and his

descendants and provided the rainbow as a covenant sign that he would not destroy the world by flood again. Besides, Yahweh’s original plan for mankind was that man should multiply and fill the earth. Antithetically the tower builders opted for mega-settlements. The scriptures say God confounded their language before the tower project was complete. The Shinar people were forced to scatter-a dispersion of a religious people distraught of God.

The Tower of Babel brings to mind a religious people distraught of God and crazy about making a name. Though religious, the people had a distorted picture of the creator God as part of their religious outlook. This seems to be the mind-set and world-view of some non-biblical religions.

The religious beliefs from Mesopotamia and therefore the civilizations emanating from there were intrinsically a pool of potentially counter-biblical religions. These religions would be somewhat similar but essentially counter to the Biblical religion. The fact that the tower of Babel fiasco occurred in the same region documented by secular history as the source of beliefs of most eastern religions is not a mere coincidence but a correct history of the origin of some religions. Therefore the similarities among the world religions are indicative of their common origin-the mastermind is the subtle serpent, Satan the Devil.

The power behind all non-biblical religions is therefore the antithesis of Yahweh and his Christ-the Devil and his demons. Therefore ignorance, rebellion, disobedience and deception are possible factors in the rise of non-biblical religions.

Since Yahweh is sovereign, the similarities among world religions is a possible divine preparation for the global declaration of the everlasting gospel (see Rev 14:6-12). This phenomenon renders the message of the Biblical religion not all that strange to people of different religions.

THE OLD TESTAMENT AND OTHER RELIGIONS

A general study of the book of Genesis reveals that by the time of Abraham there were a number of established non-biblical religions. Abraham’s people worshiped some other gods (Joshua 24:2). The entire Old Testament record

reveals a multiplicity of gods in contrast to Yahweh the sovereign God; that could possibly be the reason why Yahweh revealed himself to the children of Israel as the God of Abraham, Isaac and of Jacob. Amidst the heathen environment it was still possible for some to worship the true God. Yahweh called Abram, later renamed Abraham from such an environment to be his ambassador in Canaan. This set the biblical religion as a monotheistic religion amidst an environment prevalent with a myriad of polytheistic beliefs.

An interesting aspect of the religious life of the early Old Testament people is that even those who worshipped Yahweh, the sovereign God, could still have other gods. Laban, Jacob’s uncle for instance, had his gods besides the true God of his ancestors (Genesis 31:30-31).The early part of the Old Testament, generally suggests that Jehovah (Yahweh) was perceived as a family, clan or national God rather than the God of the whole universe (see Genesis 31:29).

The concept of a family, clan or national God might have continued for a number of centuries as it is implied in the Exodus account and even lingers on the record of Israel’s establishment as a kingdom in Palestine. The young Israelite nation saw her God as competing with gods of other nations around her (see Judges 11: 24).Some scholars say that the concept of the Almighty God seems to have flowered later in history around the eighth century before Christ. (E.G Parrinder, What other religions teach, p 149). This suggests that the true worship of God was somewhat compromised over the ages. Even God’s faithful like Job, Abraham, Lot and Noah had a blurred concept of God’s truth. They were, however, teachable.

The Hebrews and later the Israelites were taught in such a way that there was no shadow of a doubt that theirs was a superior religion. When the Israelites were liberated from the bondage in Egypt they were strongly warned not to associate themselves with the religious practices of the nations they would find in Canaan. They were conditionally promised victory over all the nations of Canaan as long as they remained true to Yahweh. They were instructed to systematically annihilate the Canaanites because their religious practices were an abomination to Yahweh,

the sovereign God. The Old Testament prophesies imply that Israel and Jerusalem in particular were to be the centre of worship for all the nations of the earth. Therefore no other religions would have ultimately existed if ancient Israel had faithfully obeyed God (Isaiah 2:1-5; 49:22-26).

The Old Testament record shows that there were some converts from heathen religions who became part of Israel. Even the covenant sign of circumcision could be extended to these proselytes. Biblical history shows clearly that from the time of Abraham up to the time of Israel as a nation, gentiles were potentially children of Yahweh. Proselytes were not a strange phenomenon in the religious life of Israel or God’s people in general. The religion of Israel was to be the religion of the entire world (Genesis 12:1-3).

God’s revelation to Old Testament Israel was progressive. This was according to the omniscient God’s own timing and the spiritual infancy of the period. It wasn’t easy to reform Israel after long centuries of their living in a culture where truth and error were not easily distinguishable during their Egyptian sojourn. In his grace, God led his people step by step. By the eighth century before Christ, it was possible for the prophets to set out Israel’s faith as universal. The standards of Yahweh were clearly set for all nations of the earth. This was the task of such prophets as Jeremiah, Isaiah, Amos, Hosea, Micah, Jonah and many others in the later part of Israel’s history.

God’s grace is universal-to all nations, languages and peoples; similarly later prophets pronounced judgment to all nations of the earth that fell short of Yahweh’s standards. Therefore during the later history of Old Testament Israel, one could not believe in the Biblical religion and at the same time accept other religions as of equal virtue. The concept of religious pluralism though tolerable was far from normal and was therefore eschatologically passé.

THE NEW TESTAMENT AND OTHER RELIGIONS

God’s grand plan for the redemption of man is eternal. As soon as Adam and Eve sinned, the plan of redemption was in full operation. The costly ‘rescue operation’

was revealed to Adam and Eve and has been unfolding progressively to suit every historical stage. In a way, God’s grace has been more than sufficient for all ages including the darkest period of human history. In a way, the Old Testament was the infrastructure and the New Testament is the superstructure of the unfolding kingdom of God. The New Testament presents even more dramatic encounters with the non-biblical religions.

At the very dawn of the Christian era, the account of the birth of Jesus Christ gives us one of the earliest encounters with gentiles identified with the Biblical religion. The wise men from the east or the Magi as they are sometimes called, appear to have had come from a region outside Palestine. The record suggests that they came to the knowledge of Jesus’ birth through their study of astrology. These men could have been earnest seekers of truth who were rewarded for their faith by coming to the knowledge of the birth of the Saviour of mankind. They could have been adherents of a non-biblical religion or proselytes to the Biblical religion; whichever way, these gentiles make the story of the birth of Jesus Christ of a universal scope.

The gospels also give us stories of some Roman soldiers who accepted the Biblical religion as the way to eternal life. Jesus commended the faith of a Roman centurion who had accepted the Biblical religion as presented by Judaism (see Matthew 8:5-11; Luke 7:1-10). Another Roman soldier accepted Jesus Christ as the Son of God during the time Jesus hang on the cross (Mark 15:39). In fact in commending the faith of the former, Jesus Christ said many would come from all corners of the earth to fellowship with Abraham and other patriarchs while some Hebrews would be out of the kingdom of God. The context suggests conversion and not co-existence of religions.

There were many encounters of Jesus and the Apostles with adherents of different religions. In all cases, the adherents of other religions were challenged to receive Jesus Christ as the Saviour irrespective of their former religions or philosophies of life. The Biblical religion was always presented as God’s revelation of love and mercy to all mankind (Matthew 8:11; 15:21-28).

Jesus Christ’s commission to all believers is to evangelise the whole world (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). Shortly after Jesus’ ascension believers went out from Palestine, the cradle of Christianity, to Asia Minor, Europe and Africa preaching salvation in Jesus Christ to people who already believed in different religions. The challenge was still the same old one- the good news to all nations of the world. Many believed and were baptized into the Biblical religion (Acts 8:9-13; 17:22-32). The apostle Paul challenged the religious Athenians with the gospel. He even debated with the philosophical Epicureans and Stoics (Acts 17:16-22). This was the main agenda of the Biblical religion at the dawn of the Christian era.

The Biblical religion was always ‘the way’. The New Testament Church related to adherents of other religions as people in ignorance. The many religions of the world are therefore a field to be harvested using spiritual tools endowed to the Church at Pentecost. People have to be loved into the kingdom of God.

WHAT MAKES THE BIBLICAL RELIGION UNIQUE

The Bible teaches that man’s way out of his predicament of sin is possible only as a result of God’s initiative prompted by love. Man without God is incapable of finding his way back to holiness (Romans 2:4; Ephesians 2:8). Salvation is God’s work, man’s role is to co-operate.

Originally man was created perfect. He lost his perfection when he sinned and passed on his marred nature to all his offspring. Humanity is groaning under the burden of sin and its consequences (Romans 6:23). The justice of God demands the loss of life of a sinner as a natural consequence of sin (Romans 3:23). Since the wages of sin is death, only one who has life in himself could extricate man from his dilemma of sin. The loving God intervened by taking man’s place in Jesus Christ the divine Son of God (John 3:16). This was possible because Jesus Christ is God essentially. Since he has life in himself, as the creator of all that exists Jesus is able to save all to the uttermost (John10:10; Colossians1:15-16). All who willingly accept God’s offer of salvation as it is in Jesus Christ are miraculously and progressively restored to God’s image.

Salvation in the biblical sense is a gift from God that has to be accepted by full trust in God. This is unlike in non-biblical religions where man tries to find his way to perfection by meditation, enlightenment, good works or tapping the supposedly divinity in his nature. The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is the full vindication of the efficacy of Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for sinners who believe.

In Jesus Christ, God’s grace saves man from the penalty, power and environment of sin. Jesus is the panacea to all the dilemmas of life as we know it. The promises of God in Jesus are to be appropriated by trusting fully in the merit of Jesus as revealed in the Bible. Since all religions are in a way a search, in Jesus the search ends as he is the full revelation of God to mankind. The good news as it is in Christ invalidates the time-worn quest for God evident in most religions of the world. In a way, the Biblical religion is not a religion as such but God’s revelation of himself.

The religion of the bible is based on faith in God and his Christ (Hebrews 11: 6). This requires believers to obey what God says in his word and by his Spirit. This obedience is only possible in the power of God’s Holy Spirit that is provided to all who accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour. Obedience is therefore a natural fruit of the faith relationship prompted by love (John 14:15). Conversely disobedience becomes a sure sign of rebellion against a loving God.

In the Biblical religion, believers do not obey so as to be holy or to be saved but do so as a result of God’s Spirit of obedience in them. God, in Jesus Christ, is in their lives through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They thirst to do God’s will as is it revealed to them. Their new nature in Christ abhors sin which is lack of faith and transgression of the law of God. Therefore obedience becomes a true manifestation of their love of God (John 14:15).

Whereas works of obedience are a core issue in non-biblical religions as a way of meriting acceptance by God or some super-being; in true Christianity, faith comes before obedience. The biblical plan of salvation is sequential. God’s sequence in salvation as biblically revealed has to be accepted. “Christianity is not concerned with substance alone, but with sequence as well…Place works before justification

or overcoming before forgiveness and the very being of Christianity is destroyed .’’(J.C. Smuts Van Rooyen, Grace finds a way, Ministry, May 1980, p5).

It is this relationship between substance and sequence that makes the Biblical religion unique. A change in sequence on salvation is non-negotiable. Salvation for all mankind is by grace as manifested in Jesus Christ the saviour. Jesus is the way and the only way (Acts 4:12 12: 1Timothy 2:5). The bible suggests no other possible ways. There is no such a thing as dispensation of the law and that of grace but the everlasting Gospel only. The religion of the bible is a messianic religion. The entire religion centres in the person of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The religion is more relationship oriented than it is doctrinally oriented. Theology and correct doctrine important though they are, come only when a personal relationship with Jesus Christ has been established.

Another unique and significant feature of the Biblical religion is that it is the oldest and the only religion among the 50 major religions of the world whose founder is still alive. Only Jesus Christ died and rose again as a vindication of his saving power. The other founders though historical, were but mere humans whose remains in their graves are a sure evidence of a futile attempt to find a way out of the dilemmas of life.

Jesus Christ taught his followers to pray to God in his name. The name in the eastern context was not just a label as it is mostly the case in western cultures but implies the character and virtue of the individual. None of the other founders of religion even dared to mention to his followers that they were to pray to God in his name. When time came for them to die they were more interested in their own positions before God. They assumingly understood their limitations as mere sinful humans. It is mentioned that when Gautama the Buddha died he was in the careful eye of his disciples who expected to hear his last word. When asked by his disciples how they could best remember him, he told them not to bother. It was not his person but his teachings that counted (David Watson; ‘Discipleship’ Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1981 p23).

The essence of the Biblical religion is a vibrant personal relationship with the person of the saviour Jesus Christ. Without Jesus, Christianity is but a road to nowhere. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. This makes the religion of the bible very unique.

A GLIMPSE AT THE ESCHATOLOGICAL ROLE OF NON- BIBLICAL RELIGIONS.

