THE QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT(1).

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.

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 QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT(1).

THE QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT(1).

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to THE QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT(1).

Similar to THE QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT(1). (10)

THE QUEST FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT(1).