Kategorie: Mens

FA van Deventer

Beantwoord vir u self die vraag:

Is hierdie ‘n man of is dit ‘n vrou?

…

Ek is seker dat die meeste van u sou geantwoord het dat u dink dit ‘n man is. Dit is egter nie….

Ons sien hier ‘n vrou waarvan die regterkantste deel gegrimeer is om soos ‘n man te lyk. Die meeste van u het seker al gehoor van die term ‘n Drag Queen – daardie homoseksuele mans wat elke jaar opgetooi is as vroue in ‘n optog. Nou wel hierdie vroue wat hulle self aantrek soos manne is die vroulike ekwivalent van Drag Queens. In die lesbiese wêreld noem hulle dit ‘n Drag King. Hierdie verskynsel kom veral voor onder Homoseksuele vroue.

Wikipedia verbind Wokeness, LGBT, Feminisme en Social Justice met mekaar:

“Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning “alert to racial prejudice and discrimination”. Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as racial injustice, sexism, and denial of LGBT rights. Woke has also been used as shorthand for some ideas of the American Left involving identity politics and social justice, such as white privilege and reparations for slavery in the United States.”

Nie-Christene soos Elon Musk sien die gevare van Wokeness raak wanneer hy skryf (Twitter 19 Mei 2022):

“Unless it is stopped, the woke mind virus will destroy civilization and humanity will never reached Mars”.

Musk skryf bg. toe hy die besluit geneem het om Twitter op te koop. Hy sien dat die “Woke mind virus” ‘n gevaar is. Dus het ‘n nie-Christen soos Musk, dit wel raakgesien dat dit ‘n gevaar is…

Helen Zille se boek “#STAY WOKE Go Broke” is gepubliseer nadat die woke DA leierskap gepoog het om haar te skors op grond van aantygings dat sy ‘n rassis is. Sy skryf:

“If there is one party that knows exactly how destructive racialised ideologies like Wokeness truly are, it is the DA. We have lived through its impact, and I am grateful that we have survived to tell the tale… I thought my time had come, back in 2015, when I stepped down as leader, but when the DA went so badly off course due to the capitulation before Wokeness, I felt I had to return.” (p. 127-128)

Zille wys daarop dat die “FeesMustFall”, “RhodesMustFall”, “ScienceMustFall” en “decolonisation” spesifieke voorkomste is van Wokeness wat Suid-Afrika teister (p. 63).

Zille sê dat hierdie Woke Chaos wat Suid-Afrika en die Weste teister met Post Modernisme te doene het (p. 66):

“

1. Wokeness is Applied Post-Modernism
2. Post modernism, in turn, centres on two core principles a. A Knowledge Principle b. A Power principle
3. Social Justice flows from these two principles. It is a core concept in Woke ideology, which through post-modern knowledge and political principles, seek to radically transform society
4. The method involves identifying specific issues and driving them in ways that are aimed at confronting and fundamentally changing the power hierarchies, structure, and functioning of society”

In Romeine 1:18-27 lees ons die volgende oor Homoseksualisme:

“¹⁸Want die toorn van God word van die hemel af geopenbaar oor al die goddeloosheid en ongeregtigheid van die mense wat in ongeregtigheid die waarheid onderdruk, ¹⁹omdat wat van God geken kan word, in hulle openbaar is, want God het dit aan hulle geopenbaar. ²⁰Want sy onsigbare dinge kan van die skepping van die wêreld af in sy werke verstaan en duidelik gesien word, naamlik sy ewige krag en goddelikheid, sodat hulle geen verontskuldiging het nie; ²¹omdat hulle, alhoewel hulle God geken het, Hom nie as God verheerlik of gedank het nie; maar hulle het dwaas geword in hul oorlegginge, en hul onverstandige hart is verduister. ²²Terwyl hulle voorgee dat hulle wys is, het hulle dwaas geword ²³en die heerlikheid van die onverganklike God verander in die gelykvormigheid van die beeld van ‘n verganklike mens en van voëls en viervoetige en kruipende diere. ²⁴Daarom het God hulle ook in die begeerlikhede van hulle harte oorgegee aan onreinheid, om hulle liggame onder mekaar te onteer ²⁵hulle wat die waarheid van God verruil het vir die leuen en die skepsel vereer en gedien het bo die Skepper wat geprys moet word tot in ewigheid. Amen. ²⁶Daarom het God hulle oorgegee aan skandelike hartstogte, want hulle vroue het die natuurlike verkeer verander in dié wat teen die natuur is; ²⁷en net so het ook die manne die natuurlike verkeer met die vrou laat vaar en in hulle wellus teenoor mekaar ontbrand: manne het met manne skandelikheid bedrywe en in hulleself die noodwendige vergelding van hulle dwaling ontvang.”

Die vraag kan nou wees:

• Maar wat het Homoseksualiteit te doen met Feminisme?
• Nog meer spesifiek: Wat het dit te doen met die vrou in die ampte.

As mens die koerant oopmaak, dan sien mens artikels soos hierdie een met die opskrif:

“Teoloë kap NG Kerk in gay-verslag” van Beeld 13 April 2006, p. 12.

Dit gaan hier oor Ds Laurie Gaum wat in ’n homoseksuele verhouding was en dat hy toe deur die NG Kerk geskors is. Hy is egter nie geskors oor sy homoseksualiteit nie, want in 2004 het die NG Kerk besluit dat homoseksueles as volwaardige lidmate aanvaar moet word. Dr Andre Bartlett wat die besprekings oor dié kwessie in 2004 gelei het, het gesê dat weens die besluit niemand op grond van homoseksualiteit verhinder mag word om geligitimeer te word of beroepbaar gestel te word nie. (Rapport http://www.news24.com/Rapport/Nuus/0,,752-795_1606315,00.html)

Dit is dus ietwat raaiselagtig dat die NG Kerk teenstrydig met wat hulle op hul Sinode besluit het, twee jaar later dan ‘n besluit neem wat hierdie besluit weerspreek. Dit kan egter wees dat die weerstand teen homoseksualisme wat daar uit party gemeentes soos MorelettaPark gekom het tot hierdie raaiselsagtige besluit gelei het. Waaroor dit gaan is dat Ds Laurie Gaum ‘n praktiserende homoseksueel is.