A clear perception of the biblical concept of the great controversy between God and Satan is vital to the correct interpretation of biblical eschatology. This spiritual war began in heaven (Revelation 12:7). The cosmic war then transferred to this planet where it will finally end. The conflict will climax into a great showdown between good and evil- Armageddon. God, his Christ and saints will come out victors in this conflict of ages. Heaven and earth will be renewed and Jesus will be the eternal King of kings.

In this great controversy the Devil and his hosts have apparent advantages. The powers of darkness have a variety of shrewd strategies at their disposal- distortion of truth, deception, denial of truth and even violent coercion of consciences through persecutions. On the other hand God and his Christ are limited to only one method: Lovingly revealing the truth to humankind so as for man to willingly choose to accept the gift of eternal life as revealed in Jesus Christ. God is Love and love respects man’s free will. Love is only genuine when one chooses to love.

The bible treats the subject of the end times extensively. This is so as to prepare believers for the hard times ahead. God does not want any human to perish without prior warning (Amos3:7). The bible teaches that the Devil will intensify his diabolic activities so as to lead many people to eternal damnation (Revelation 12: 12). In this controversy, there is no middle ground. Jesus said, “Whoever is not

against us is for us”, (Mark 9:40). Similarly he also said, “He who is not with me, is against me and he who does not gather with me, scatters”, (Luke 11:23). In this spiritual war believers have to fortify themselves with the truth of God (John 17:17; 8:32).

The Lord’s discourse on the end times as recorded in Luke 21 and Mathew 24 mentions among other signs the coming of false messiahs as remote signs of the end. If false Christs are to be exposed, people need to have a good knowledge of the authentic Christ- the eternal Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth.

A study of almost all major religions of the world reveals a number of some messiah figures. These ‘Christs’ will play a very significant role in marshalling the peoples of the world to the climax of the great controversy. The arch-deceiver, Satan understood the proto-evangelism (Genesis 3:15) much better than some of the saints in the Church. Ever since the proclamation of the victory of the ‘seed of the woman’ (Galatians 3:16), the Devil has been more than busy planting counterfeit messiah expectations and fulfilments in various religions and even several in the Biblical one. His has been an attempt to thwart God’s grand plan of redemption as it is Jesus Christ.

Counterfeit Christs jut out of the sacred writing of almost all major religions of the world either implicitly or explicitly. Hinduism has its own Krishna, an incarnation of God. This Krishna is associated with many miracles just like Jesus Christ of Nazareth. In the same vein Buddhism has its Buddha, the enlightened one, with his four noble truths and the eightfold path to nirvana. The Japanese sect of Buddhism has its saviour in Amida who is believed to transfer his merits to sinners so as to save all. Northern Buddhism has the Yama believed to be the only true vehicle by which all will be saved. Orthodox Buddhism in general believes in the next Buddha to come called the Maitreya. The Maitreya is believed to be the final messiah.

The thread of false messiahs also runs through Islam. Muslims believe that Jesus Christ was one of the prophets just like the prophet Mohammed but Mohammed is the last prophet. There is a belief in some sects of Islam of the coming of ‘the guided one’ before the end of all things. This messenger or the Mahdi is believed to be the anointed one. These ‘messiahs’ are also evident in the Baha’i faith. The Bab and Bahaullah also take their place in the almost interminable list of messiah figures. The credentials of these messiah figures are believed to be equivalent to that of Jesus Christ. The long list of ‘anointed ones’ confirms the arch-rival’s effort to thwart the gospel as it is revealed in the scriptures.

The apparent similarities in the messiah figures and teachings of different religions are usually cited as an argument that all religions are equal paths to God and none is superior to others. Logical as the argument might seem is but one of the many deceptions meant to distract attention from the everlasting gospel as it is in Jesus Christ.

A Christian needs not be disturbed by the fact that there are many religions in the world .We are living in a post- modern world that propagates multi-culturalism, moral- relativism and religious pluralism and this is now well entrenched in our educational system and entertainment industry. What we need is to be well informed as regards post-modernism and fortify our minds with the truth of the bible (John17:17; 8: 32).

THE QUEST FOR CHRSTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT (I)

“THAT THEY MAY BE ONE”

INTRODUCTION

In the beginning there was only one Christian Church started by Jesus Christ. This Church grew rapidly. No sooner had it grown than it experienced serious divisions. By the time of the Apostle Paul, the prophetic eye could see serious divisions in the Church. Paul prophesied thus:

“I know that after I leave, some men will come into your group. They will be like wild wolves. They will try to destroy the flock (group). Also, men from your own group will become bad leaders. They will begin to teach things that are wrong. They will lead some followers of Jesus away from the truth.” (Acts 20:29, 30)

In Paul’s second letter to the Thessalonians, the prophetic eye focused even further foreseeing the great apostasy that would occur just before the second advent of Christ (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

The cradle of the Christian Church was Palestine. The Church expanded from its humble beginnings in the Middle East and gained a lot of converts in Asia Minor and Western Europe. It is in Western Europe that the history of Christianity was greatly shaped. The hub of church history was the great company of believers in the Roman Empire, particularly located in the city of Rome.

Like many other Christian communities, the believers in Rome were persecuted by the pagan Roman Empire. When Emperor Constantine accepted the Christian religion around AD 312 the persecutions in the empire were halted. Christianity was elevated and later declared the religion of the empire. Rome being the capital of the world Empire shared the aura with the bishop of the church at Rome. Besides, church traditions also enhanced the peculiarity of the bishopric of Rome. Initially the bishop was looked at as a brother of the other bishops of different towns and cities. Later his advice was taken as that from a father (papa). Even if

the title ‘papa’ earlier applied to all bishops it later became a distinctive title for the bishop of Rome.

Theologically, a theory had been developed with a lot of unsubstantiated church traditions to the effect of the primacy of the bishopric of Rome. Politically, Emperor Justinian of the East declared the Bishop of Rome the leader of all Christians in his empire by his AD 533 decree. This in essence was the development of the papacy that according to Catholic tradition dates back to Simon Peter as the first bishop of Rome.

Even before the declaration of the bishop of Rome as the leader of all Christians in the Roman Empire, differences in doctrine had already greatly divided the church as whole into fragments. Among the rival groups of Christians in existence then, the Arians were the most disturbing to the Roman See. These were adherents to the teaching of Arius of Alexandria who strongly opposed the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The kingdoms of the Heruli, Vandals and Ostrogoth who were Arians, made it difficult for the bishop of Rome to exercise his authority as mandated by the Roman emperors. By AD 538 the last of the Arian Kingdoms to be silenced, the Ostrogoth, were vanquished by the Emperor of the East. The silencing of the Arian threat to the authority of the bishop of Rome did not solve the differences as there were many other differences in the Church as a whole.

In AD 1054 several differences in doctrines and other problems culminated into the establishment of the Greek Orthodox Church. The East of Europe accepted

the Patriarch of Constantinople as the Greek Orthodox Church. The west of Europe rallied behind the bishop of Rome-the Pope; these became the Latin or

Roman Christians commonly known as the Roman Catholic Church.

The 1054 schism meant the separation of Russian, Greek, Romanian, polish, Bulgarian and many other independent Christians from the Roman Church. The division did not leave the Roman Church united. The Church had to contend with internal divisions without major breakaways for centuries.

On the 31st day of October 1517 the time bomb exploded. Martin Luther, an Augustinian monk nailed 95 points on the door of the Wittenberg Cathedral in

Germany. The 95 points attracted a lot of attention –discussions and debates, in and outside Germany. This was yet another doctrinal battle against the supposedly ecclesiastically infallible Roman Church authority. At the core of the doctrinal contention encompassed by the 95 points of Martin Luther were the following issues:

Salvation results from justification by faith in Christ alone (sola fide) and not from priestly absolution or works of penance.

Forgiveness is granted solely because of God’s grace (sola gratia) and not by authority of priests or popes and

All doctrinal matters are to be confirmed by scripture only (sola scriptura) and not popes or church councils.

Luther’s points shook the Church as they spread through different countries of Western Europe. The excommunication of Luther and his sympathisers led to another schism in the Church. This time the division was within the Western Church. The Church was polarized into Roman Catholics and the Protestants or Reformers.

The Protestants did not remain united after coming out of the Roman Church .The reformation could not find the panacea for the ever tormenting scourge of disunity. As usual doctrinal differences divided Protestants into several denominations .Interestingly all Protestants still assert that the bible is the only rule of faith, forgiveness is by grace and salvation is by faith in Christ alone.

THE QUEST FOR UNITY

Christianity whose very essence is love and unity is paradoxically gnawed by denominationalism .Since the first indications of schisms were noticed in the early Church; well-meaning Christians have prayed and worked for the unity of believers. However, Church unity has remained stubbornly elusive.

There are two different approaches to Christian unity currently in operation. The first one from a historical point of view is Protestant oriented, manifested in the World Council of Churches` policy. The other one is Catholic oriented manifested in the spirit of Vatican II document in the Roman Catholic Church. Both movements seem to envision a unity of both Catholics and Protestants though the latter has a wider vision encompassing other world religions. To appreciate the quest for Christian unity, it is necessary to study the principles behind the ecumenical programs of both Catholics and Protestants. This will enable us evaluate the progress of the ecumenical movement in general and its potential for unity.

When looking at the Catholic sponsored effort towards Christian unity as it appears in the spirit of Vatican II we need to appreciate the structure and theology of the Roman Catholic Church through history . The Roman Church remained fairly firm and consistent despite the Orthodox and Protestant breakaways. There has not been any major schism in the Church since 1517. Instead, there have been formations of different religious orders within the Church. This proliferation of religious orders during the mentioned period seems to have acted as a pressure relief valve for the Catholic Church machinery.

The consistency in the structure and theology of the Catholic Church seems to be anchored in the authority of the Pope. The Pope`s authority is believed to be infallible when exercised within his ecclesiastical office. According to Catholic Church tradition the papacy goes back to Simon Peter who is believed to have had received authority over the universal Church from Jesus Christ. It is around this traditional and otherwise spiritual aura of the Pope` s office that the Roman Church derives its peculiarity and assumed primacy.

The certain and definite ecclesiastical authority theologically invested in the Roman Catholic Church , in the office of the Pope in particular ,greatly shapes the Church`s official stand on church unity. A case in point is a document presented to the Patriarch of Constantinople following the 1054 Orthodox breakaway. The

document denounced Orthodox Christians as being “On a level with the devil and his angels.” Similarly, Martin Luther and his followers received vehement

Pronouncements on their being excommunicated from the self- proclaimed “Mother Church.” Those excommunicated and their followers were simply heretics in the eyes of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Since Vatican II the tone has soften from ‘heretics’ to ‘separated brethren’. The Roman Church has never and might never doubt its authority in Christendom despite the current tolerance.

Protestants and Orthodox Churches on the other hand responded equally vehemently to the Catholic Church’s verbal onslaught. There was no humility on both sides of the conflict. The Popes and the Papacy was simply the ‘anti-Christ’ of biblical prophecy. Roman Catholicism was clearly ‘Babylon’ of the apocalyptic book of Revelation. The name calling was not new but an echo of some old theology within the church that existed even before the 1054 schism. These Christian rivalries continued unabated up to the 20th century. By 1916 “The Western Watchman” a Roman Catholic paper read:

“In the eyes of the church (Roman), Protestants are heretics pure and simple, and if the name is offensive, it’s nothing more than the offensiveness of truth.” (Jan 17, 1916).

The disunity evident in Christendom is more embarrassing to Protestants than it is to Roman Catholics. This is assumed from the sincere efforts Protestants have made to try to bring about the unity of all denominations-Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant. In America, the Federal Council of The Churches of Christ was formed in 1908. The modern Ecumenical movement began when the First World Missionary Conference world was held in Edinburgh, Scotland in 1910 (Encyclopaedia Britannica). By 1948 The World Council of Churches was formed at an assembly in Amsterdam, Netherlands, representing 147 churches among them Orthodox Churches. In 1950 The Federal Council of Churches of Christ became the National Council Churches of Christ in the United States of America.

The ecumenical movement seeks to promote the unity of churches and not mere uniformity. The essence is “Nothing should be done separately which can be done together.” At the time that the Ecumenical movement was gaining momentum, a good number of Protestant churches were suspicious of the aims and objectives of the movement. The suspicions were given substances when certain World Council of Churches resolutions sparked serious criticisms from the Christian community at large. For instance, in 1969 the WCC recommended that member churches should support violence if it is the last resort to overthrow political and economic tyranny. The WCC actually provided funds to armed liberation movements. Such controversial resolutions serve more to work against the unity the movement is seeking to achieve.

