By Ray Yungen

I believe the Bible contains an important passage, which clearly indicates a change of times and seasons may indeed be at hand. In Matthew 24:3-5, which is a chapter dealing with the tribulation period, Jesus spoke these words to His disciples concerning the signs of His coming and the end of the age:

And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. (emphasis mine)

I have heard two interpretations of Jesus’ reply. The first interpretation asserts various individuals will claim to be the returning, incumbent Jesus Christ. The other view says a number of messiah figures will appear and gather followers to themselves in a similar fashion to cult leader Jim Jones or Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, the guru leader who set up his idea of utopia in Oregon. I now believe neither of these interpretations encompass the bigger picture. It is in light of numerous New Age statements that Matthew 24 takes on new significance.

A basic tenet of New Age thinking is that of the Master Jesus. Adherents to this idea believe during the unrecorded period of His life, Jesus traveled to various occult centers and mystery schools in such places as Tibet, India, Persia, and Egypt; at these places this same Jesus learned the metaphysical secrets of the ages. Therefore, they claim this Jesus spent seventeen years of travel on a pilgrimage of higher consciousness. According to this viewpoint, Jesus of Nazareth became the Master Jesus, one who allegedly gained mastery over the physical world by becoming one with his higher self.

This is how the New Age interprets the word Christ. The word comes from the Greek word kristos, which means the anointed. New Agers believe this means being anointed or in touch with the higher self or divine nature. In other words, to be anointed is to be enlightened.

Since New Agers believe Jesus was completely in tune with his higher self, this made him a Christ. It is, they believe, a state of awareness and a spiritual condition rather than a title. For that reason, anyone who is in full attunement with his or her divine essence is also a Christ.

After reading innumerable such statements that promote this Christ consciousness, I took a closer look at Matthew 24:5. What I found astounded me! The Greek word for many in this verse is polus, which means a very great or sore number. The word may actually be saying that millions upon millions of people are going to claim deity for themselves. The Greek words for “come in my name” mean they shall come claiming to represent what Jesus alone personifies by misusing His name and mistaking His true identity.

In summary, Matthew 24:5 is saying a great number of people will come claiming to represent what He (Jesus) represents but will be in fact deceiving people. In light of Jesus’ warning (“many shall come in my name”), consider the following remarks taken from two New Age sources:

Jesus was one soul who reached the state of Christ Consciousness; there have been many others. He symbolized the blueprint we must follow . . . The way is open to everyone to become a Christ by achieving the Christ Consciousness through walking the same path He walked. He simply and beautifully demonstrated the pattern.1

The significance of incarnation and resurrection is not that Jesus was a human like us but rather that we are gods like him—or at least have the potential to be. The significance of Jesus is not as a vehicle of salvation but as a model of perfection. 2 (emphasis mine)

New Agers claim Jesus is a model of what the New Age or Aquarian person is to become. These statements could be called coming in His name or claiming to represent what He represents.

The remainder of verse five in Matthew, chapter 24, reveals the warning of Jesus that they will actually say: “I am Christ.” Again, we find a multitude of statements by New Agers that confirm the admonition of Jesus. Here are some examples:

This World Leader, by the way, is supposed to represent the new Aquarian Age and establish the Oneness of all mankind—one religion . . . In the Aquarian Age, you will not need the outer saviour, for you will be able to learn how to reach the inner Christ Consciousness . . . The Saviour of the New Age will be a channel through which all Cosmic Truth will come.3 

The Christ is You. You are the one who is to come—each of you. Each and everyone of you!4 

Christhood is not something to come at a point in the future when you are more evolved. Christhood is—right now! I am the Christ of God. You are the Christ of God.5 (emphasis mine)

It is not surprising to find those in the contemplative prayer camp who also subscribe to this view. Contemplative author John R. Yungblut, former Dean of Studies at the Quaker Meditation Center at Pendle Hill in Pennsylvania, echoes a similar notion:

But we cannot confine the existence of the divine to this one man [Jesus] among men. Therefore we are not to worship the man Jesus, though we cannot refrain from worshiping the source of this Holy Spirit or Christ-life which for many of us has been revealed primarily in this historical figure.6 

Willigis Jager, who ironically titled his book, Contemplation: A Christian Path, stated the same perception of Christ’s role to humanity:

Salvation will now be nothing other than a realization of the fact that “the kingdom of God is within you” . . . This is the Good News Jesus proclaimed to humanity. The kingdom is already within all of us.7  (emphasis mine)

Although many contemplative authors still maintain a traditional view of Christology, enough subscribe to the New Age model to where there is cause for grave concern.

There is also a movement flourishing in Jewish circles, which parallels the contemplative spirituality of Catholics and Protestants. Based on the Kabbalah, the Jewish mystical text, this version of contemplative prayer is spreading like wildfire through Judaism. Take a look at any section on Judaism at a local bookstore and you will find it saturated with books on this subject.

One such book, New Age Judaism (written by meditation teacher Melinda Ribner), is typical of such titles. Ribner explains:

Many people will be surprised to find that Judaism is fundamentally aligned with what we think of today as the New Age. Many of the beliefs and practices we associate with the New Age are not new but are part of kabbalah, the Jewish mystical tradition. . . . Though this knowledge has been mostly closeted throughout time, kabbalah is becoming increasingly popular and available today.8

Ribner echoes the view of mystical Judaism when she emphasizes:

Though the term “Messiah” refers to an actual person, Judaism believes that the Messiah is within the consciousness of every person. We all carry the sparks of Messiah within us. Though we await a person who will embody this consciousness and unite the world, we each have to develop this consciousness ourselves. . . . Thus, when a sufficient number of people have developed a consciousness of spiritual unity, the rest of mankind will be uplifted.9

Israel itself is ripe for this type of spirituality. One recent book, The Israelis by Donna Rosenthal, said that according to a Gallup-Israel survey, sixty percent of all Israelis are attracted to mysticism. In fact, Reiki News magazine reported there to be 6,000 Reiki healers in Israel. That is a very large number for such a small country.10

One Kabbalah proponent, Rabbi Phillip Berg, has opened fifty “Kabbalah Centres” around the world to spread its message to the masses. According to his literature, this organization has guided 3.9 million people into this mystical practice. His center in Tel Aviv alone has drawn in thousands of students. In addition, there is an entire publishing company devoted to the Kabbalah, Jewish Lights Publishing, with scores of titles on the subject. Their most prominent author is Rabbi Lawrence Kushner, who has reached a wide audience of readers.

This is significant to the prophecies in Matthew, chapter 24 because the mystic Jews also refer to the higher states they enter into as the “messianic consciousness.”11 So, in effect, this state of being, according to their view, makes one a messiah, or in the Greek language, a christos or a christ.

The Great Apostasy
In light of the many who will be coming in Christ’s name, I also believe the “prophecies” of the occultist Alice Bailey can provide further insight into what the apostle Paul called in II Thessalonians the falling away. Bailey eagerly foretold of what she termed “the regeneration of the churches.”12 Her rationale for this was obvious:

The Christian church in its many branches can serve as a St. John the Baptist, as a voice crying in the wilderness, and as a nucleus through which world illumination may be accomplished.13 

In other words, instead of opposing Christianity, the occult would capture and blend itself with Christianity and then use it as its primary vehicle for spreading and instilling New Age consciousness! The various churches would still have their outer trappings of Christianity and still use much of the same lingo. If asked certain questions about traditional Christian doctrine, the same answers would be given. But it would all be on the outside; on the inside a contemplative spirituality would be drawing in those open to it.

In wide segments of Christianity, this has indeed already occurred. Contemplative priest Thomas Keating alone taught 31,000 people mystical prayer in one year. People are responding to this in large numbers because it has the external appearance of Christianity but in truth, is the diametric opposite­—what a skillful spiritual delusion! Could this possibly be the falling away Paul speaks of?