While Protestants and Orthodox churches were seeking unity through the World proponents of ecumenism. The Roman Catholic Church categorically refused to involve herself in anything ecumenical. In 1928 pope Pius VI issued The Encyclical Mortalium Animos forbidding Catholics to give any support to the ecumenical movement.

The unexpected started to happen in the Roman Catholic camp when Pope John XXIII came into office in 1958. In 1959 he called the first ecumenical council by the Roman Catholic Church so as to try to “bring the church up to date.” This council purported to “open the way towards the re-union of the separated brethren of the east and west in the one fold of Christ.” The heretics were this time called the ‘separated brethren’. This was received with mixed feelings by some in the Catholic fold. The shocker to hard-core Catholics came in1960 when the Pope set up a secretariat for Christian unity. In 1961 some Catholic even attended the World Council of churches conference in Delhi, Indian, as observers. By this time the Vatican poly on ecumenism was a puzzle to both Catholics and non-Catholics.

By 1965 relations between the Pope and Orthodox Patriarch were almost normalized. The pope and the patriarch mutually nullified the excommunications that their predecessors had pronounced against each other in the schism of 1054. In 1969 pope Paul VI visited the WCC Headquarters in Geneva. Interestingly, the Catholic Church is still not a member of the World Council of Churches. The Vatican II decree on ecumenism simply marked the entry of the Catholic Church into the ecumenical movement in general. This should logically imply that the Roman Catholic Church has officially abandoned the infamous ‘’one true church’’ position in favour of its new position of the “mother church.” At this stage one can venture to ask, “Is not the structure and theology of the Roman Catholic church too historical to change?”

ANALYSIS

The progress of the Ecumenical movement is a theological and historical conundrum. While the movement seeks to unite Christian churches, it has two different sponsors whose objectives are not clearly open for scrutiny. There is need for honest and objective research from scholars of both Catholic and Protestant backgrounds to clear the air.

The force behind the ecumenical activities among Protestants is the World Council of Churches (WCC). The WCC aims and objectives are not as difficult to understand as the Catholic ones. The Protestant churches constituting the WCC lack consistency and solidity in both structure and theology. Every time a WCC is held some areas of differences of understanding are exposed as delegates fail to agree on certain cardinal issues. This is due to the fact that by nature, the WCC is an aggregation of churches whose very existence is indicative of the differences existent in protestant Christianity. A wide spectrum of religious views with

obvious contradictions is not likely to result in unity without some member churches losing the essence of their very existence.

Since the very essence of ecumenism discourages discussion of doctrines that make a member churches of WCC peculiar, the difference are not likely to be resolved. This predicament perpetuates disunity naturally. The WCC pursuit of unity concentrates on aspects of Protestant faith that are reconcilable. This means that as much as possible those aspects of Protestant member churches of WCC that are controversial should be of least attention during ecumenical programmes. This same stance should be taken towards Catholicism. This attitude is the corner- stone of all ecumenical activities that obviously resulted into the tolerance amidst Christians today.

The WCC has not been favourably received by all Protestants. Some Pentecostal Churches, Charismatics, the Seventh - day Adventist Church, and many other Churches and Para-church movements involved in some kind of ecumenical activities still by policy are non-members of the World Council of Churches. Having said this, the situation as it stands now indicates that Protestants as a whole have developed relative tolerance towards each other as churches. Above all, this tolerance is evident even between Protestants and Catholics than before. We could argue that the ecumenical activities promoted by the World Council of churches (WCC) and Vatican II (policy on ecumenism) are behind the progress. This is because before the WCC was formed Protestant churches were rivals and even bitter ones as evident in their clashes in their mission activities in Africa and Asia.

While the general tolerant atmosphere amidst Christians is sure evidence of the vindication of the WCC quest for unity, it would be farfetched for one to say that Protestants as a group are moving towards unity in the Christian sense of “One Lord, one faith and one baptism”. The contemporary situation shows that Protestants are now fragmented far more than ever as denominations, sects and Para-church movements. There has been a proliferation of new churches,

reformed churches and Para-church movements in form of independent ministries each with a distinctive creed.

The picture of Christian unity among Protestants, tolerance aside, is still gloomy. New efforts have to be sought to arrest the proliferation of denominations as Protestants already have babel of Churches to try to unite. The unity of Christians as viewed from the positive efforts of the WCC is therefore deceptive. The apparently better understanding between different churches but Protestants as a group are very far from united. The aims and objectives together with the policy of the ecumenical movement amongst Protestants need a re-evaluation if not a complete overhaul to be of any spiritual value of the Christian Church as a whole.

An attempt to scrutinize the ecumenical style of the Roman Catholic Church is significant to have a general analysis of the guests for Christian unity. In spite of the consistency of the Roman Catholic Church, a non-Catholic cannot help but notice apparent discordant notes in the usually consistent catholic symphony. This admittedly is what makes the analysis of the ecumenical activities of the Roman Catholic Church a complex, if not venture.

Some serious question need to be addressed as we venture to understand the Catholic path to Christian unity: Has the Roman Catholic Church really abandoned its “one true church” position? Has the church changed any of its fundamental doctrines and policies that greatly contributed to the 1054 and 1517 schisms? At this stage we need to refer to the Vatican II document on ecumenism. The document shows that the council resolved that Catholics should abstain from “Any frivolous or imprudent zeal… their ecumenical activity cannot be other than fully and sincerely Catholic… in harmony with the faith the catholic has always professed.” This simply implies that nothing fundamentally Catholic can change in trying to bring the unity between Catholic and Protestants.

By implication Protestants would have to change their doctrinal positions to achieve the much sought unity while Catholic remain fundamentally the same. This perspective means the Catholics decree on ecumenism does not really reconcile its ecumenical stance with the assumption that the Roman Catholic Church would seem to be unchangeably Vatican centred. Since Vatican II, the “only true church” position does not seem to be some serious issue among progressive Catholics, however, the observation that the Roman Catholic Church’s understanding of ecumenism is Vatican centred is by implication unavoidable.

The leadership of WCC also seems to be suspicious of the Catholic mode of ecumenism as championed by the papacy since Vatican II. Dr Konrad Raiser, a former Deputy Secretary General of WCC echoed, “The Pope (John Paul 11) is making many ecumenical declarations, but he is inspired by a mission that is taking him in a different direction.” it is clear that non- Catholic proponents of ecumenism and possibly some within Catholic are not sure of the direction the Vatican II ecumenism is leading. It should be obvious that the Catholic hierarchy well knows the direction. It is therefore clear that the ecumenism of the Roman church is very different from that of the World Council Churches.

Historical facts force one to say the ecumenical activities of the Roman Church are but a tactful move to entice the Orthodox and Protestant Churches to the Catholic fold. If this is an unfair allegation then the Catholic Church has a noble duty educate Christians worldwide as to the nature of unity they are working towards.

Biblical Christianity has love and unity as its very core. The Bible clearly shows that unity is intrinsic of Christianity. The Church of God as Christ’s bride is invincible and fundamentally the same from Eden to New Jerusalem. The gates of hell would never prevail against God’s Church. Jesus said that he will receive his Church “spotless and without blame” at his second advent. In the same way the remnant of Israel formed the nucleus of the New Testament Church, the remnant of God’s true Church will continue with the truth and be ready to meet their Lord

when he comes. The confusion in Christendom as regards Christian unity as manifested in the ecumenical movement in general is but a babel, which is a sure child of apostasy of 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Amidst the Babel of Christendom there is God’s Church of those who “keep God’s commandments and have the testimony of Jesus” (Revelation 12:17)

We should thank God that his word reveals a coming out of the religious confusion typified as Babylon (Revelation 18:4). It is clear from the scriptures that there would be a worldwide apostasy before Christ comes again. The last appeal to the Church in apostasy is given in Revelation 14:6-12. God’s Spirit will plead with the faithfully in all churches and safely seal them for salvation. God has given us a bird’s eye-view of the true Church as it would exist just before Jesus comes again in Revelation 12:17; 14:12 and 22:14.

What Christianity needs therefore is not the ecumenical movement which though sincere is but trying to treat the symptoms and not the illness. The universal Church of God needs a restoration of biblical truth.

A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

PREFACE

This collection of essays was prompted by questions posed by students in higher institutions of learning and Secondary Schools in Zambia and Botswana to the author in the period 1983 to 2012. The essays are meant to stimulate biblical research rather than indoctrinate. The intended readerships are the young Christian students who are privileged to attain post-secondary school education. Adult readership would equally benefit as the essays are a debate of contemporary Christian topics. The approach in all essays is the “bible only” which admittedly smacks a Protestant approach. Paradoxically the speculative approach is used on subjects that have no obvious answers as they are eschatological in nature. The language used is academic as a deliberate effort to stimulate research. It is the hope of the author that the mind will be provoked to search more from the in exhaustive gem mine-the bible so as to articulate contemporary Christian issues.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The material in this work is part of the common heritage of Christian literature. It is therefore “our work.” Credit is given to the following people for their contribution in making this project a reality: Br R. Hankambe and Elder W. C Sepete both posthumously, Miss P. M. Mafelomale for reading through the essays

and providing constructive criticism, Mr. A. Chimwanga, Maamba SDA Church members (1996-1998), and the former Livingstone Region Seventh-day Adventist Youth Forum branches (1988-1993) for the encouragement. In a special way I would like to thank my friend and wife Fennie C. M. Lukato and our daughters, Tabo and Lilato (posthumously), for their patience and encouragement during the period of preparation of this work that robbed them of valuable family time.

Victor M. L. Lukato WA Masule

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to my parents, Bo Ndate Mareta Alison Lukato Masule and Bo Ma Mareta Alice Sanyambe Mwanota Lukato who nurtured and whetted my curiosity.

THE PALESTINIAN LAND ISSUE- A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

INTRODUCTION.

The Middle East land issue is one of the dilemmas of biblical prophecy speculations and international diplomacy. On the religious side the great leaders and scholars from Judaism, Islam and Christianity have offered their possible solutions. The political side has had and still has a more active role in trying to resolve the land issue. The problem has remained defiantly challenging; as ever it is still puzzling, unreasonable and menacingly explosive. Strangely the peace of the entire globe sometimes appears inextricably tied to the volatile Middle East.

At the centre of the Middle East land conflict is the invincible small state of Israel. The Middle East conundrum has both historical and religious complexities. The Israelis claim that the land of Palestine was given to them by Jehovah. On the other side, the Palestinians have a purely historical claim though somewhat coupled with an equally convincing spiritual claim to the same land. In exception of those of Philistine and Canaanite ancestry, those of Edomite, Ishmaelite, Midian and other “Abrahamic tribes” ancestry are equally heirs to great promises. The indigenous Palestinians claim that their ancestors had been living in Palestine much earlier than the Jewish Patriarchs- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

History has complicated the Middle East land issue to such an extent that the question as to who owns the land of Palestine on purely historical and religious grounds is realistically irrelevant. Much has happened and trying to untie the historical knots is as worthless as searching for a needle in a haystack. The issue at hand is: “How can the Jews and Palestinians live in harmony?”

Since biblical support has shrewdly been evoked by both Jews and some Christians to try to legitimise Israeli occupation of other Palestinian’s land, the bible will be used in this discussion to refute the supposedly biblical reasons for the perpetration of the land conflict. At the same time, we will briefly but objectively look at the negative contribution of the Palestinians to the interminability of the land conflict. In essence we will address the veracity of Israel’s biblical claim over Palestinian land in its entirety.

Necessary to the understanding of the land issue is the fact that in the Middle East, politics and religion are inextricate. They are delicately interwoven. The Middle East is the crossroads of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. In this religion conflicts are quite often fanned by religious fanaticism while simultaneously being seasoned by political witticism. The fact that the religion sits on a “pot of oil” makes every spark potentially dangerous. The region thus becomes a nerve centre for the entire world. World powers are extra-sensitive to political and religious activities in this region.

A HISTORICAL BACKGROUND.

In the wrangle over Palestine, the Palestinians claim the land as theirs because they have lived there for thousands of years. The Jews claim the same land because they believe the land was given to them by God. Their claim goes back to the Patriarch Abraham. Miller mentions 18 people groups who have fought for or claimed ownership of Israel (Miller, D A. 1994).

History, both secular and biblical, shows that the Jews have lived in diaspora more often than they have lived in the promise land. Interestingly the Jewish Patriarch, Jacob, in the embryonic stage of Israel’s existence, was forced to be a refugee in Egypt due to famine in Canaan. Jacob died in Egypt and his children-the Israelites, lived there for a period of about four hundred years (Exodus12:40; Acts 7:6).Later through Moses and Joshua the Israelites resettled in the promise land.

The Assyrians plundered Northern Israel and displaced the ten tribes commonly referred to as “the lost tribes of Israel.” These were never restored to their home land. Later the southern kingdom (Judah) was invaded by Babylonians and taken into captivity for a period of seventy years (Jeremiah25:11).King Cyrus and the other Mede-Persian kings later allowed the Jews to go back to Canaan but many remained in diaspora willingly. With time the Jews in Canaan came under Greek rule and later Roman rule. When the Romans through Pompey established Roman

rule in Palestine in 63BC, they continued until the collapse of Roman rule around AD 324.

The Romans destroyed Jerusalem in AD 70 resulting into the last wave of Jewish diaspora whose major impact is the current Middle East land conflict. In outline a chronological list of occupying powers from the time of the Romans is as follows:

Romans 63 BC-AD 324.

Byzantine Christians AD324-AD638.

Arabs 638-1099.

Christian Crusaders 1099-1244.

Tartars, Mongols, and Turkish tribes 1244-1291.

Egyptian Sultans 1291-1517.

Ottoman Turks 1517-1917.

The British 1917-1947.

The United Nations Organisation 1947-1948.

(Marion F Kremers, 1992).

The Jews have had no homeland until 1948. The suffering of the Jews in diaspora due to anti-Semitism from the so-called Christian nations of Western Europe, Russians and Arabs led to the rise of the desire to establish their nation in Palestine-Zionism.

The precursor of Zionism was Rabbi Judan Alkalai (1798-1878) who suggested an international recognition and establishment of a Jewish settlement in Palestine in his 1840s and 1850s pamphlets for which he earned serious denouncements (Marion F Kremers, 1992.)

In 1895 Theodor Herzl, a Jewish Austrian newspaperman, was stirred to write a book on establishing the state of Israel (Jack Van Impe and Rodger F. Campbell). Theodor Herzl was helped by some Christian restorationists among them William Hechler, the Anglican Chaplain of the British Embassy in Vienna to organise the first Zionist Congress in Switzerland in 1897 (Kremers 1992).

The Zionist movement later received more positive support in Europe especially in England. In 1903 there was an offer to settle the Jews in Uganda by the British Foreign office to alleviate Jewish persecutions in Russia. William Hechler influenced Herzl to reject the offer as it would have worked against the Jewish settlement in their “biblical home land.”(Egner, D. 1983).Doctor Chaim Weizmann, a chemist turned politician then based in England was also opposed to the British offer of Uganda to the Jews. He used his influence in England to promote the Zionist dream of a homeland in Palestine.

By 1917 the British endorsed the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine in the Balfour declaration. The British commitment to the 1917 Balfour declaration was lukewarm until 1948 when David Ben Gurion declared the formation of the state of Israel. Surprisingly earlier in 1946 the British gave Trans- Jordan complete independence (Kremers, 1992).

After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70, Palestine was exclusively Arab land. In fact when the Romans rebuilt the city of Jerusalem in AD 132 no Jew was allowed to enter Jerusalem. It was a city for gentiles only. The Jews were scattered all over the world without any homeland.

When World War I ended, Palestine was still largely Arab land. It was occupied by mostly Sunni Muslims with a very small population of Christian Greek Orthodox (Alan Scotland, Restoration magazine, March/April, 1991). Later, Jewish population started increasing. By this time the British were the rulers. The Arabs

never liked British rule. During World War II, the Arabs fought alongside the British and the British promised them independence. In 1937, the British suggested the creation of separate Jewish and Arabic states. The Arabs objected to the idea as they strongly believed that Palestine is for Arabs.

The Arabs believed then as some still believe that the Jews have no right to live in Palestine, not even in the land their ancestors conquered from the Canaanites when they came from slavery in Egypt. In 1947 an attempt to create a bi-national state also failed. At this time the Arabs were the greatest obstacle to the settlement of the Palestinian land issue. The Jews were then ready for a peaceful settlement. Strangely the British showed more concern in the settlement of the minority Jewish population at the expense of the majority Arab population.

In the same year that the British tried to sell the idea of a bi-national state, they indicated that they were giving up their mandate over Palestine. This the British did without settling the land issue between the Arabs and the Jews. Unfortunately they allowed the Zionist Jews to declare the creation of the modern state of Israel and strangely so because the state of Israel was created for all Jews including those in diaspora.

It was clearly stated by the Zionists that all Jews were potentially citizens of the new state of Israel. David Ben Gurion who declared the creation of the state of Israel on 14 May 1948 even later said that if he were Arab he would have been equally bitter about it because it was obvious that the Jews grabbed their motherland. It was obvious the Palestinians had a raw deal but Israeli military mighty put them at a disadvantage.

The fighting that ensued at the declaration of Israel as a state unfortunately led to loss of Arab land to the Jews. The effects of the 1967 and 1973 wars worsened the lot of the Arabs over the Palestinian land. The West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights are some monuments to Arab sufferings in the Middle East. Millions of Palestinian Arabs are now living as refugees in neighbouring Arab states and all over the world (I.N.Goldman as quoted by Alan Scotland, Restoration magazine, March/April, 1991).

THE OLD TESTAMENT ISRAEL

To correctly appreciate the role of Israel in Jehovah’s biblical plan, it is necessary to understand God’s purpose and plan in the creation of man. God’s choice of Old Testament Israel is within his eternal plan for mankind. The bible says that God created man so as for man to glorify him. This implies man manifesting outward splendour as well as revealing the beauty of God’s character in his life. God created man perfectly in his image (Genesis 1:27). Later man sinned and fell short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23).

The advent of sin did not thwart God’s plan for mankind. As soon as man sinned, God’s eternal plan of redemption was operational (Genesis 3:15; Galatians 3:16, 1Peter1:20). To Adam and his descendants the plan of redemption was revealed and the faithful participated in the types and symbols to reaffirm their hope in the redeemer to come. The generations after Adam and Eve got deeper and deeper into sin and God’s plan for mankind was perverted and distorted as presented by mankind until Jehovah’s gracious offer was almost oblivious.

In his grace, Jehovah called Abram later renamed Abraham from his heathen environment in Mesopotamia so as to be his ambassador of grace to a sin sick world. Abraham was called out of his motherland to the land of Canaan with promised blessings to his faithful offspring as God’s chosen nation and priests to bless the entire world(Genesis 12:13). The faithful Abraham was to inculcate God‘s oracles to his children and later to the whole world.

God’s plan and ministry to restore mankind to edenic glory was to be revealed to a dying world in the life and ministry of Abraham‘s faithful offspring. The line of Abraham’s faithful descendants began with Isaac then Jacob and his twelve sons who gave rise to the nation of Israel. The descendants of Abraham enjoyed both temporal and spiritual blessings as a result of Abraham’s faithfulness. However, each one of Abraham’s descendants had to appropriate the spiritual blessings by being faithful to the covenant God made with Abraham manifested outwardly in the physical circumcision of every male child (Genesis 17:9-14).

The physical or natural children of Abraham were to be a light to all nations. They were to reveal God’s plan of redemption to all nations whose concept of God and his grace was distorted and adulterated over the years since the expulsion of Adam and Eve from paradise. Relative to the physical children of Abraham who were repositories of God’s oracles, the other nations were referred to as gentiles. The twelve tribes of Jacob (Israel) eventually became the stewards of God’s oracles. They were to be ambassadors of a loving God to the entire gentile world. This favoured position of the children of Israel was supposed to be for the glory of God.

Israel’s peculiarity was tied to the spiritual responsibility entrusted to her by a loving God for the good of the entire world. The blessings bestowed upon Old Testament Israel were to be shared with the gentiles who lived with them and worshipped Jehovah. The covenant sign with Abraham, circumcision, was to be extended to foreigners who were part of Israel’s households (Genesis17:9-14). This shows the universality of God’s mission. The sign of circumcision was not merely a physical mark but an outward sign of a heart relationship-circumcision of the heart. Similarly being a Jew was more than being a biological descendant but rather implied having accepted by faith God’s offer of restoring man to edenic glory (Romans 2:28,29; Jeremiah 9:25).

In essence the Israelites were chosen by God for no merit of theirs but to reveal Jehovah to the world. In a way they were among the gentiles in Abraham before his call by Jehovah. Abraham, the great Patriarch, was a “gentile” before accepting God’s call. Abraham was brought up a heathen because his father, Terah, served other gods (Joshua 24:2). In a sense, the nation of Israel was taken out, from among heathens by God’s grace. Israel as a nation existed as proof that God’s purpose is to save a people among the gentiles (Acts 10:34-35). This means that Old Testament Israel existed so as to bless others and not for any national advantage or superiority.

The nation of Israel exists so as to avail salvation to mankind as a whole. Jehovah promised the inheritance of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants for strategic purposes. The land of Canaan is centrally positioned. It lies between Europe, Asia

and Africa. From Canaan God’s oracles could reach the entire world easily. The significance of the location is alluded to in God’s reference to the city of Jerusalem in the book of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 5:5). Therefore God the sovereign ruler decided to call Abraham from Ur of the Chaldeans to Canaan in his marvellous plan to save mankind from the ravages of sin. It is in this light that Old Testament Israel’s existence in the Middle East is to be positively appreciated.

Old Testament Israel was God’s steward or manager. A manager can be a good one or a bad one. Whichever way, a manager is answerable to the owner of property (treasure) entrusted to him. Unfortunately Old Testament Israel as a nation proved to be an unfaithful manager, as we shall see later.

Almost all biblical promises to ancient Israel were conditional. The covenant blessings to Israel were often coupled with curses- blessings on obedience and curses on disobedience (Deuteronomy 7:12; Exodus 19:27-33). There are, however, a lot of prophetic allusions that suggest unconditional blessings to Israel as a nation. These have to be understood in the light of the entire word of God- the bible.

Old Testament Israel even under the mighty David and wise Solomon failed to appropriate God’s promises in full. Evidently David and Solomon saw Israel to her highest physical and spiritual moments though short lived. Israel failed to conquer all the nations of Canaan as God promised them. This was due to the fact that as a nation Israel was not faithful to the covenant. Miller, D A.(1994) says under David and Solomon the Jews possessed only 30,000 square miles of the 300,000 square miles promised to them (Deuteronomy 11:23-25).

Since biblical history clearly shows the failure of Old Testament Israel as a nation to live up to her spiritually responsibilities, another entity has to be identified that bears the same responsibilities. God’s plan to save mankind is eternal and no human ability or lack of it can determine its fulfilment. The apparent failure of Israel as a nation reveals the invincibility of God’s prophetic word. The bible shows the rise of spiritual Israel that fulfils God’s eternal plan for mankind as part of the revelation of the New Testament. The spiritual significance of the Old Testament nation of Israel ended with the failure to fulfil the God given mission.

In a way the apparent fiasco reveals God’s mystery of salvation in Jesus and the Church as a fulfilment of God’s word first entrusted to Abraham’s biological children.

THE NEW TESTAMENT ISRAEL

The New Testament introduces “spiritual Jews” as heirs to the oracles once entrusted to the blood descendants of Abraham. This does not mean that there is an alternative to the Old Testament Israel but rather a fulfilment of the promise to Abraham. It is through the remnant of Israel that God’s plan is fulfilled just as biblical prophecy predicted it would.

The New Testament Israel comprises the blood descendants of Abraham and the Gentiles who have responded to God’s call to regeneration-restoration of man to edenic glory 16 (2:28; Deut.30:16). Whereas some of the Jews had only submitted themselves to physical circumcision overlooking the spiritual significance, real Jews are those whose circumcision is of the heart. This does not in any way stifle physical circumcision but puts it as a symbol in its proper perspective. All are children of Abraham by faith and thus heirs to the promise in Jesus Christ (Galatians 3:15-16). Paul discusses this theme at length in his epistles to the Galatians and Romans (Romans 2 and Galatians 3).

Old Testament Israel sealed her spiritual history of unfaithfulness by rejecting Jesus of Nazareth, the promised messiah (Isaiah 53). Israel as a nation failed to recognize the Saviour she had been awaiting for millennia. Jesus was the “seed” promised to the patriarch Abraham. The acceptance of Jesus of Nazareth as “The suffering servant” of the Jewish prophets is the greatest obstacle to the kingdom of God to the faithful of Judaism even in the twenty first century. Only a remnant of Israel accepted Jesus as the messiah.

Jesus Christ tried to explain to the Israelites of his time his role in their covenant relationship with Jehovah (John 8:37-44). Following their persistent rejection of his mission, Jesus pronounced the doom of Israel as a nation in the covenant deal:

“Oh Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill prophets and stone those sent to you…look, your house is left to you desolate” (Matthew 23:37-38).