Endnotes:

1. Davis and Rice, Messiah and the Second Coming, op. cit., p. 49.

2. John White, “Jesus, Evolution and the Future of Humanity” (Science of Mind magazine, Oct. 1981), pp. 40-42.

3. Donald H. Yott, Man and Metaphysics (New York, NY: Samuel Weiser, 1980), p. 74.

4. Armand Biteaux, The New Consciousness (Willits, CA: Oliver Press, 1975), p. 128.

5. John Randolph Price, The Planetary Commission (Austin, TX: Quartus Books, 1984), pp. 143, 145.

6. John R. Yungblut, Rediscovering the Christ (Rockport, MA: Element Inc., 1991), p. 164.

7. Willigis Jager, Contemplation: A Christian Path (Liguori, MO: Triumph Books, 1994), pp. 93-94.

8. Melinda Ribner, New Age Judaism (Deerfield Beach, FL: Simcha Press, 2000), p. xv, “Author to Reader” section.

9. Ibid., pp. 196-197.

10. William Rand, “Reiki in the Holy Land” (Reiki News, Winter 2003), p. 20.

11. Rabbi David Cooper, God is a Verb (New York, NY: Riverhead Books, 1997), p. 58.

12. Alice Bailey, Problems of Humanity (New York, NY: Lucis Publishing, 1993), p. 152.

13. Alice Bailey, The Externalization of the Hierarchy (New York, NY: Lucis Publishing, 1976), p. 510.

LTRP Note: We are posting a few of the many e-mails we received after our "Open Letter to Christian Leaders" article a couple weeks ago. The reason we are posting these isn't to bring attention to ourselves with the favorable remarks said about us but rather to give words of encouragement to those of you on the front lines in defending the faith so you will be reminded that you are not alone and that there are many other brothers and sisters who see what you see.

To Lighthouse Trails:

I just read your article titled: “An Open Letter to Christian Leaders: Please Tell Us Where We Are Wrong.” Please don’t be discouraged by the criticisms. Just keep doing what the Lord has called you to do. Though some will continue to criticize, many are being helped. Most of what I have learned about contemplative, I have learned from your website and from the books that I purchased.

I suppose some thought it was unthinkable to question a Bible teacher of the stature of John MacArthur (one of my favorite preachers). But even he can be guilty of an oversight that could give people the wrong impression. You were right. That sermon from years ago should no longer be available at his website if it contains any positive reference to a man like Dallas Willard. Instead of being upset, people should be grateful that it was pointed out so the correction can be made.

Though I can’t give much in the way of financial help, I do keep your ministry in my prayers often and pray God’s protection over you. May God bless you for all you are doing and for your faithfulness in the midst of the attacks. Lighthouse Trails is a very helpful and important ministry and may it continue to be a light in a dark world until Jesus returns.

God bless you! R

Dear Friends!

God Bless You as you continue to stand strong for Truth and Righteousness under the Banner of the King Of Kings and Saviour of our souls, Jesus Christ The Righteous!

You have "stepped on the dragons tail," and he is not happy with your exposing his evil deeds! But, the promise is "Resist the devil and he will flee from you." James 4: 7

And we have no doubt you often bring to mind Eph. 6:12 "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." 

As for [those] who are worshipping the devil through Jesuit Spiritual formation, their "degree" fosters their "pride" which is so hard for all of us to surrender! God help them!

Keep the trumpet sounding loud and clear, some souls will be "pulled out of the fire" for God has said His "Word will accomplish that whereunto it is sent"!  Praise God! R & J

Dear Fellow Defenders of The Faith,

I am now getting to the newsletter with an open letter to Christian leaders, of which I am not but my husband was a pastor of two good churches. I am so saddened by how cruel so called Christians can be and we experienced it. You got your self on the battle line, don't turn back!! I found your site several years ago and have looked forward to it. I know there are others who are defenders but I only go to a few, so much to read. I have appreciated your stands against and your warning of mystics, Emergent and so on, it is getting worse. My husband and I witness many, who were once in good solid churches, drifting into Calvary Chapels. . . We see once solid folk going back to denominational churches with wrong doctrine. How can it be??? Well, we believe we are in the "last days" with strong apostasy.  I feel for you and for others who are taking the darts from Satan via those who call themselves Christians, they are "false and strange voices. . . .  Sirs and Ladies, keep sounding out, they may try to close you down and how sad but don't quit! I get very disturbed by those who call themselves Christian and do not line up with Scripture. My husband will write letters to those doing wrong or not abstaining from the appearance of sin. They do not answer or they get angry. So be it. In these days you will not be popular in those crowds but our Lord was not popular.

Thank you for Standing,
Because of Christ, J.

Dear Lighthouse Trails:

Thank you all for everything you do to warn us what is out there.  These things are slowly slipping into my church and many others, and Lighthouse Trails keeps those of us sane when we sense something is not right, then the Lord verifies it in your newsletter.  If it does not line up with Scripture, then it should not be in the church.  Thank you again for all you do. L.J.

Hi,
 
I'm not a "Christian leader," but I do read and study my Bible and have a relationship with the Lord.  Jesus is my Savior, my Lord, and my God. 
 
You have done NOTHING wrong!  What you're experiencing is what all who love the Lord and desire to walk in His truth experience.  These so called Christians who are giving you a hard time, neither love Him, nor know Him, but seek glory, money, and fame for themselves.  They could care less that they are leading precious souls to Hell, as long as they are living a good life here on this earth.  They hate you because you might turn followers away from them, and they need followers in order to maintain their elaborate lifestyles.  If they allowed the Lord to rule over them, they might have trials and tribulations, and they sure don't want that.  Jesus said, "If you love me keep my commandments."  Feeding people lies and exalting oneself is not keeping His commandments.  It's not you these people war against, but the Lord.  He is the One they really hate.
 
Mar_13:13 "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Hang on!  The Lord's coming is near.  Even so, come Lord Jesus!! God bless you! C.C.

By Heather Clark
Christian News Network

SASKATOON – A Canadian bridal boutique has reached a settlement with a man who identifies as a woman after the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled that the owner broke the law by refusing to allow him to try on a gown for his wedding.

The incident occurred in April of this year as Rohit Singh, who moved to Canada from India three years ago, went to Jenny’s Bride Boutique with his fiancé Colin Peace to shop for a gown for their “wedding.”

However, when Singh wanted to try on a particular gown in the women’s changing room, owner Jenny Correia refused to allow him to do so.

“I don’t allow men to wear dresses in my store,” she stated, according to reports. Click here to continue reading.

By Roger Oakland

As the world continues to plunge into further darkness and despair, ”new” spirituality leaders say it is the church’s fault, particularly that of rigid Christians who won’t bend their beliefs or convictions. While Christians certainly are not without sin, true believers are not causing the world to fall apart. It is happening for one reason alone … man’s sinful condition. We are each responsible for the sin in our own lives. The Bible is clear that the penalty for sin is death. We all, each and every one of us, have had a death sentence meted out to us. But we have also been offered a free gift of salvation.

As Christians, God expects us to reach out to those suffering and in need. When Jesus dwells in a human being, He convicts and He communes with that individual. He has saved us from destruction, and He desires to live in us and fellowship with us. And He compels us to live righteously and care about those less fortunate than ourselves.

The world is in trouble because of sin. And Jesus commissioned us as believers to go out into the world and preach the wonderful Good News of His free gift of salvation to all who come to Him by faith. Satan hates this Gospel message, and he hates the messenger, the church. Is it any wonder that as this new, self-deifying reformation takes form, its followers will grow increasingly hostile to those who preach the biblical Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Ironically, the emerging “progressive” church, which says its main goal is to help the suffering and to help eradicate the world’s problems, is not pointing the world to Jesus Christ and His body. Rather it is rejecting the atonement, locking arms with a religion (Catholicism) that teaches we are justified by works rather than by grace alone, embracing mystical practices and altered states of consciousness, and pulling these suffering lost souls further and further away from the only thing that will ever help them—a personal one-on-one relationship with Jesus Christ, who explains very clearly who He is:

Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. (John 10:7-11)

Emerging/emergent spirituality continues making serious inroads into Christianity. Churches and Christian colleges, unaware of the subtle undermining of such spirituality, are embracing teachers and leaders of this movement and pointing others to them. Often they are unaware of what these teachers really believe and teach. Mike Erre (pastor of the First Evangelical Free Church of Fullerton – Chuck Swindoll’s former church) wrote a book titled Death by Church: Rescuing Jesus from His Followers, Recapturing God’s Hope for His People. This book is a perfect example of how the “new” spirituality has an outer wrapping of Christianity but an inner core that exudes an entirely different spirituality. The concepts in this book are the basic concepts of the mass deception that is happening within the walls of Christianity today. In this book review, we hope to show the “big” picture of this deception.

In the pages of Death by Church (Harvest House), Mike Erre acknowledges that Jesus is Lord. He also references a number of Scriptures and talks about several different Bible stories. But for the discerning Christian who knows his Bible, it doesn’t take too long into Erre’s book to realize something is amiss, and such a reader soon begins to have a sense that he is theologically being tossed to and fro between the pages of this book and soon feeling like he is in a battle zone for the truth. Sandwiched between the Scripture references and the mention of “Jesus” is a theology that does not at all represent the Gospel.

Death by Church has a point to make–that God is saving “all of creation” (eg. p. 100) and that the “church” is not the substance of the kingdom of God (i.e., the whole of creation and all of humanity is). In fact, Erre says, the church is not the kingdom of God at all – it only points to the kingdom of God, which incorporates all of creation and, if the church does all the right things it can have the privilege of being part of that kingdom too. Erre seeks to prove his point but not just by turning to Scripture – he turns to prominent figures in the emerging/emergent church (e.g., Brian McLaren and Dan Kimball), the contemplative mystical prayer movement (e.g., Dallas Willard and panentheist Richard Rohr-a favorite of Erre’s), and New Age sympathizers (such as Marcus Borg, who believes Jesus did not see himself as the Son of God (see FMSN, p. 124), and Gregory Boyd, emerging author of Benefit of the Doubt: Breaking the Idol of Certainty). Couple Erre’s frequent use of emerging/contemplative/New Age sympathizing authors with his kingdom-now theology wrapped in universalist/panentheistic overtones, and Death by Church actually takes on a pseudo-name, Death by Deception. But let’s take a closer look:

Erre states in the beginning of the book that as Christians, “We have become famous for what we oppose, rather than who we are for” (p. 22). Relying heavily on statistics and studies in this first section of the book, Erre wants the reader to know that for the most part over the “majority of the last 2000 years” Christians have “been the sponsor and center of most of Western culture and civilization”(p. 20). But this has not been a good thing, according to Erre, who says that something has “gone very wrong,” particularly with “American culture,” which has been guilty of simplifying “complicated things.” He gives an example: salvation. “We have reduced salvation into four steps that allow me entrance into heaven when I die. But in so doing, we have bypassed the gospel that Jesus preached–the gospel of the kingdom of God. This gospel deals much more with the ‘here and now’ that the ‘then’ ['then' meaning when Jesus died on the Cross] and there’ [there meaning heaven, our eternal home]” (p. 26). And this is Erre’s set up for the remainder of the book.

The kingdom of God theology that Erre presents is broad–in fact, very broad. That is why he turns to Brian McLaren, Alan Hirsch, and a number of other broad-minded thinkers to make his case. Erre is not merely quoting these figures in a benign manner–he clearly resonates with them and admits many of them have been “highly influential” in his life.1 He fondly and favorably tells his readers what they think and what they believe. Quoting Alan Hirsch, Erre says that “the major threat to the viability of our faith is that of consumerism” (p. 31). He eventually defines “consumerism” as individualism, saying that there has been too much emphasis within Christianity on individual salvation and nothing on corporate salvation (ie., all of the world and creation being saved).

As with most emerging authors, Erre exalts uncertainty and doubt (always searching, never finding). He states: “Jesus brings mystery, paradox, and tension–rarely did someone get a straight answer out of Him” (p. 36), which is not true about Jesus at all. To help build Erre’s case, he turns a number of times to two Fuller Seminary professors, Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger. Interestingly, in Faith Undone, Roger Oakland discusses Gibbs and Bolger. Oakland states: “They found that emerging church leaders are not impressed with Christians who defend the faith by offering definitive answers to those who doubt the faith (p. 182).” Doubt and uncertainty are vital to the emerging church thinking–and to their mission–and without this foundation, the emerging church cannot reach its goal of an all-inclusive kingdom (that Erre seeks to present in Death by Church). This resonates with Thomas Merton who told people of other religious traditions that we are already in unity, but we just don’t realize it yet. (see ATOD, p. 159). Again from Faith Undone, Oakland quotes Gibbs and Bolger:

Evangelism or mission for me is no longer persuading people to believe what I believe, no matter how edgy or creative I get. It is more about shared experiences and encounters. It is about walking the journey of life and faith together, each distinct to his or her own tradition and culture but with the possibility of encountering God and truth from one another.2

Oakland shows how Gibbs and Bolger are presenting an “inclusive gospel,” certainly the overall message of Erre’s book.

Ironically, Gibbs and Bolger look to emerging church figure, Spencer Burke (of The Ooze), who, according to Burke’s publisher’s website (Zondervan), has had significant connections to Erre’s former church Rock Harbor Church.3 Roger Oakland reveals some disturbing things about Burke’s spirituality that sound very inline with Erre’s. Quoting Gibbs and Bolger again:

Burke’s community is prepared to learn from faith traditions outside the Christian fold. There is a Buddhist family in their church. As a community, the church visited a Buddhist temple. They participated in a guided meditation with this family. Burke celebrates the many ways God is revealed. He recognizes that the Spirit has been with these people all along. The community celebrates other traditions. They reach out to other traditions, and see them as beloved children of God. With a focus on kingdom rather than on church, people find that their relationship with other faiths changes.

Back to Death by Church. Erre says that “Central to the kingdom is God’s desire to renew, restore, and reconcile all things” (p. 41). Calling this a “deep theology” (p. 42), Erre says he would like to “lay a theological groundwork” (p. 45). First, he explains that a gospel that focuses on “going to heaven after you die, and praying the prayer of salvation” is “only a narrow slice of what the Scriptures teach about salvation” (p. 46). Erre adds: “His great purpose is to restore His fallen creation and renew it beyond the original” (p. 48). Numerous times throughout the book, he says that the “central theme” of the Bible is “the kingdom of God” (p. 54). But as the discerning reader pours through the pages of Death by Church, a clear and disturbing picture of what Erre means by “kingdom of God” begins to take shape–when Erre talks about the kingdom of God, he means that “the church” is “not the kingdom.” The kingdom is “something bigger.” “If the kingdom is inclusive,” Erre says, “the church should be also” (p. 78).

Erre sounds very much like New Age Episcopalian priest, Matthew Fox, who calls the “deep theology” that Erre talks about a “deep ecumenism” (“deep” meaning all-inclusive). Fox expresses this clearly:

I foresee a renaissance, “a rebirth based on a spiritual initiative” … This new birth will cut through all cultures and all religions and indeed will draw forth the wisdom common to all vital mystical traditions in a global religious awakening I call “deep ecumenism.”4

While Erre himself does not speak of the “mystical traditions” in Death by Church, many of those he incorporates into his book (Willard, McLaren, Rohr, Borg, Bell, Kimball, etc.) abundantly do in their own writings.

Erre is not shy about sharing his replacement theology views either. Speaking of a “coming restoration” (p. 88) and a “new order,” he says that the “people of God” are “the new and renewed Israel” (p. 95). Reading through the book, one realizes that Erre sees no prophetic value or plan (for the future) in Israel:

“Jesus … creates a new order–a new community, a new Israel” (p. 104).

“Jesus of Nazareth reconstructs a true Israel by choosing 12 disciples (one for each of the 12 tribes of Israel)” (p. 110).