In the parable of the vineyard, Jesus made the Jews (Pharisees) pronounce judgment upon themselves. To sum up the parable, Jesus rhetorically ended thus, “What then will the owner of the vineyard do?” And the Pharisees responded, “He will come and kill those tenants and give the vineyard to others.”(Mark 12:9). Matthew’s gospel goes further by saying, “Therefore I tell you the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.” (Matthew 21:43).

New Testament theology does not seem to indicate the return of the Jews to Palestine in the Zionist style that culminated into Ben Gurion’s 14 May 1948 declaration of the state of Israel. Ascribing ancient Israel’s role to the Zionist state seems outside the helm of biblical theology. The destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70 and the diaspora was a biblical fulfilment of the prophecy to unfaithful Israel (Deuteronomy 28:62-65). The Jews are therefore no longer God’s peculiar people as a nation by default of the covenant. The subsequent fulfilment of the covenant promises in Jesus Christ the faithful Jew in whom the Torah meets its fulfilment seals the significance of their mission-the type met the antitype and the shadow was swallowed by the substance (Matthew 5:17; Hebrews 8:1-5).

THE CHRISTIAN DEBATE OVER THE ROLE OF THE MODERN STATE OF ISRAEL IN END TIME EVENTS

Some popular evangelical eschatologists teach that all unfulfilled prophecies about ancient Israel will be fulfilled in the modern state of Israel. This theology is academically appealing to modern ears. It is enhanced by the fact that Zionist Israel is a miracle in its existence amidst avowed enemies. This reality superficially manifests a fulfilment of God’s promise to Israel despite the fact that modern Israel is totally unrelated to ancient Israel spiritually.

The prosperity of the modern state of Israel and that of certain individual Jews tantalizingly suggests an apparent fulfilment of bible prophecy to Israel. The question we may ask is; “Is this aspect of the essence of Israel’s existence as God’s chosen people or rather a consequent blessing emanating from the ramifications of God’s covenant with Abraham as a person?” Israelis or Jews may enjoy some blessings as Abraham’s blood descendants as theirs is a culture greatly shaped by God’s physical and spiritual principles. Besides, their history and present predicament naturally produce positive material benefits due to their determination to preserve their nationhood amidst avowed enemies bent to annihilate them at the slightest opportunity. This perspective may blur our perception of biblical prophecy.

In a once Christian best seller, “The late Great Planet Earth” by Hal Lindsey and Carlson, a physical and spiritual restoration of Israel is portrayed. The book tries to explain modern Israel’s role in the end times. The role of Israel in the Middle East political situation is explained culminating into the war of Armageddon. The work discusses modern Israel role in end time events and makes predictions of the Israel’s future involvement in world politics (page 30, paragraph 2). The authors scholarly explain and reveal how Israel’s arch-enemies Egypt and Russia and their allies would spark Armageddon. Communism is exposed as a great force in this conflict. Strangely the book overlooks the conditionality of some of the Old Testament Israel’s covenant promises. Besides, the political events of modern history expose the vulnerability of Lindsey and Carlson’s scholarly predictions.

Egypt is no longer the champion of the Arabic cause it was some years back during the Nasser reign. The Camp David Accord has left a stigma on Egypt from the Arabic perspective. Communism as it existed in the USSR at the time of Lindsey and Carlson’s writing is almost dead in today’s Russia.

The once popular theology on Israel amongst evangelicals is therefore in need of serious revision if it is to be plausible. What currently poses as Christian theology on Israel may otherwise turn out to be a fabrication of western imperialism spiced with theological terminologies. The Dutch church in Apartheid South Africa was for years (1948-1994) used as prophetic voice of the oppressive Nationalist

government; we hope the Church in the West will not have a similar embarrassment in the end.

Another popular evangelical author on the role of Israel in the end times, David C Egner, is equally convinced that Magog, he believes to be representing Russia in whatever political form, will attack Israel after the restoration of modern Israel and rebuilding of the temple thereby sparking Armageddon. His exposition is also based on the book of Ezekiel 38-39.He builds his case by referring to Genesis 22:3 and 22:17, 18 where he expounds on the “seed” of Abraham’s prosperity to build his case for the role of the biological descendants of Abraham in end time events (Egner C, D. Those Irrepressible Jews. Radio Bible Class, USA, 1983). His exposition is not very different from that of Lindsay and Carlson mentioned earlier in our discussion.

The Apostle Paul in the New Testament to the contrary builds his theology on Christ being the “seed” of Abraham in whom salvation is offered to all nations and not Israel as a nation (Galatians 3:16).It is either the prophecy has a double fulfilment or Paul’s interpretation takes precedence on the basis of inspirational authority.

Egner sees, though admittedly not very definite, the Jews’ return to Palestine in 1948 as having had set the stage for the rest of the prophecy to be fulfilled. Briefly the outline of the scenario as he sees it is as follows:

A coming treaty between Israel and the Antichrist(revived Roman Empire ruler)

A third temple to be built in Jerusalem.

Israelites fleeing to the mountains of Judea.

Russian’s invasion of an Israeli occupied Palestine

The messiah’s intervention.

This interpretation is based on the theory of dispensations dividing biblical history as follows: The call of Abraham up to the kingdom of Israel constitutes the early phase with the “Church Age “as a parenthesis in the full time God gave to Israel in the Old Testament prophecies. The rapture completes the Church Age and the resumption of the Jewish era.

These evangelical scholars pursue a literal interpretation of some prophecies such as Armageddon of Revelation 16 thereby taking the nation of Israel as a central player in the end time events and carefully watching events in the Middle East. Significant in their view of events is the rebirth of Israel in 1948 and the recapture of Jerusalem in 1967 with the possible rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem and the coming of the Antichrist who would promise false peace to Israel only to persecute and later spark Armageddon that would culminate in the Messiah’s coming to Israel’s rescue. The raptured Church would be enjoying the millennium in heaven as the Jewish era resumes the last phase of Israel’s prophetic history. It is during this period of the last phase of Israel’s history that it is believed there would be a great tribulation to those who would have been unfortunate to be left out in the rapture.

Though not all evangelicals agree on the exact nature of the detailed fulfilment, the general view is that the secret rapture will occur before Russia invades Israel. It is believed that a seven year tribulation will follow while the raptured Church is in heaven with Christ. There are some Evangelical scholars who don’t believe in the rebuilding of the temple as a fulfilment of the prophecy to modern Israel. There is some agreement among these scholars that the tribulation will be meant to punish the nations and help Israel to repent. The general view among evangelicals is that the beast of Revelation 13 and the little horn of Daniel 7 refer to the antichrist of the revived Roman Empire.

This school of thought makes the prophetic teachings of the New Testament by Jesus, Paul, and the Apostles very difficult to reconcile with the Old Testament. Interestingly dispensationalist scholars seemingly try to force the New Testament fit in the unfulfilled Old Testament prophecies to Israel. These scholars seemingly

if not intentionally make the role of Israel’s restoration primary to the interpretation of end time prophecies.

The trouble with this eschatological interpretation is that it seems to pit the East (Russia) against the Christian West indicative of the Cold War mind- set of the time of Lindsay and Carlson’s writing of the then Christian bestseller-“ The Late Great Planet Earth.” Israel is made the Centre of prophecy and not Christ. To the contrary the book of Revelation introduces itself as the revelation of Jesus Christ to his Church in agreement with the rest of the Scripture; Jesus Christ is the Centre of the end time conflict with the beast as the villain. Armageddon contrary to the depiction commonly used by most evangelicals and political commentary as a physical end time battle comes out clothed in the symbol of King Cyrus’ defeat of ancient Babylon( Revelation 16:12-16 reference to Armageddon). The war is clothed in the spiritual symbols of the Old Testament referring to the “drying of the Euphrates river” as consistently used by Jesus Christ and the Apostles when discussing application of Old Testament prophecy to their time.

It is very evident that the Old Testament economy was a shadow of Christ and Christian scriptures are Christocentric by their very nature. In Jesus Christ the shadow culminates into the substance in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and high priestly ministry of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary and the final victory of the King of Kings over the beast (Babylon).

Most end times prophetic interpretations create unending controversies because of our failure to recognise the bible as anchored in Christ and his unfolding kingdom that will culminate in the full restoration of mankind to the glory lost in Eden when man broke the law of God. There is a tendency to make the “beast”, “Israel” or such topics as the “mark of the beast” the focus that the Gospel is oblivious in the teachings of end time events. It has to be appreciated that the Old Testament is the Infrastructure and the New Testament is the superstructure of God’s kingdom and their purpose is to reveal Christ.

The confusion over the role of Israel in the end times and the Christian attitude towards modern Israel arise from the unfortunate fixation of the popular Christian stance towards modern Israel on Old Testament prophecies without

appreciating that Jesus Christ made end time prophecies clearer in his teachings and later in the teachings of his Apostles(John 5: 39,40).

The debate on the role of Israel is complicated by the fact that arguments over detail arise from the proponents’ commitment to their schools of thought as regarding Christian eschatology-as pre-millenialists, Amillenialists or Post-millenialists.Academics in general have a tendency to fall in love almost blindly with their favourite theories. Worse still there are still fine differences even within a particular school of thought as regarding some detail. Admittedly differences are health in the pursuit of knowledge but not against the foundation of authority and truth-Jesus and the Apostles. When it comes to the bible we have to realise that the knowledge it contains is meant to transform lives and not only for academic satisfaction thus our need of an open mind approach to discussions posing differences of understanding.

Jesus Christ is the faithful Jew in whom all the law and prophets are fulfilled. He is the “seed’ of Abraham in whom all nations of the world are blessed and the suffering “servant” of the prophecies of Isaiah. To Noah was given the covenant of mercy to all, to David was given the covenant of the Kingdom of God, and to Israel at Sinai was given the conditional covenant of holiness fulfilled only in the Christ as the perfect and faithful Jew in whom all nations receive the blessings through the nation of Israel. This is the culmination of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 12: 2-3).The New Testament is the revelation of the mystery of salvation first given to the Patriarchs and prophets now fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ.

The Apostles saw the ministry of John the Baptist as the coming of Elijah of Malachi 4; In the Pentecost, they saw the promise of the latter rain of Joel 2; in the death of Jesus Christ, they saw the fulfilment of the suffering servant of Isaiah ; in the second coming of Jesus they saw the fulfilment of the Messiah’s everlasting kingdom. This is the core to New Testament teaching on end times.

The concept of Israel is redefined in Jesus as Israel is now both Jews and Gentiles in Christ. In Jesus Christ Israel is a blessing to the world (Genesis 12:2; Isaiah 49:3-6).

God always speaks to people in terms appropriate to their own time, place and circumstances

“God reveals his knowledge about the end without bypassing the culture, literary style or ways of thinking of those he reveals himself”

This entails that New Testament Christians should relate differently to the land promises of the Old Testament (Paulien J, 1998).

The Church needs a better prophetic voice than what is commonly alluded to as Christian theology on Israel. Zionism is a political movement and should not be mistaken for a spiritual restoration of biblical Israel. Christian eschatology should be anchored on Jesus Christ’s discourse on end times in Matthew 24 and Luke 21, Paul’s revelation on the same and the Apostles’ writings sealed by the book of Revelation. It is around these that all Old Testament eschatological writings are to be interpreted. This is crucial because God’s kingdom has been unfolding through history and culminates in Jesus Christ. This I believe will prevent New Testament Christians from repeating the fiasco of Judaism of Jesus’ time of failing to recognise the messiah in Jesus of Nazareth’s ministry as a result of faulty prophetic interpretation. This predicament would render the majority of the Christian Church unable to read the signs of the end correctly and set up themselves for the global deception of Revelation 13:8.

Biblical prophecy is above politics as it is a revelation of God’s program for mankind. The religio-political events of the modern state of Israel and the Middle East in general though significant should not be the focus but what Jesus taught to fulfil the Law and the prophets of the Old Testament.

CONCLUSION

The state of Israel claims to have the right to invade Palestine. The major reason is that Israel has the right to protect herself as well as a biblical right to the occupation of Palestine. The Israelis say as a way of defending themselves they have to raid Palestinians before they attack Israel. At the same time Palestinians

also believe that they have the right to their home land of the pre-1967 and 1973 wars. Some Palestinians unfortunately also believe that Israel as a nation should be obliterated from the Middle East. This naturally perpetuates the land conflict to an interminable war situation.

A lot of Christian groups in the West and many around the globe support the Jewish state of Israel morally and through some government policies financially in the conflict with the Palestinians. These Christians even lobby their governments to support Israel in her struggle against the Palestinians and her Arab neighbours. These Christian groups believe that it is their Christian responsibility with consequent blessings emanating from Abrahamic promises of the book of Genesis.

The foundation of the pro-Israel Christian theology is scripturally shaky because it ignores the conditionality of some of the Old Testament promises to Israel as well as the unfolding nature of the kingdom of God concept that though eternal also has a contextual application. These promises are better appreciated when taken from the point of view of the New Testament revelation as expounded by Jesus Christ and the Apostles.

A careful examination of the picture of end times as revealed to Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Joel, apocalyptic writings of the inter-testamental period, and the New Testament writers clearly shows that each had a contextual element that took contemporary culture and mind-set into consideration without distorting divine revelation. Scholars such as Jon Paulien have dealt with these studies at length (see “What The Bible teaches About End Times”).It is therefore not wise to transplant passages from Ezekiel, Zechariah and other prophets to develop a panorama of last day events without taking into account the unfolding nature of revelation throughout the history of the bible.

The Christian understanding of the role of modern Israel is further influenced by the Jewish lobby group in the United States of America which greatly influences Washington’s foreign policy in the Middle East. The rest of the world seems to be following the lead. This is much so politically, socially and religiously because the USA is a global trend setter. The pro-Israel evangelicals have taken advantage of

this to give Israel the support she enjoys without fear of a political backlash. This stance militates against Christian gospel outreach to Arabic nations as Christians are generally perceived as enemies of the Arabic cause.

Lobby groups aside, Americans as a government traditionally tend to support the Israeli demands in the Palestinian land issue. This is further buttressed by the presence of a strong Christian lobby group giving the USA a double edged sword in terms of political support to Israel in the conflict. The USA foreign policy towards Israel is usually ill perceived by the Arab world as they see it as a Christian stance because the West is perceived as such in general.

It is significant to appreciate that the American interests in the Middle East or Palestinian conflict are broader than mere support for Israel. There are global and Middle East interests that are primary. The current American approach to the resolution of the Palestinian land issue as regarding the 1967 borders as a basis for the settlement has antagonised the Jewish lobby as well as the pro-Israel Christians (Time, August 23, 2010).This is an enormous challenge the Barack Obama administration will have to contend with given the economic and spiritual muscle the American Jews and Christians wield.

Christians need to appreciate that the Zionist dream is more political than it is religious. There isn’t much in it tied to Old Testament Israel in terms of spiritual significance. It is unfortunate that Christians in leadership work to perpetuate the bloody conflict by using their religious platform to inflame the conflict by using questionable scriptural interpretation to back their political stance. These sensitive positions in world politics would be better left to professional politicians.

Pastor Joseph Kansema in his book,” Kingdom Come and Kingdom Go” is representative of this sincere but difficult Christian position as he boldly states that he “believes the solution to the Palestinian land conflict in his opinion is in giving Israel its biblical original borders.” He further states that he sympathizes with Palestinians but he can’t change God’s word (Joseph Kansema, Kingdom Come and Kingdom Go, Discipleship Ministries, Mafikeng, RSA, 2003 p20).

The implication of the above stance is that God’s acts are arbitrary. It is clear from the bible that though sovereign, God is loving, merciful, gracious, just and holy. He cannot just will that the Israelis oppress Palestinians as pawns in his grand plan. God’s purpose through Israel is meant to save mankind from sin thereby being a blessing to other nations. Not even Old Testament Israel was given the mandate to oppress other nations. Israel was in the Old Testament time only used in war situations to execute God’s judgment to nations that were perceived by God in his holiness and wisdom to have had filled the cup of their iniquities. That responsibility to execute God’s righteous judgment required Israel to be relatively obedient to God. The fact that the nation of Israel occupies a small fraction of the promise land today is indicative of the disobedience of Israel that led to the forfeiture of the right to full occupation of Canaan.

Biblically speaking, a linear prophecy silences Israel, ancient or modern, to exclusive rights over Palestine. Around 538 BC, the prophet Daniel spelled out a mathematical time limit to ancient Israel’s privileged existence as God’s chosen nation (Daniel 9:24-27).This prophecy is part of the longest time prophecy in the bible that begins in Daniel 8:14.The time limit to rebellious Israel commences with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem and restore civil administration by a Persian Emperor. Some scholars peg the commencement of this decree at 444 BC while some believe the 457 BC decree by Emperor Arterxerxes has better historical support. The seventy symbolic weeks given to the Jews ended in the first quarter of the first century of the Christian era. If we take 457BC as our basis of the calculation, the seventy weeks or literal 490 years would terminate in AD 34. Many scholars believe that this is around the time Deacon Stephen was martyred resulting in the wave of persecutions that took the Gospel to the Gentiles. Later Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans resulting into the last diaspora of the Jews (For detailed explanations of the prophecy refer to the appendix).

It is therefore clear that the Jews have no exclusive rights to the occupation of Palestine from a purely biblical point of view. The challenge to Christians is to work and pray for the peaceful co-existence of both the Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East. Palestinians should be persuaded to accept the existence of their Jewish neighbours. The Israelis’ security concerns should also be seriously taken

into accounts more so that they have suffered severe persecutions at the hands of all world powers through history. Ironically, the same Christians who planted the seed for the holocausts are now the ones inflaming the flames of violence by unquestionably providing material and moral support to one party in a bloody conflict.

Modern Palestine is for Palestinians in a general sense that includes descendants of the Philistines, Canaanites and Jews. Both Jews and Arab Palestinians have equally convincing biblical reasons to be in the region as they are Abraham’s descendants with promises of greatness to both. None of them would be a convincing winner on the basis of purely military might as that would be impossible from a biblical prophecy point of view. It is noble for Christians to prevent careless loss of lives rather than inflame the already volatile political situation in the Middle East. There is an urgent need to promote the peaceful co-existence of all parties to the conflict. I strongly believe Jesus Christ the Prince of Peace loves it so. It is not too late for Christians to make a difference.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. BRITTEN B, WE DON’T WANT YOUR WHAT WHITE RELIGION

MULTIMEDIADIA PUBLICATIONS, LUSAKA, 1984

2. CHIBAMBA,A RIGHT IS MIGHTY, PLO, ZIMBABWE 1990.

3. EGNER C, DAVID, THOSE IRRESPONSIBLE JEWS, RADIO BIBLE CLASS, USA, 1983.

4. HOLOHAN F.T, FROM BISMARCK TO BE GAULLE, GILL AND MAC MILLAN, DUBLIN 1988

5. LOWE N, MASTERING MODERN WORLD HISTORY, MACMILLAN, LONDON 1988.

6. LUGT H, V, ISRAEL: KEY TO WORLD PEACE, RADIO, BIBLE CLASS USA, 1981

7. VANDEMAN G. E, SHOWDOWN IN THE MIDDLE EAST, PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING, CARLIFONIA, 1980.

8. RESTORATION (MAG) MARCH/ APRIL 1991; MAY/JUNE 1991 AND JULY/AUGUST 1991.

9. BBC RADIO PROGRAMMES (1990-2002)

THE QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY

AND

THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT (II)

“A PROPHETIC VIEW OF THE VATICAN CENTRED ECUMENISM”

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Roman Catholic Church has a direct historical link with the primitive Christian Church whose real root is the Biblical Church. The Biblical Church after separation from Judaism was Catholic (universal) but because Roman Catholic after the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 5th century. The Vatican policy on ecumenism therefore puzzlingly receives its authority from this historical background. Besides, the Roman Church unlike Protestants bases its teachings and religious authority on the bible and Church traditions believed to have been passed on from the Church fathers. A brief look at Church history is therefore necessary before we venture into the prophetic view of the Vatican policy on ecumenism.

The turning point in Church history was the ‘conversion’ of Emperor Constantine of Rome around AD 312. Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire in the fourth century. Later in AD533 Emperor Justinian of the East also declared the Bishop of the Rome the leader of all Christians in his empire. There were pockets of believers in the empire who did not concur with Justinian’s decree. The Arians were the most opposed to the authority of Rome in the sixth century. The voice of defiance was temporarily silenced when the last of the Arians threat, the Ostrogoth, were vanquished in AD 538. The papacy enjoyed full religious authority in Europe until 1798 when General Berthia invaded the Vatican and took the Pope prisoner to France where he later died.

There were a number of schisms in the Church after AD 538. The major ones were the 1054 Orthodox breakaway and the 1517 Protestant reformation. Eastern Europe was predominantly Orthodox while Western Europe became Catholic and Protestant. The Roman Catholic Church has enjoyed relative certainty and security with the pope at the helm. The pope is believed to be the Vicar or representative of Christ and therefore rebellion against his authority is taken very seriously by faithful Catholics. The Church in its ideal sense refers to the Catholic Church. The Church in its universal sense is believed to be under the Pope. The Church in this sense refers to the Catholic Church and not the Roman

Catholic Church. This distinction often eludes most Protestants. Reference is here made to the world Church in its ideal sense.

The certain and definite ecclesiastical authority invested in the office of the Pope and the Roman hierarchy as a whole shapes the reaction of the Roman Catholic Church to the Orthodox and Protestants’ opposition to the papacy. To sum up her authority, the Roman Catholic Church says:

“For not man, but God separates those whom the Roman pontiff (who exercise the functions, not of mere man but of the true God on Earth), having weighed the necessity or benefit of the Church, dissolves, not by human but rather divine authority.” (Decretals of Gregory IX; Book I, Title 7, chapter 3, in corpustius canonic [1555-56 Ed] vol 2).

At the time of the 1054 and1517 schisms, those who were separated from Rome were clearly heretics in the Roman Church’s eyes. Puzzlingly the Roman Catholic voice has toned down to amicable references to Protestants and Orthodox Churches as “separated brethren.” Interestingly the Church maintains that it has not changed any of its doctrines. It still maintains that its authority is infallible as regards ecclesiastical matters.

A PROPHETIC VIEW

As we begin to delve into the Roman Catholic policy on ecumenism and how it affects Christendom we are tempted to seek answers to certain cardinal issues as regards Christian unity. Is this unity tenable without betraying the cause of the Protestant reformers? Is the Roman Catholic Church ready to bend or even discard some of its fundamental beliefs to accommodate Protestants? These questions need honest answers as ecumenism without addressing ourselves to these issues is tantamount to unhealthy indoctrination if not brainwashing people into the ‘kingdom of God.’

In this exposition we will take a position that focuses on the activities of the Roman Catholic Church as seen in the Vatican II document as primary. I believe

the name “mother church” is used by Roman Catholics to imply just this. This position is biblical as the paper will try to show from bible prophecy how the ecumenism of the world Council of Churches (WCC) fits in the general picture as I perceive it.

Most bible scholars, Catholic and Protestant, agree that the prophecy of Daniel chapter seven with its four “beasts” covers the period from the Neo-Babylon to the divisions of the Roman Empire which most historians peg at a period after AD 476. This prophecy says that during the time of the divisions of the Roman Empire, God intervenes. Daniel 7:27 says:

“Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms of the whole world will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High, his kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will Worship and obey him."

The context shows that God will set up his everlasting kingdom by bringing the nations that came out of the fall of the Roman Empire to an abrupt end. Briefly, the kingdoms (or nations) of the world in relation to Israel’s significance as God’s chosen people are as follows:

The lion-like beast (Neo-Babylon)

The bear-like beast (Mede-Persia)

The leopard-like beast (Greco-Macedonian)

The mysterious beast (Rome).

The mysterious beast (Rome) had ten horns symbolizing the division of the Roman Empire that resulted into the countries of Western Europe (Daniel 7:23, 24).

The division of Rome into several kingdoms occurred following the conquest of Western Europe by Germanic tribes:

Out of pagan Rome came the independent kingdoms of the Ostrogoth, Visigoths, Lombard, Franks, Burgundies, Vandals, Heruli, Anglo-Saxons etc.; from these kingdoms developed what is now Western Europe.

Since we are looking at the activities of the Roman Catholic Church as regards ecumenism in our time, we should search for prophetic cues in the prophecy of Daniel chapter seven following the division of Rome into kingdoms and later, states and extend our pursuit up to the twenty-first century.

The division of Rome in Daniel’s prophecy is depicted by the ten horns of the fourth beast, which defies any zoological description (Daniel 7:7-8). It is important to note that this prophecy covers crucial issues concerning the true worship of God from the fall of Rome to the second advent of Jesus Christ. The focuses of our search for clues are the events described in Daniel 7:7-8.

The fourth beast of Daniel chapter seven represents the fourth world kingdom after Neo-Babylon which from a historical view is the Roman Empire. Daniel chapter seven verses seven to eight (7-8) bring to view a ‘little horn(peculiar nation or kingdom) which came out of the fourth beast among the ten horns (kingdoms or nations) that emerged later than the ten horns (kingdoms or nations). This little horn had three (3) of the original ten (10) horns (kingdoms or nations) uprooted before it. The implication is that three of the original kingdoms were to be wiped out before the little horn (peculiar kingdom or nation) would establish its authority.