“Central to understanding this call of Jesus is the idea that it concerned itself less with the salvation of individual souls and more with the formation of a renewed Israel, a community of disciples that would collectively embody the kingdom” (p. 111).

“The early Christians saw themselves as continuing Israel’s story … as messianic Israel” (p. 116).

Echoing his fellow emergent leaders, Erre minimizes “the question of what happens to me after I die” and talks about a “cosmic” Jesus who “sends His “new community, the church” into the world (p. 98). He states: “The New Testament … regularly insists that the major, central, framing question is that of God’s purpose of rescue and re-creation for human beings and the whole world” (p. 98). He calls it the “here and now” theology (p. 99). (“Our worn-out theology of escaping from this world does not do justice to the here-and-now work” (p. 99).

Erre’s theme, that all of creation is being restored and saved, is redundant through the book. On one page alone, he drives the point several times:

1. “God wants to redeem the whole person and all of creation.”
2. “The good news … is about the rule of God being applied to all of creation–every part of human beings and the world.”
3. “Our traditional conceptions of salvation are blatantly more individualist, focusing on one’s individual reconciliation with God through a personal relationship with Jesus … It is more concerned with getting souls to heaven than with bringing heaven to earth. [This resonates with Marcus Borg, who calls this old paradigm Christianity.] This narrow gospel focuses only on the salvation of the human soul, but the gospel of the kingdom s includes salvation of human beings within the context of the larger story of God restoring all of creation.
4. “[T]he consummation of the kingdom includes an entirely new creation.
5. This new and cosmic salvation is spoken of as the renewal, restoration, or reconciliation of all things.”
6. (p. 125): “One of the ways that the kingdom is larger than the church is that the focus on the kingdom is the redemption of all creation. The message of the kingdom of God is cosmic in its proportions … it [the kingdom] is ultimately aimed at redeeming and restoring all that God has made” (more on pp. 128-129; 210-211; 217).

Please understand that the view Erre is expressing in these statements is classic universalism – all are saved (which negates the Gospel message of Jesus Christ because now faith in Christ is not a requirement for salvation, and regardless of one’s acceptance or rejection of the Gospel, he or she is saved. This would mean, as New Ager Neale Donald Walsch teaches, that even Hitler would be saved).

It is important to note here that when Erre talks about God restoring and renewing all things, he is not talking about the new heaven and the earth that will take place after the events that are foretold in the Book of Revelation. He is espousing a view about a renewal and restoration that will occur prior to these events (this is called kingdom-now theology).

Erre says that this newly defined “Kingdom citizenship” incorporates those of other kingdoms as well, not just our own kingdom of God, which helps us to see “our place in the cosmic [meaning universal] story” (p. 112). This new “Kingdom” “has decreed that independence has no place in His kingdom. Instead collective interdependence is demanded,” Erre states. One term that Erre uses frequently is a term that resembles New Age leader Barbara Marx Hubbard who also speaks of a “new humanity.” When Marx Hubbard uses this term, she means man has been enlightened to understand his own divinity and now realizes all of humanity is being saved, along with all of creation. The stipulation for this “new humanity” is not whether someone has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through being born-again and regeneration through Christ–no, it is about a new humanity that has joined together and understands her cosmic divinity (see False Christ Coming).

Erre’s kingdom-now theology is expressed throughout the book. For instance on page 132, he states that the Gospel is “something bigger” than the “story of Jesus’ dying for the private sins of individuals…. it is the story of God’s kingdom being launched, on earth as in heaven, generating a new state of affairs. Atonement, redemption, and salvation are what happen on the way.” This is typical emerging spirituality that does not see atonement, redemption, and salvation as a moment in history when Jesus Christ died on the Cross but rather an ongoing process that is continually growing, expanding, changing (see our review of An Emergent Manifesto of Hope). Erre states that “the end of the age does not result in the destruction of the earth but rather in its renewal.” He says: “[R]ather that waiting for the last days, we have been living in them since the coming of Jesus. Rather than waiting for the end to come, we are already living in the end times that will be consummated when Jesus returns” (p. 198). And, “[T]he end of the age does not result in the destruction of the earth but rather in its renewal”(p. 212).

Erre believes that the church “neither initiates nor sustains [God's] work” on the earth but must seek out where the work of God is already taking place and participate in that work. He says when we take on this view, we can then understand that the “whole of creation is now included in the scope of redemption.” “The church is not the primary location of God in the world; the world is,” he says (p. 133).

Death by Church also lays out a perfect example of what Lighthouse Trails calls “the new missiology.” In essence, Erre tells believers that “we don’t take Christ to a region or people group, but we instead show up and pay attention to the work that Jesus is already doing. We have to move away from the current mind-set about church, ministry, and mission.” (p. 136). In other words, we don’t have to tell people about Jesus because Jesus is already there among them (before they hear the Gospel and believe; i.e, they can keep their same religion and still be connected to God). This is what William Young, author of the best-seller The Shack, echoes when The Shack’s “Jesus” says he has no desire to make anyone Christian. Erre states: “We don’t do God’s work in the world; we simply participate in God’s work in the world that is already underway. … He’s always at work everywhere” (p. 162).

As if the kingdom-now theology, replacement theology, universalistic message, and new missiology were not enough, Erre presents to the reader a case for panentheism (God in all things). Given the fact that he includes Richard Rohr in his list of those he resonates with, this is no surprise. Rohr is the founder of the Center for Action and Contemplation. His spirituality would be in the same camp as someone like Matthew Fox (author of The Coming of the Cosmic Christ) who believes in pantheism (God is all) and panentheism (God in all). Rohr wrote the foreword to a 2007 book called How Big is Your God? by Jesuit priest (from India) Paul Coutinho. In Coutinho’s book, he describes an interspiritual community where people of all religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity) worship the same God.

In Death by Church, in Erre’s presentation of panentheism, Erre quotes Madeleine L’Engle: “There is nothing so secular that it cannot be sacred, and that is one of the deepest messages of the Incarnation” (p. 159). What she is saying here is that God (the sacred) can be found in everything (the secular). In that line of thinking, Erre himself says that his new kingdom “dismantles the sacred/secular distinction” and “all things are given over to God–including those things formerly thought to be secular or unspiritual” He adds: “Confessional worship … seeks to see everything as having been made to reflect the glory of God. … we reawaken to the possibilities of redemption in all areas of life” (pp. 158). This is the same theology as Sue Monk Kidd (see ATOD, p. 134). This concept reflects classic panentheism–God is in all things. Keep in mind, that there is a continuity of the theme that God is in everything with many of the figures that Erre turns to in his book. Richard Rohr, Marcus Borg, Brian McLaren, and John Dominic Crossan are four who hold to this view and are referenced in Death by Church. Borg is one of the leading champions of of mainline Christianity, as is Brian McLaren through the emerging church. Rob Bell, who resonates with panentheism Marcus Borg, is also referenced in Death by Church. We want to reiterate here, Erre is not just referencing these figures–he has absorbed their theology!

We close with this. It’s vital to understand that spiritual deception can sound very Christian. That is how deception works. Ray Yungen has given a solemn warning to this effect when he comments on occultist Alice Bailey’s prediction of what her movement (the New Age) would do and how it would accomplish “world illumination”:

In light of the many who will be coming in Christ’s name, I believe the Alice Bailey prophecies can provide further insight into what the apostle Paul called in II Thessalonians the falling away. Bailey eagerly foretold of what she termed “the regeneration of the churches.” Her rationale for this was obvious:

The Christian church in its many branches can serve as a St. John the Baptist, as a voice crying in the wilderness, and as a nucleus through which world illumination may be accomplished.

In other words, instead of opposing Christianity, the occult would capture and blend itself with Christianity and then use it as its primary vehicle for spreading and instilling New Age consciousness! The various churches would still have their outer trappings of Christianity and still use much of the same lingo. If asked certain questions about traditional Christian doctrine, the same answers would be given. But it would all be on the outside; on the inside a contemplative [emerging] spirituality would be drawing in those open to it.5

Notes:
1. From Disclaimer in Death by Church at beginning of book.
2. Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic of Baker Publishing Group, 2005), p. 132. (This book cites Brian McLaren on back cover).
3. One source told us that Burke may no longer be on staff at Rock Harbor.
4. Roger Oakland in Faith Undone (chapter 2), quoting Matthew Fox, The Coming of the Cosmic Christ, 1988, p. 5.
5. Ray Yungen, A Time of Departing (Eureka, MT: Lighthouse Trails Publishing, LLC, 2nd ed., 2006), p. 123.

By Roger Oakland
Understand the Times

For those who are not aware of the Catholic Church’s New Evangelization program, let me provide a brief overview. The Catholic Church plans to establish the kingdom of God on earth and win the world to the Catholic Jesus (i.e., the Eucharistic Christ). This will be accomplished when the world (including the separated brethren) comes under the rule and reign of Rome and this Eucharistic Jesus.

The Eucharistic Jesus is supposedly Christ’s presence that a Catholic priest summons through the power of transubstantiation, the focal point of the Mass. Many Christians believe the Christian tradition of communion is the same as the Catholic tradition of the Eucharist. But this is not so. The Eucharist (i.e., transubstantiation) is a Catholic term for communion when the bread and the wine are said to be transformed into the very body and blood of Jesus Christ. The Catholic Catechism states:

In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist “the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained.”1

The host is then placed in what is called a monstrance and can then be worshiped as if worshiping Jesus Himself. The implications are tied directly to salvation itself. With the Eucharist, salvation becomes sacramental (participation in a ritual) as opposed to justification by faith in Christ alone, described in Galatians 2:16. While this mystical experience is a form of idolatry (as well as the very heart of Catholicism), there is a growing interest by evangelical Christians in this practice, particularly by the emerging church.

The Catholic Church leadership, concerned with apathy for the Eucharist within the Catholic ranks, is hoping to “rekindle the amazement”2 of the Eucharist through what is called their “New Evangelization program.”3 With a two-fold purpose–to keep present Catholics and to bring evangelicals into the Catholic Church–church leadership has a plan to re-emphasize the Eucharist as the focus of the Catholic faith. By saying “rekindle the amazement,” they mean bring out the mystical, supernatural element of the Eucharist.

All Catholics are expected to worship the host (Eucharistic Adoration of the transformed wafer), and church leadership says it is anathema (to be accursed) to reject this teaching.

While it is true that during the Reformation and Counter Reformation, many who refused to believe in transubstantiation were tortured and executed for their faith in the Gospel, time has a way of forgetting the facts of history.

In April of 2003, the pope wrote an encyclical promoting the “New Evangelization” program for the purpose of “rekindling amazement” for the Eucharist.4 Then in October of 2004, John Paul II initiated “The Year of the Eucharist” as part of his evangelistic plan to bring the world to the Eucharistic Christ. Following his death in April of 2005, Pope Benedict XVI picked up Pope John Paul’s mission immediately. He called the “faithful to intensify” devotion to the Eucharistic Jesus, and said the Eucharist is the “heart of Christian life.”5

The New Evangelization program plans to revitalize the Catholic faith by reigniting strong interest in the Eucharistic Jesus. It is not just the pope who is enthusiastic about this–cardinals, bishops, and priests all over the world are joining in to help with the mission. Something very significant is happening. Eucharistic adoration is becoming the foundation for the new evangelization of the Catholic Church.

In speaking of the pope’s view on the Eucharist, Protestant-turned Catholic Scott Hahn states:

The coming of Jesus Christ – what the Greek New Testament calls his “parousia” – is not simply some far-off event. It is his presence in the Eucharist. Fundamentalists reduce the meaning of “parousia” to Christ’s coming at the end of time; but for the first century Greek speakers the word meant “presence.” Catholic theology holds on to that original meaning.6

The presence of Christ in the Eucharist is the Second Coming Catholic style. Unfortunately, many evangelical Protestants are not even aware of this.

While Eucharistic adoration contradicts biblical Christianity, a growing number of popular evangelicals (especially those leaning toward emerging spiritualities) seem to find no offense in such a doctrine. And with the increased acceptance of mysticism and an attraction to imagery within evangelical circles, it only makes sense that many evangelical Christians find nothing wrong with the Eucharist and Eucharistic adoration. Such acceptance, however, is neutralizing former evangelical resistance to all things Catholic.

In Doug Pagitt’s book Church Re-imagined, he describes his initial attraction to rituals associated with the Eucharist:

The first day of Lent this year brought the first Ash Wednesday gathering in our church’s history and in mine…. Until this point, Ash Wednesday had not been part of my Christian faith experience. Not only had I never applied ashes to anyone’s forehead, but I had also never had them applied to mine. After this experience I wondered how I could have celebrated 19 Easters as a Christian without this tremendous experience.7

Scot McKnight, another emerging church influencer and the author of The Real Mary and The Jesus Creed, in referring to an Anglican service, McKnight speaks of the Eucharistic focus. He states:

[T]he point of an Anglican gathering on a Sunday morning is not to hear a sermon but to worship the Lord through the celebration of the Eucharist… First some scripture readings and then the sermon and then some announcements and then the Eucharist liturgy–with everyone coming forward to kneel and participate publicly–in the body and blood.8

McKnight says that “the Eucharist profoundly enables the grace of God to be received with all its glories and blessings.”9 No doubt, McKnight will have an impact on those in the emerging church movement, and his views on the Eucharist will rub off. He has been a popular speaker at many events including Willow Creek’s Small Group Conference and the National Pastors Convention. Both of these events have reached the “postmodern” generation.

The late Robert Webber was very influential in closing the gap between Eucharistic adoration and the evangelical church. A document he authored called “A Call to an Ancient Evangelical Future” states: “We call for a renewed consideration of how God ministers to us in … Eucharist.”10 Two well-known evangelical publishers, Baker Books and InterVarsity Press (both of which now publish emerging church authors) sponsored the document as did Christianity Today. The AEF, which the document is called, is endorsed by various emerging church leaders such as Brian McLaren who calls it “a preaching resource” that “emphasize[s] the importance … of Advent or Lent.”11

Participants of the AEF include numerous Christian seminaries like Bethel Seminary in Minnesota, Dallas Theological Seminary, and pastors from many different denominations including Nazarene, Wesleyan, Mennonite, Reformed, and Baptist.

To those who traditionally haven’t had much ritual in their lives (i.e., Protestants), the ambience of the Mass would have great appeal because of its religious novelty – thus the interest in the Eucharist by those who promote contemplative spirituality. And for many Catholics, the Mass (where the Eucharist is presented), in, and of itself, is not a mystical experience. However if the contemplative dimension is added, one actually can enter the mystical realm. On the surface, this phenomenon seems complex, but once we begin to understand mysticism, it all makes sense. Within the contemplative prayer realm, the meditator is actually getting in touch with a spiritual power or force. Combining the tradition of the Eucharist, which appeals to many raised in the Catholic Church, with the relatively recent explosion of contemplative practice, the Catholic Church sees this as a way to recover its robust state of previous decades.

Right now, some may be asking, is the physical presence of Jesus held inside the elements of the Eucharist? Or as some evangelicals and emergents have suggested, is there a special presence and power in the Eucharist? The answer to both is a resounding no! Jesus Christ indwells the heart of every person who is born again and who belongs to Him by faith through grace. He promises never to leave or forsake us, meaning that His presence is in our lives at all times. We are not required to partake in a ritual to experience His presence, nor is He confined in benign, lifeless wafers and wine (or juice). As Jesus said:

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit [spiritual as opposed to physical], and they are life. (John 6:63, emphasis added)

Jesus said this in response to his disciples’ confusion over His statement “my flesh is meat indeed” (vs. 55). Paul adds further clarity in writing to the Romans that all we need to do is call upon the true Jesus, and He is there:

But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:8-13)

At this point, we see the great chasm that separates Catholicism from the light of the Gospel – a light the reformers saw, for which many of them gave their lives. They recognized that participation in the sacraments is not what saves people.