The little horn would have ‘eyes like a man’ and ‘a mouth’ that speaks blasphemously or boastfully. Unlike the other powers out of Rome, the little horn would exist influentially after AD 476(fall of Rome) and continue up to the coming of Jesus. The little horn is therefore an active religio-political power originally from the pagan Roman Empire and geographically centred in Western Europe.

The following are some of characteristics of the little horn (religio-political power) as laid down in Daniel chapter seven:

It rose out of the fourth beast (Rome).

It appeared after the ten horns (division of Rome).

It was ‘little’ when it was seen but became ‘greater than its fellows.’

It was to put down three horns (kingdoms).

It had “a mouth speaking great things and against the most High” (blasphemous).

It was given special power for “a time, two times and half a time (1260 literal years).

A review of world history of the period AD 476 to date gives only one organisation answering to all the characteristics listed above. This religio-political entity is the Christian Church of Western Europe that rose to religio-political prominence as the authority of Roman emperors was crumbling. The Church actually boasted and still boasts of having salvaged western civilization. This Church is the Catholic (universal) Church to which both Protestants and Roman Catholics owe their origin. The present Roman Catholic Church is structurally the same but constitutionally different from this Church of the Dark ages. The church was Catholic but became Roman Catholic during the decline of the Roman Empire.

The prophecy of Daniel says the little horn rose out of the fourth beast. This literally means the Church came out of the ruins of the Roman Empire with the religio-political authority that came with the conversion of Emperor Constantine. Since the prophecy shows the little horn as appearing after “ten other horns”, this literally means the prominence of the religio-political Church is after the division of the pagan Roman Empire(After AD 476). The prophecy goes on to say the “little horn” became greater than its fellows implying that the Church would assume authority over political powers of Western Europe. The Dark Ages confirm that the Church through the papacy was supreme over political systems. There is historical evidence of payment of taxes to the Church and instances where kings were even deposed by popes for various offences.

We noticed that the Church through the papacy assumed full superintendence over all Christians in AD 538 though the decree was made earlier in AD 533. The elimination of the Arian kingdoms of the Heruli, Vandals and Ostrogoth answers to the “putting down of the three horns” before the little horn appeared as

depicted in the prophecy of Daniel. The papacy enjoyed full religio- political power until 1798 when General Berthia of France invaded the Vatican and took Pope Pius VI prisoner to France. This means from 538 to 1798, the Church enjoyed unchallenged religio- political leadership for a period of 1,260 years. This period gives the darkest record in Church history. Some historians say over 50 million people were killed on religious grounds either by the Church or by some so called Christian nations with the full authority of the Church. This answers to the oppression or “wearing out” of saints of the Most High by the little horn (Daniel 7:25). All students of history know that reformers such as Jerome, Wycliffe, John Huss and many others were killed by the Church. The Spanish inquisition and the Saint Bartholomew Massacre and many such persecutions give even a darker picture. Pope John Paul II made several public apologies for these atrocious events.

The time limit of “a time, two times, and half a time” refers to three and a half prophetic years which according to a day for a year biblical prophetic interpretation as used in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 stands for 1,260 years using the Jewish lunar calendar where a month is about 30 days. There is some general agreement over this principle among some Jewish scholars and early Christian ones, Isaac Newton inclusive. This period apparently agrees with the papal reign of the state-church of the Dark Ages-AD 538 to 1798.There are some disagreements over the specificity of the beginning date for the period among scholars but there is a general agreement over the validity of the period of papal oppression.

The Church through the papacy assumed powers biblically held only by God himself. Some popes in history were so arrogant that they claimed to be ‘king of Heavens and Earth and lower regions’ (Lucius Ferraris, Promptas bibliotheca, (Papa; Art 1772-1771 Ed, vol 1 p 26). Popes still claim to be Vicars of Christ giving themselves unquestionable authority over the Church despite how corrupt they might be. This is clearly blasphemy (see Daniel 7:25). The papal Church also teaches that in the offering of the mass, a priest no matter how sinful has the privilege of turning the bread and wine into the very body blood of Jesus. In my opinion these doctrines border on blasphemy unless popes are divine.

The Church of the Dark Ages through the papacy claimed to have had received authority even to change divine laws to suit the Church. In this regard the Ten Commandments as they appeared in catechisms were different from those given to Moses as recorded in Exodus 20. Besides, a lot of pagan sacred days and practices where Christianised much to the confusion of ordinary believers. The Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday in honour of the resurrection and several pagan shrines and temples were dedicated to saints. This fulfils Daniel’s prophecy of “attempting to change divine laws and seasons.”

The little horn of Daniel 7:8, 25 without any doubt is a symbolic representation of the activities of the Church (Papacy). As it were, the Papacy took the Church hostage. As long as the Roman Catholic Church embraces the mixture of paganism and Christianity as progressively incorporated into doctrines by the so called Christian philosophers and scholars; the pope as a representative of the historical institution, the papacy, will answer to the little horn of Daniel chapter 7. This interpretation was expounded long before the 1054 and 1517 schisms by honest and Church loving saints within the Church as soon as the signs of the “falling away” were observed. Attention was systematically drawn away from this truth by supporters of the paganised Christianity who developed a defensive interpretation that identified the “little horn” as a Jewish anti-Christ who would appear before Jesus’ Second Advent. This just suited the anti-Semitism that had been part of Roman Catholicism.

The search for clues to the unlocking of the ecumenical puzzle is only complete when the book of Daniel is complemented with the prophecy of Revelation.The book of Revelation at chapter 13, just like Daniel 7 has a lot of symbolism. The chapter begins by introducing the first “beast” that comes out of water. In Daniel 7:23 we are told that a “beast” represent a political power, kingdom or nation. Revelation 17:15 tells us that “waters” represent “people, multitudes, nations and languages”. Therefore the beast of Revelation 13 represents a “power” that comes out of a highly populated part of the earth. Interestingly the symbolic

beast of Revelation 13 is a composite one. It has four parts of the four beasts of Daniel 7 as follows:

‘Ten horns’ like the ten horns of the fourth beast of Daniel.

Blasphemous names ‘on each of its heads like the blasphemous little horn’ of Daniel 7.

It looked like a leopard like the third beast of Daniel 7.

It had feet like those of bear and a bear was the second beast in Daniel 7.

It had a mouth of a lion, which is the first beast of Daniel 7.

It persecuted God’ people for 42 months which is equivalent to the three and a half years of Daniel 7 (note that 42x30=1260 days).

The beast or a political power of Revelation 13 has some characteristic of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), Greece (leopard) and Rome (mysterious beast with ten horns) as shown by the symbolic representation of the description. The composite beast however has blasphemous names on its heads and persecutes saints for 1260 days. The beast is therefore a religio-political power just like the little horn of Daniel 7:8, 25.

With the above listed characteristics one can safely assume that the ‘little horn’ and the leopard-like beast are either the same power or one is a mirror image of the other. It is easier to assume that the two are actually the same entity. Let us pursue this line further. Since the little horn is already established as the papacy, we can tentatively take it that the leopard-like beast symbolizes the same organization, the papacy.

We have above everything else to establish the fact that the Papacy represented by the leopard-like beast of Revelation 13 is composite as an institution but Greek-like in operation. Is the papacy “Greek-like” since the leopard in Daniel 7 represents the Greek kingdom?

To try to answer this question, it is a known fact to all who have studied works of Greek philosophers that the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy’s operations owes

much to Greek philosophy, especially Plato’s theories. Besides, Catholic scholars admit to having borrowed ‘good’ knowledge from the pagan cultures of the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and obviously Rome to enrich church theology and administrative structure. This explains the composite nature of the leopard-like beast, which in reality is a detailed revelation of the activities of the ‘little horn’ of Daniel 7. In fact, Daniel was told that he would not understand some of the details of his visions as they were meant for “the end time” (see Daniel 12:8-10).

The ten horns of the composite beast carry over the issues of the divisions of the Roman Empire from which the religio-political authority developed. History shows that the decline of the Roman Empire was actually the development of the papal authority. Some Catholic scholars still claim that the use of the name Roman Catholic Church instead of simply the Catholic Church is very important as it is a mark of the authenticity of the Church.

The prophecy of Revelation 13 says one of the heads of the beast had a “mortal wound” from which it miraculously recovered much to the amazement of the whole world. The invasion and imprisonment of Pope Pius VI in 1798 by the French with the consequent loss of political authority was therefore the infliction of the “mortal wound”. In fact the Pope died in prison! By 1870 the papacy lost the seven papal Duchies and three provinces as a result of the Victor Emmanuel conquest. The “healing of the wound” should therefore imply the re-establishment of the religio-political authority after the French invasion of the Vatican.

In 1929 a treaty of St John the Lateran between the Roman Catholic Church and the Italian government under Premier Mussolini was signed. On behalf of the papacy, Cardinal Gasparri met Mussolini ‘healing the wound’ of many years. The Vatican was given back its city-state status which it had lost. Since 1929 the papacy has been steadily increasing her influence on world politics and of course religions by entering into strategic treaties with a number of political and religious institutions. The Roman Catholic Church has ever since been regaining her lost glory. Interestingly, the world at large seems to have forgiven the Church of atrocities committed during the Dark Ages much to the advantage of the Church.

The prophecy of Revelation 13 says, “But the mortal wound was healed; the world wondered and followed the beast.” The general awakening of the world to the authority of the Pope is therefore a lucid fulfilment of the prophecy.

The puzzling initiative of the Roman Catholic Church authority on ecumenism since Vatican II suits well in contributing to the “world wondering and following the beast.” It is now clear that the “little horn” of Daniel 7 and the “first beast” of Revelation 13 is a reference to the papacy as an institution and not an individual pope as such. However, it is a known fact that a pope stands at the head of this historical institution. It should be made clear that this prophecy refers to the Church as an institution and not individual Roman Catholic believers many of whom are sincere Christians just like any other Christian believers. History shows that there have been many periods of apostasy in Church history dating as far back as the Old Testament times through the primitive church, middle ages and the Protestant era up to the twenty first century. This just happens to be the last major apostasy just before Jesus Christ’s Second Advent.

Taking these prophetic and historical revelations into consideration, ecumenism can only work when Catholicism is the nucleus of the union of Churches of Christendom. In such an important spiritual programme, it is easy to follow the tide but very difficult to judge the direction of the flow of the current.

WHERE TO CHRISTENDOM?

We can now use Revelation 13 as the backdrop in our examination of the role of the Roman Catholic Church in the ecumenical movement. The current voice of the Vatican on ecumenism is apparently contradictory to that heard centuries ago. Some Roman Catholic scholars says that “only those outside the mainstream of Catholicism have this illusory knowledge of the contradiction,” Another catholic scholar similarly says “ …historical data and proven facts cannot be used to pass decisive judgment upon the essential nature of the Catholic structure.” The same scholar goes on to say “only the man who himself lives in the Catholic life stream… only he can know the full meaning and complete reality of it.” It is against this background that we will try to tackle the conundrum of the Vatican II Ecumenical policy and its progress.

It is very important to understand that the peculiarity of the Roman Catholic Church centres much in the personality of the pope in office at a particular time not as mere administrator but part of the organised system of the church leadership structure that constitutes the papacy. There are some elements of permanence and apparent change in the papacy that enhance its almost mysterious nature. This renders the system elusive to scrutiny from a human point of view. The whole issue is therefore only possible to analyse from a purely scriptural perspective. To try to elucidate, Pope Leo XII said “We (popes) hold upon this earth the place of the Almighty.” (The reunion of the Christendom, June 20, 1894). This in a nutshell is the basis of the ecumenical programme of the Vatican.

Since Protestants have a well-organized structure meant to work towards the unity of Christians and Catholics are not part of this structure, the progress already made will only help to actualise the Roman Catholic mode of ecumenism. The World Council of Churches’ activities have greatly helped in creating the current tolerance and mutual understanding that the Catholic Church can exploit to its advantage. The Catholic Church, though not a member of the World Council of Churches has co-operated with the ecumenical programmes of the Protestant churches. To appreciate such ecumenical progress, a look at the list of some mammoth steps (judged against the historical obstacles) taken by both Catholics and Protestants towards unity in Zambia is worth taking a look at. The following are some of the ecumenical achievements:

The Christian Council of Zambia.

Mindolo Ecumenical Centre.

The Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia.

The common Religious Education Syllabus for schools in Zambia.

Multimedia Zambia and

Churches Medical Association of Zambia.

Where are these achievements likely to lead to, the World Council of Churches mode or Catholic mode of ecumenism? The ecumenical movement is a reality and its programmes affect all Christians either directly or indirectly but it is the direction of unity that needs to be recognized.