The Catholic’s New Evangelization is no small issue. Darkness has fallen over the Christian church the same way an avalanche sweeps down a mountain. Every day new unsuspecting victims are being swept away and buried. And the role the emerging church plays in bringing this about is something that should alarm every discerning Christian.

To read more about the emerging church, read Roger Oakland’s expose,  Faith Undone.

Related:

WUERL: A new morning with Pope Francis

Notes:
1. Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 1374, page 383.6
2. H. J. Schroeder, The Canons and Decrees of The Council of Trent (Rockford, IL: Tan Books and Publishers, 1978), page 79, Canon 1.
3. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, “The New Evangelization” (http://www.ewtn.com/new_evangelization/Ratzinger.htm).
4. Zenit: The World Seen From Rome, “Why the Pope Would Write an Encyclical on the Eucharist: To Rekindle Amazement,” cited April 17, 2003, http://www.zenit.org.
5. “Pope Benedict calls on faithful to intensify devotion to Eucharistic Jesus,” http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=3686.
6. Interview with Scott Hahn, “Eucharist in the Pontificate of Benedict XVI” (Pontifications, June 12, 2005, http://web.archive.org/web/20070209234229/http://catholica.pontifications.net/?p=940).
7. Doug Pagitt, Church Re-Imagined, p. 103.
8. Scot McKnight, “An Anglican Service” (Jesus Creed blog, http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=2258 – link no longer online).
9. Scot McKnight, Turning to Jesus, (Louisville, KY: Westminister John Knox Press, 2002 edition), p. 7.
10. Robert Webber, “A Call to an Ancient Evangelical Future” (Online at: http://www.aefcall.org/read.html.
11. Brian McLaren, “The AEF Document as a Preaching Resource” (From the AEF Call website: http://www.aefcall.org/documents/TheAEFDocumentasaPreachingResource_000.doc).

LTRP Note: The following is an excerpt from Diet Eman’s book, Things We Couldn’t Say. Diet was part of the Christian resistance movement in Holland during World War II. Her group was responsible for hiding and saving Jewish people from Hitler’s “final solution.” Today, at 92, Diet still shares her story with others.

A little bit different from last year’s Easter! Then we were in the midst of war and now that horror is over. O God, still we were closer to You then. And did not this all happen to bring us closer to You? How can it be that all of us are getting so bitter, and that we feel guilty under Your heavy hand.

Send Lord, Your light and Your truth. Never did we know what truth meant until now, when we are surrounded by lies. Bah, what an atmosphere around us—and are we the “lights” in the darkness, like You commanded us to be? There is no difference between me and the world. Am I of the world? Sometimes I am afraid that I am. Please loosen me from that, O Lord. from the diary of Diet Eman

 1941 Holland

It was no more than a few months after the Occupation [of the Nazis in Holland] began that we realized there were things that simply had to be done. When we saw injustice, we all felt it; we couldn’t just sit there and do nothing. But what could we do? The atrocities toward the Jews all around were beginning, and we felt it was our duty to act in some way. But it took time for us to know exactly what, when, and how we could do something.

Right from the beginning, the Occupation created ambiguities, arguments, and difficult struggles within Christian circles. When Jesus lived, His country was occupied by the Romans, and everyone remembered what He said: “Give Caesar what is Caesar’s.” Jesus Christ never preached rebellion against the Romans. Part of the moral struggle was the belief that what had happened in our little country was in fact ordained by God: some people claimed that we shouldn’t interfere with what went on because the Occupation itself was God’s will. Even my brother was originally inclined to think that one simply could not work against the Germans if one followed the teachings of Scripture.

The queen and the government had left for England in the early moments of the five-day invasion; there was a whole group in Holland who said the queen had no right to lead us anymore, and those of us who remained behind would be required to obey the government that God had given us now—that is, the Germans. But Hein, my fiancé, and I and many others felt our royal family had been crowned in a religious ceremony, with the words “by the grace of God.” We felt the queen was our rightful government, and we felt we were doing what the Lord wanted when we obeyed her. That’s why, later in the Occupation when the queen actually told the Dutch to go on strike against the Germans, we did it, although our actions cost many lives.

Many people in our church felt that the queen was still our head, not the Nazi puppets. Meanwhile the church we called the “black-stocking church” leaned toward the other point of view—that our burden was to be in subjection to whatever higher powers God had placed over us. People who took that point of view were never very strong in the Resistance because they thought resistance against the established government was, quite simply, sin.

Diet and Hein (photo)

Those were the kinds of arguments we used to hear, and we would even have them among ourselves during those early days of the Occupation. We had especially good arguments at the home of one of my fellow bank employees, a man named Platteel. We talked about how we were to live now in this new arrangement with the Germans. He was older than I was, in his thirties, and was married with two little kids.

In those early days, members of the Platteel group would advise everyone what passages to read from the Bible, what Scriptures we should consider when we were trying to reflect morally about our new national situation.

Some of the early Resistance people would sit down and take passages from the Bible that clearly showed the direction that we as Christians ought to take. Then they would write those passages on pieces of paper, and pass those notes around. A little note would say, “Read this passage, or that one.” Mr. Platteel would give me such a note, passing it along after copying it many times. There were no copy machines in those days, so who knows how many times he wrote that out and gave it to someone? He would often distribute lists of readings on his own, and even that small gesture would be an encouragement, a direction for us to go in. Such little things were important because such little things gave our hearts strength.

We all felt terrible about what was happening around us. Hein and I would sit down and ask ourselves, “What can we do?” We always talked about it together, and then discussed how we felt with a few more people at my bank or at his office, people who thought the same way we did.

Once the Occupation began, the Germans began to make all kinds of rules: we were not allowed to listen to the BBC, for instance, though any number of people still did it secretly, of course. And then came the next order in the newspapers: “Everybody has to surrender their radios.” Radios, in those days, were the size of televisions today; nobody had little pocket-sized appliances. So deciding whether or not to give them up to the Germans was a big decision. And the Germans made it very clear that if you didn’t deliver your radios to them, you could be thrown in prison. People became very scared. In the Netherlands, people were accustomed to liberty; nobody had ever told us what to do before.

This is what we thought: “Do we simply obey those miserable Huns?” The question “Are we going to obey?” had to be asked and answered, asked and answered, over and over again. Some brave people would make a hole in the wall of their homes, put in a shelf, and then place a radio in that hiding place and hang a painting or a mirror over it.

Every evening at eight o’clock, the BBC sent out information about the progress of the war and other matters. If you lived on a main street of the city, somebody from the family would walk the dog or just walk down the street to be sure there was no spy around. By that time, there already were Dutch cowards—those who sided with the Germans—who had started to make money by turning in their own countrymen. If they betrayed you by pointing the Nazis to your house, they made good money. Once those kinds of sides had formed, the real danger started: the Underground against the informers.

A Jewish Family being “deported” from Holland to Germany to the death camps

The Germans continued to say, “You are not allowed to do this, and you are not allowed to do that.” They made prohibitory laws against just about everything, and they reported the news in such a crooked way that everyone assumed what we heard was just plain wrong. So we knew the BBC on the radio was our only source of reliable news. Those of us who met to discuss what could be done were a very few people then, very few. Because many people were intimidated by the Germans and did hand in their radios, we knew that few of those people were hearing the real news of the war, the news from England. Thus, our first act of disobedience was listening to the BBC, taking down the real news in shorthand, typing it out, and spreading it around. That was the beginning of most Resistance groups. If you were caught doing that, of course, you went to prison. But we did it anyway.

In The Hague, we were surrounded by Germans immediately. They were everywhere, marching and just standing around on street corners. Even where you worked, you had to be careful about what you said because a lot of people in the office were pro-German, some of whom you never would have suspected. 

My heart nearly broke because my two dear girlfriends, Rie and Jet, the friends my age with whom I went jumping sloten and climbing trees and had so much in common—these best friends wouldn’t think for a moment about resistance. As a matter of fact, my brother Albert had a crush on Jet, so those girls were always in our house. Albert and Jet were friends, and I was dating Hein; Rie’s boyfriend, Paul, lived on our street, and his sister Jopie came along too. We were all the same age and we formed a club called the Malakka Club, because we lived on Malakka Street, named after a part of Malaysia. We were always together on Saturdays, and it was quite a mixture: Jet, Rie, and Daniel were Christian, as were Albert and I and Gerald, another friend; but all the rest of the kids were of different faiths. There were even two brothers of a family who had no religion, Stan and Henk van Eekelen. Of the two, one became a fanatical communist, the other one a fanatical Nazi, of all things; two brothers in the same house, two completely different views of the world!

Even before the war, my parents would often have Dutch soldiers over on Sunday. We lived beside an armory, and we would have several soldiers come to the house for dinner, and to play the organ and sing. My parents thought that was one way to support our boys.

Jet’s family didn’t invite boys from the armory into their home. Her family belonged to our church, but they had six kids, and they would say, “Yeah, yeah, our family is too busy. We can’t do that.” We accepted their decision. But they were really the same kind of people we were: they attended the same church and had the same basic beliefs. In fact, their father did the same work as my father did; they were sort of competitors. After church on Sundays, the girls would come to my house, and we would play Ping-Pong or sjoelbak (shuffleboard), or we would play four-handed piano.

But one Sunday, just a few weeks after the war broke out, I entered their house, and there above the piano hung a portrait of Hitler! In addition, German soldiers were in their house that night. Jet’s family was doing for German soldiers what we had done for the Dutch boys before the war. Now, after the Occupation had begun, they could do it for the enemy.

Soon after that, something else happened that hurt me very much. I had decorated my bicycle at that time by putting a little patriotic red-white-and-blue flag on it. Every night I rode home from the center of the city on my bike with the flag waving. One day Jet’s brother Daniel ripped the flag off my bike. I was so deeply hurt that I wrote them a letter. “Until that picture is gone”—I meant that picture of Hitler—“I’ll never set foot in your house again,” I told them. I said I was angry, “because you had no place for the Dutch soldiers who gave their lives for our country, and now you treat the guys who have come into this country, totally uninvited, with hospitality.”

 July 1941

Dear Rie and Jet:

Sometimes I would so very much like to know how you are doing. Sometimes I long so much for both of you. Especially when I look at our vacation photos. Then I can barely take it that things are now the way they are. You had such a large place in my heart, and I loved you both, more than even Fanny. You probably are playing a lot of piano, eh, Jet? And what is Rie doing? I have the feeling that I barely know you anymore. Nel, Bram’s girlfriend, sometimes laughs and makes movements and then I am thinking: “Who does she remind me of?—somebody does it just the same.” And now I know it, Rie—it is you. When you were teasing someone, you laughed just like Nel does.

Did I do wrong in breaking with you? Would it have been my task to still try to keep you? Was it wrong that I did not want to come to your house any longer? Also not to be considered a traitor? I spoke to Taverne, [a man I helped] and he said, “The light may not be in communion with the dark forces.”

I wish I was a light, but I am only a little flickering flame. I am so happy that Nel now came into my life, I still don’t know her, but I feel that she will be able to replace something that I lost when I lost you.   from the diary of Diet Eman

To this day, I don’t understand their way of thinking. That family was so similar to ours in beliefs—same church, same profession, and same standard of living. Maybe I never knew what those people were really like. When we were younger, maybe we were just having too much fun. We never talked about important things, about politics; we never talked about serious things at all. We just had fun. I never knew them inside, I suppose. But maybe there was more to all of it. Those girls were my best friends, so I’ve often thought about what happened.

Hein and I and the group that met at Platteel’s felt very strongly that what we were doing was right, both with our consciences and with God. What we were certain of was that there were things happening in our country that were wrong. But it was so difficult to know what to do. At first, we didn’t know where to start. At that time, the Germans had not yet started persecuting the Jews. What had aroused us was other things: laws against radios; rules about what we could listen to; laws forcing us to hand in copper, brass, and other metals; laws against everything. We the people of the Netherlands were accustomed to being free.                                                                                                        

July 7, 1941

Did not write in a long time and much has happened during that time. Two weeks ago, Russia joined. All metal has to be handed in. Political parties have to be dissolved. Their monies have to be handed in. Many arrests among the Roman Catholics. And we are getting accustomed to this, that is the very worst of all. And also, I forget to see this all happens with God’s permission.

I keep looking at the injustice, So this man rang the doorbell at the home our country and people are suffering, but I forget that You allow trials on this earth.

Teach me to see that this too is You, who carries everything in Your strong hands. Then I can even be happy knowing that You are fulfilling Your plans. Keep me from saying so many things, which are not pleasing to You. Set a guard over my mouth, O Lord, and keep watch over the door of my lips.  from the diary of Diet Eman

The Germans would print rules in the newspaper and broadcast them over the radio. They put up little signs on trains: “Be careful what you say.” That’s always what the Germans told each other: “Be careful with your conversations. The enemy is listening in.” Of course, we were the enemy, and they were reminding their military that they should not talk about military things, because we would hear it. Then they began designating certain cars on the trains as belonging only to them. At that time in the Netherlands, only the very rich had automobiles, and there was no gas. So the trains were a vital means of transportation. Everyone had bicycles, of course, but if you needed to go some distance, you usually took the train. What they did was this: if it was a train of six cars, say, they would take two cars for themselves. They would put big signs on those cars: Nur für Wehrmacht (“Only for the German army”).

When the Germans marked specific cars, those cars would almost always be empty, and the Dutch people had to stuff themselves into the one or two cars left for them. One time I fainted on the train, and I could not fall to the floor: there were too many people. I hung there, even though I had fainted dead away. Hein saw that I had fainted, but he was standing so far away from me that he could not get through the crowd. You were simply happy if you got on the train at all, never mind if you stayed together. We were already doing Underground work and were heading to Nijkerk on that day, and I fainted shortly after we left The Hague.

The train stopped in Voorburg for two minutes, and the people around me saw me hanging there, green probably; and when the doors opened, they shoved me onto the platform. The doors closed, and the train simply left without me! Hein could not get to me. He had seen me lying there on the platform, but he was caught in his car because everyone was so cramped in. The train went all the way to Utrecht with him on it and me lying on the platform at Voorburg. Imagine, if you fainted, you couldn’t even fall on the floor, you just hung there between people.

The way the Germans abused the railroad made me very angry, especially later, when I had to do so much traveling on those packed trains for the Resistance. So one time I walked right into one of those empty cars where the paper message (written in both German and Dutch) Nur fur Wehrmacht/Gereserveerd voor Duitsche Weermacht was stuck on the windows. I stood there with my back against the window, and behind my back, I ripped the message off completely. Immediately, of course, the whole car filled up with Dutch people. That time, at least, the Dutch people had one extra car on their own train.

An officer at the bank I worked at by the name of Gitz used to give me occasional hints: “I have heard some people are actually taking these Jews and hiding them,” he said to me one day, as if it was an incredible shock that such a thing was being done. At that date, to be sure, it wasn’t really done often. There were onderduikers already by that time, people who “dove under,” went into hiding under a false name. But even hiding onderduikers was all very new then. Gitz was a man with whom I had a lot to do at the bank. “Have you heard of people who are in the Resistance, and who then have to go into hiding?” he asked me in a rather casual way.

“Ja, I’ve heard about that,” I said, also very casually.

He often attempted to read my own feelings about the whole situation in that way, and I always was wary of him and his interest, even though, later on, he gave me more tips on people who were in the Underground and in other organizations. So Gitz helped me to get started, but always in a very guarded way. It wasn’t easy to bring these things up with people you didn’t know well: the price for being wrong about who could be trusted was very, very high.