If the reasons for the Protestant Reformation of the 16 th century still hold water, and the Roman Catholic Church is still what it was in doctrines way back in 1517, then one would venture to ask; “Could it be that the ecumenical movement in whatever form is just a pawn in a great cosmic drama with a nicely calculated objective?”

At one time, during his campaign programmes, former USA president F.D Roosevelt said , “When you see somebody you admire arm in arm with someone you mistrust, ask yourself this fundamental question: Who is using who?” In this quest for unity, who is using who?

The Roman Catholic Church says that ecumenism is only achievable when the Roman Catholic Church as a ‘mother’ recognizes rudiments of a preparation of reunion of all Christians. The preparation is believed to be demanded by the present state of Christendom in general and of the West in particular. (Karl Adam, THE SPIRIT OF CATHOLICISM, p120.) Assumingly, the ‘new look’Roman Catholic Church (since Vatican II) came at the right time. Despite the historical turn around that took the entire Christian world by surprise, the Roman Catholic Church did not join the World Council of Churches but opted to have her own ecumenical programme. The Church recognizes the necessity of re-union but she is only prepared for such a reunion on her terms. The Roman Catholic Church believes that the World Council of Churches terms of Christian unity lead to reunion by destruction. (Lesley Rumble, THAT CATHOLIC CHURCH, p374). In THE SPRIT OF CATHOLICISM, Karl Adam argues, “The Catholic Church does not recognize other Christian communions as churches of like order and rights with itself as this is tantamount of infidelity to her own nature”. (Karl Adam, p120).

The prayer of every sincere Christian is that the Church be one in doctrine and ministry. The ecumenical movement’s efforts towards unity are sincere but sincerity does not guarantee authenticity. It is possible to be sincerely wrong. The

book of Proverbs says, “There is a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof is death” (Proverb 14:12). The indicators from biblical prophecy and current affairs are clearly signalling that the kind of unity the ecumenical movement is likely to achieve would be Roman Catholic oriented. Protestants do not have the fibre to bind them together to facilitate the accommodation of the Roman Catholic Church. Besides, the unity sought and likely to be achieved is a counterfeit of the biblical unity because it does not emphasise repentance and rededication to the authority of the bible to promote righteousness. Christian unity is a consequence of the work of the Holy Spirit and only then is it genuine.

The Church of God in the universal sense is already listening to the voice of the shepherd and slowly but surely growing in unity as they are heading the truth. To be truly united, the Church requires a faith that involves knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus, believing the truth and obeying it-moving in the leading of the Spirit of God.

The World Council of Churches and Protestants in general have a serious crisis in the area of authority; to the contrary, the Roman Catholic Church authority, the papacy, seems to have passed the test of time. Ecumenism is therefore clearly in favour of Catholicism. The papacy has qualities of leadership currently lacking in the Protestant World. She seems to have the “right keys” to unlock political, social, economic and spiritual dilemmas currently gnawing organisational stamina of almost all world religions. The World political and religious organisations have just wakened up to the pope’s authority. The revival of the pope’s authority as evidenced in Pope John Paul II’s acceptance across racial, political and religious barriers particularly since the 1980s vindicates this motif.

The pilgrim Pope was clearly a world favourite! Could Lenin believe that the USSR just before crumbling dreamt of establishing ambassadorial relations with the Vatican? Could one imagine Martin Luther after 1517 at an ecumenical mass with the Pope ministering the service? What with Pope John Paul II’s visits to the USA and the impact of the visits on the mostly Protestant American population!

Where some expected protests, there were wild cheers that would turn the martyred Protestant reformers in their graves. To top it up, think of the crowds in

attendance at Pope John Paul II’s services in Africa, Eastern Europe, and Asia in the 1990; where to Ecumenism?

The Roman Catholic Church has extended unbelievable tolerance to many Protestant churches and Protestants have taken the arm of Catholicism without suspicion and that is expected of them by the Roman Catholic Church. In 1979 at a meeting in Chicago, USA, Pope John Paul II told Catholic bishops to “Let the work of drawing near to our separated brethren go on, with understanding, with great love, but without deviating from the true Catholic doctrine.” On the other hand in 1986 in Columbia, S.C. Pope John Paul II exhorted 27 Eastern orthodox and Protestant leaders “…to work towards the time it will be possible for Christians to confess together the one faith.” What a noble plea! Wait a minute, which one faith? Can Orthodox and Protestant churches accept this kind of unity?

The answer to the above question is yes and no. Yes, in the sense that the Roman Catholic Church enjoys comparatively better stability than Orthodox and Protestant denominations economically, politically and theologically. Who wouldn’t want such stability amidst economic, political and theologically turbulences of the 21st century? And no, in the sense that Orthodox and Protestant churches cannot accept the type of Christian unity proposed by the Roman Catholics without betraying the essence of their spiritual existence.

THE CLIMAX OF THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT

To complete our prophetic view of the ecumenical Movement, let us go back and complete our search for clues from Revelation 13. In our exploratory look at the book of Revelation 13, we have seen that the whole world “wondered and followed the beast (papacy),” emphasis mine. If we read on, Revelation 13 verses 11 to 17 talks of another beast. This second beast comes out of the ‘earth’. If the water symbolises “people, multitudes, nations and tongues” it therefore follows that the ‘earth’ is a symbol of a sparsely populated region of the world. The beast (power) appears without having to conquer other powers to establish itself on the world scene.

The second beast of Revelation 13 has ‘lamb-like horns’ possibly symbolising innocence, gentleness and harmlessness. Surprisingly the lamb-like beast “speaks like a dragon”. The dragon primarily represents the Devil or Satan (Revelation 12:9). The second beast is therefore a political power whose characteristics are a paradox; it appears gentle and innocent (like a lamb) but later displays diabolic attitudes. Literally, this power should establish itself in a sparsely populated region and its eminence must be clear after 1798. The only nation that fits this description is the United States of America (USA). The USA was steadily adding to her power by 1798 after her 1789 constitutional appearance. This nation born out of Christian principles with her motto “In God We Trust” boldly printed on her currency, and her principal pillars of success-religious and civic liberty, answers to the lamb-like appearance.

Whereas the first beast (papacy) rose in the competitive Western Europe where power struggles were prevalent, the USA quietly grew to strength like a germinating seed in a comparatively peaceful environment. The dragon-like voice of the second beast (USA) would therefore suggest a digression of the USA from her founding principles to oppressive tendencies or possibly religious and civic intolerance.

This would appear to be wild speculation to the ears of patriotic and post-modern Americans but truth does not need to be pleasant to be authentic. The prophecy implies that the USA in whatever form will form a subtle alliance with the first beast (papacy) and force the world into a form of Christianity not very different from that of Dark Ages. Revelation 13 verses 11 to 17 say the second beast (USA) would use its economic strength to coerce all except a few to participate in some worship of the beast (papacy) and the image of the beast (some semblance of religio-political set up of the church of the Dark Age).

The motif of this prophetic exploration is not the ‘worship’ but the establishment of the Vatican led ecumenical programme that finally achieves its goal. Since the USA is the home base of most Protestant churches, the relationship between the first beast symbolising the papacy and the lamb-like beast symbolising the USA is significant in the Vatican II type of ecumenism of our motif. Implied here is a

subtle alliance between ‘modernised’ Roman Catholicism and the strangely gullible American led Protestantism. This is a Protestant/Catholic ‘merger’ with Catholicism as the cementing substance.

The Protestant/Catholic merger alluded to above is a paradox that can only be clearly observed under a biblical microscope. Unfortunately, the ‘bible only’ approach is not an acceptable method of checking out theological problems among our Catholic brothers and neither do Protestant rely on it in practice thus the confusion prevalent in Christendom.

We should therefore expect the Protestant churches of the USA to be in the forefront in ecumenical activities. The first visit by Pope John Paul II to the USA was in 1979. While it was meant to sort out problems that American Catholicism was posing to traditional Catholicism, the visit also served to bridge the historical gap between American Protestantism and Catholicism. By 1980 the USA government established diplomatic relation with the Vatican amidst protests from the mostly Protestant population of the USA. In 1987 Pope John Paul II made his second visit to the USA. These events are but the tip of a religio-political iceberg with a global impact.

Those with a good historical background of the formation of the USA well know that the USA was a mostly Protestant government with obvious abhorrence of Catholicism in all its forms. During the American civil war, the Vatican actually worked hard with enemies of the USA dream to try to destroy the USA in the bud. Besides, the American people worked very cautiously when formulating their constitution to avoid a situation where the government would in any way officially recognise any religion. The founders in spite of being Christians were very cautious trying to prevent any religious persecution of minorities as it had happened in Europe where most of them had fled intolerance. There was therefore a clear separation between the state and the church in the constitution of the USA.

In contrast, the secret of the papacy as an institution is its religio-political nature. Without it the papacy would have no teeth to bite. The existence of the Vatican city-state within Italy as recognised in the 1929 treaty with the Italian government

is a prophetic beacon. In contrast, the USA is a strong democracy historically built on the foundation of the separation of the Church and the state. Before us is a political and religious paradox of a possible alliance of the mostly Protestant America and the papacy.

The prophecy of the Revelation 13 says that the second beast (USA) will set up “an image” to the beast and give it “breath”. If the beast is a religio-political authority then its image would similarly be a union of civil and religious authority; unfortunately this time it will be on a global scale. The context of the prophecy shows that the civil authority will have well-co-ordinated machinery to effect global operations of this mega-church set up. The image of the beast is therefore a mega-church propped up by a strong political authority similar to what happened in Europe through the Dark Ages up to 1798 when Napoleon sent General Berthia to invade the Vatican. The possible effects of such a system can be reviewed in history textbooks.

The prophecy of Revelation 13 says that the second beast (USA) would be very active after the “healing of the wound” (1798 conquest); emphasis mine. The second beast (USA) almost pushes the first beast (papacy) whose wound has been healed to the background. Actually, Protestant evangelical churches and their Para-church movements dominated the world religious scene until the inauguration of Pope John Paul II that turned the attention back to Catholicism. The American tele-evangelists backed by a strong electronic media are slowly losing their grip on Christendom. The mostly Pentecostal and Charismatic evangelists are openly compromising their Protestantism with up- to- date Vatican II type Catholicism.

The question that needs to be answered is , “Does a religio-political set up seem feasible in the USA?” the question is not asked so much to emphasise what seems feasible as to arouse our attention to signs of fulfilment of the prophecy. This is because a prophetic fulfilment does not rely on what is logical from a human perspective but on what the sovereign God declares. God directs history in the direction of his grand plan for the salvation of mankind. Humanity just chooses its side in the cosmic conflict between good and evil. God takes the initiative.

Careful observations of the current happenings reveal certain developments that seem to be moving in the direction of the revelation of the apocalyptic books of Daniel 7 and Revelation 13. The political atmosphere of the USA currently has an important element of some strong Christian lobby groups. Some evangelical Christians and some Catholics are trying to gain legislative influence so as to bring about some conditional changes in favour of the Christian religion. This attempt is historically antithetical to the dreams of Christian founders of the USA. The founders cherished political and religious liberty that would keep a clear separation of Church and state.

Among the Christian lobby groups active in the USA are such groups as ‘The Lord’s Day Alliance’ whose agenda is mostly the establishment of Sunday as an official Sabbath rest for the whole nation. There are also Christian proponents of creationism as part of the science curriculum in the schools who also would like to see the re-introduction of prayer as part of the classroom activities. These are working with the Moral Majority movement in trying to promote Christian values in American society. The majority of these Christian lobby groups are in favour of a religio-political government in the USA. While sincerely trying to Christianise the American people with contemplated positive effects, this trend carries some threat to the American constitution. This dream would obviously facilitate the Washington-Vatican alliance.

History teaches us that religio-political governments quite naturally resort to institutionalised persecution of the religious minorities. This is what characterised the Church of the middle Ages (Dark Ages) and Protestant nations of Europe.

The Vatican stand on ecumenism can only be well perceived and understood when the current apparent contradictions in the voice of the Vatican are seen in the light of the prophecy of Revelation 13. At this stage one can know ‘who is using who’ in the elusive Protestants-Catholic quest for Christian unity. Looking at the ecumenical movement, we should not be blinded by the swift current flowing below the apparent mild surface. Both Catholics and Protestants need to go back to the only true guide-the bible. Let the bible that brought the 1517 schism be used to heal the differences. The prophet Isaiah says “to the law and to the

testimony if they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20). All biblical revivals were brought about by transparent repentance and re-dedication to the scriptures and not treaties as we are witnessing now. Let us search for the landmarks of biblical Christianity. Jesus is calling us out of spiritual Babylon (Revelation 18:4).