Working together was absolutely required if our movement was going to grow. One of my uncles, my mother’s brother, lived in The Hague and was doing important work for the Resistance when he showed interest in us. He worked for a printing outfit, which was ideal because he could secretly print the things we needed badly. He had his own contacts, so our circle grew because of our contact with him and his printing press.

When we started the dangerous work of trying to hide Jews, Herman, a Jewish man I worked with at the bank, told me about his Uncle Frits, who was doing all kinds of things for the Resistance. “Would you like to meet him?” he asked.

This Uncle Frits was not Jewish, but he had married Lena, Herman’s mother’s sister. Because his wife, his whole family, and all his relatives on his wife’s side were in danger—being Jewish—he began to work hard for the Resistance. Uncle Frits had a strong sense of what was right and wrong.

He started doing all sorts of things with us. He came to the meetings at Platteel’s, and, of course, he had even more contacts, including an accountant and his wife, Jenny, who was a housewife and very active and eager to work in the Underground. So at one point we had a big group of resisters in The Hague, and soon there were many things we could do.

This is what happened: when it became apparent that the Nazis were really starting to go after Jewish people, we saw our task. Up until that time we had been groping around with the constant question, “What can we do?” But after the seizure of Jews became clear, that was simply not a question anymore. Our objective became very clear: to find places for Jews wherever we could.

When we formed ourselves into a Resistance group, we called ourselves “Group HEIN”; but the name had nothing to do with my fiancé’s name. It was an acronym formed from the first letters of Help Elkander in Nood, which means “helping each other in need.” Hein was one of the two leaders; the other was Ab van Meerveld, an old friend of his from The Veluwe, the part of the country where Hein had been raised and where his family still lived.

At first, we didn’t even think about a name; everything we did was so casual and limited. Our first activities consisted of spreading reliable news and trying to get people to England. Such efforts seemed to be so small, and we were such ordinary people. But then our work started growing. And other small groups started to form in those early months. The Resistance was simply made up of people who were opposed to what was happening in the Occupation.

Distrust and suspicion surrounded us all the time. Young men could be stopped at any time on the streets and conscripted by the Germans. Germany was so short on manpower, their men spread over the whole of Europe as Occupation forces, that at home they had only young kids under fourteen and very old men. So they made it a rule that young able-bodied men of the countries they occupied had to go work in Germany. First, it was an invitation; later, it was forced labor. Those men were placed in factories, which became dangerous places when the Allies got involved, because they would often drop their bombs on those factories. Few Dutch men wanted to go to Germany to help the enemy; so our work began as an effort to hide not only Jews but also the onderduikers, Dutch men hiding for other reasons, such as to escape having to go work in Germany. The necessity of that effort had become very clear to us.

The razzias, the Gestapo raids, began to take place after the Germans were already coming after the Jews; but our trying to help the onderduikers really started at about the same time that we started hiding Jews. When the Germans started taking other people too—not just Jewish men for forced labor camps—then the queen, in a radio broadcast, made very clear to us that Dutch men should not go to Germany. Once again, just as with the confiscation of radios, Dutch people had to make a difficult choice. I realize now that a lot of people were simply very afraid; and many just obeyed all those crazy German rules.

Some of the men (and Diet) in Group Hein (many of whom lost their lives)

Many men did go to Germany, but many others went into hiding. They worked on farms or did what they could in hiding; some worked in the Underground. No one had any inkling that the war would last for five years. At first, we really thought it would last only a year. We thought, “These are modern times, after all, and this horrible barbarism will be defeated quickly.”

We were sure America would join the war effort. We thought Roosevelt would help free us. But we didn’t have access to much world news, and thus we didn’t know that in America there was terrific opposition to the war. We pictured America as the great land of justice and freedom, and we thought America and Roosevelt simply wouldn’t stand for letting that little painter fellow out of Austria have his way with Europe.

At that time, the British were fighting for their lives against the bombardments. I still admire the British immensely because they had to send all their little kids out into the country in big trains, where they were taken in by farmers. Every night London was being bombed—the Blitzkrieg. Under those circumstances, when you are all in danger, you want to keep your kids by your side. And all the British housewives learned first aid and how to fight fires. After the bombardments, many English people would go out with their masks on to help. For them the war was simply horrible. I have the greatest respect for the courageous British.

 September 28, 1941

Rev. Bosch in the Grote Kerk: “Do not pray as in the Old Testament—‘Smash the heads of the children of those who persecute me against the rocks,’ but pray instead, like Paul—‘I wished that you were like me, except for these chains.’”

Sometimes I cannot imagine that we as a people ever will be less hard again. Because of the things I say now, openly, without blushing. These thoughts of revenge I would earlier have wanted to dig a hole for saying—before this war. Lord, only Your Spirit can keep us from turning into animals. Send Your Spirit into our hearts and lead us in Your eternal way. from the diary of Diet Eman

LTRP Note: The following news article shows how Bible prophecy of the days before Christ’s return is again being fulfilled. In the Catechism of the Catholic church, homosexuality is a “mortal sin” (a sin, they say, that will condemn you and send you to hell). Now the Catholic church is being led by a man who implies that homosexuality is not a mortal sin ( i.e, homosexuality is acceptable to God). When you couple Pope Francis’ spiritual grounding in contemplative practices1 and his connection to the Jesuits (who are traditionally mystics) with his "progressive" views on issues such as homosexuality and abortion, you basically have an emerging church Pope. What we foresee happening is the new Pope is going to reorient the Catholic church away from its traditionalist mortal sin approach (i.e., morality) and take it in the direction of Anthony DeMello and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (both panentheistic Jesuit priests and fervent mystics).

William Shannon (Thomas Merton’s biographer), in his book Silence on Fire, states that Catholicism has been traditionally based on the spirituality of devotion (trying to get to Heaven through pious acts and deeds). Contemplative spirituality is the antithesis of this, in that man, in essence, is already good because he (meaning all mankind) is intricately connected to God (that is, man has divinity inherently within him already). 

We can see more clearly than ever now that even the Catholic church is “falling away” from its own traditional “faith.” This is going to allow  Catholic contemplative teachers and leaders to really come out of the contemplative closet. The last pope constrained the contemplative view, for the most part. We believe this one will bring it to the forefront of the Catholic church. This is closing the gap even more between the “new” Christianity (of which many Protestant and evangelical members are now embracing) and the Roman Catholic church, a paradigm shift which will eventually develop into a world-wide ecumenical interfaith religious body that will ultimately reject the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and rather will worship and follow a one-world global religious leader of which the Bible predicts.

While Bible-believing Christians observe what is happening today in the world around us, may we encourage ourselves in the Lord that the plan of salvation as laid out in Scripture is not found in either of these spiritual outlooks: man cannot earn his way to heaven and neither is he already connected to God through his own virtue. It is only through humbly acknowledging that we are lost sinners (anything but Divine) in need of a Savior who died on the Cross as an atonement for our sins and then by faith believing on Jesus Christ and accepting Him as Lord and Savior can we be saved by His grace. No earning our way and no Divinity within ourselves.  

For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. (1 Corinthians 2:2)

For more understanding, read “A Jesuit Pope? Understanding The Jesuit Agenda and the Evangelical/Protestant Church.”

By Heather Clark
Christian News Network

“Pope Francis: Catholics Should Not Be ‘Obsessed’ With Speaking Against Homosexuality, Abortion”

ROME – In an article published on Thursday by the Italian magazine La Civilta Cattolica, Pope Francis explained that he believes the Roman Catholic Church needs to find a “new balance” in reaching unbelievers, rather than focusing on the issues of homosexuality and abortion.

During the lengthy piece, which covered a variety of topics, from being a Jesuit to the role of women in the church, Francis pointed back to comments he made last month when asked how Catholics can reach out to people who are divorced or involved in same-sex relationships.

“In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this,” he said. “During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro, I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.”

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ Click here to continue reading.