Die feit van die saak bly egter dat de NG Kerk simpatiek staan teenoor homoseksualisme.

As ons na rapportering oor die verrigtinge by liberale kerklike vergaderings kyk, dan sien mens hoe die predikante toneelspeel en skerts te midde van die verskriklike situasie waarin die N”GK” haarself bevind. Dit laat mens aan een of ander kinderkrans-kamp dink.

Vergelyk:

http://www.gereformeerdenafrikaans.co.za/modules/news/article.php?storyid=387

Bron: http://www.ngkerk.org.za/sinode/5p3.jpg

Nou moet ons noodwendig vra:

Hoe kan dit moontlik wees dat ‘n Gereformeerde Kerk soos die NG Kerk wat bely dat hulle die Nederlandse geloofsbelydenis as een van hul geskrifte aanvaar, nie meer in Romeine 1 glo nie.

In die Nederlandse Geloofsbelydenis Artikel 5 staan daar geskryf:

“Ons aanvaar al hierdie boeke en hulle alleen, as heilig en kanoniek om ons geloof daarna te rig, daarop te grondves en daarmee te bevestig. Ons glo ook sonder twyfel alles wat daarin vervat is, nie juis omdat die kerk hulle aanvaar en as sodanig beskou nie maar veral omdat die Heilige Gees in ons hart getuig dat hulle van God is. Hulle het ook die bewys daarvan in hulleself, aangesien selfs die blindes kan tas dat die dinge wat daarin voorspel is, plaasvind.”

Professor Wayne Grudem het egter in 2004 die boek met die titel “Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth” gepubliseer wat ons nader na ‘n antwoord bring op die vraag hoe dit moontlik is dat die NG Kerk homoseksuele gedrag as aanvaarbaar beskou.

In hierdie boek wys Professor Grudem daarop dat die verwerping van die Bybel as God se Woord (liberale teologie) die volgende verloop in gedeformeerde kerke in die VSA geneem hetⁱ:

1. Heel eerste: Die wegwerping van Bybelse onfeilbaarheid
2. Dan volg: Die aanvaarding van die bevestiging van vroue
3. Daarop volg: Verwerping van die Bybelse lering van die hoofskap van die man in die huwelik
4. En dan: Die stuiting van predikante wat die bevestiging van vroue teenstaan
5. Die aanvaarding van homoseksuele gedrag as geldig in sekere gevalle
6. Aanvaarding van homoseksuele bevestiging
7. Heel laaste volg: Bevestiging van homoseksueles in hoë leierskap posisies in die denominasie.

KAN U NOU SIEN WAAR DIE HOMOSEKSUALISME INPAS….?

Kan u sien dat alles begin met die ondermyning van die gesag van God se Woord en dat die volgende stappie dan die aanvaarding van die vrou in die ampte is en dat die eindpunt van hierdie pad die aanvaarding van homoseksualiteit is?

Kan u sien dat die NG Kerk haar tans tussen stappe nr 5 en 6 bevind? Kan u sien dat die NG Kerk reeds ver gevorder het op die pad van liberale teologie?

Ongelukkig is die GKSA ook besig om hierdie selfde pad te bewandel. Die GKSA bevind haar tans in die posisie waar vroue tot die Amp van Diaken toegelaat is en sommige predikante en gemeentes hul selfs bereid verklaar om vroue te bevestig tot ouderlinge en predikante. (3 Feb 2006 – Verklaring deur 32 Gereformeerde Predikante oor die vrou in die besondere ampte). Ons kan dus sê dat die GKSA haarself tans by stap nommer 2 bevind.

As ‘n voetnota wil ek nou eers op hierdie tydstip stilstaan en u wys op die boeke wat gebruik is in die voorbereiding van hierdie lesing.

The Way Home deur Mary Pride – Voormalige vroulike Feminis

Mary Pride skryf die volgende in 2005 oor haarselfⁱⁱ:

“I am a homeschooling mom of nine kids, three of whom are now in college, and two of these are National Merit Finalists. Five of the six youngest are in Civil Air Patrol. Twenty years ago I wrote the first mass-market homeschool book, of which this book is the fifth edition. I have two engineering degrees, love mystery and science fiction, publish a national homeschooling magazine (Practical Homeschooling) and a popular homeschool website (www.home-school.com), and sniffle at the sad parts in movies.”

Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth deur Wayne Grudem

Wayne Grudem is Navorsings Professor by Trinity Evangelical Divity School en hy is ook die voorsitter van die Departement van Bybelse en Sistematiese Teologie

The Feminist Mistake / The Feminist Gospel deur Mary Kassian

Mary Kassian skryf die volgende oor haarself in The Feminst Gospelⁱⁱⁱ:

“In fact, up until a few years ago, I called myself a feminist and would have unashamedly stood with others who did so. There are chauvinistic attitudes in the Church, and there are atrocities and crimes of abuse, degradation and shame to which the feminist movement justifiably calls attention. The difficulty for Christians is to deal with the very real problems and issues without being beguiled by the true impetus and philosophy of the feminist movement.”

Mary Kassian som die primere doel van Bybelse Feminisme op as:

“The primary concern of Biblical feminists is the question of the ordination of women — whether or not women should be allowed to occupy the office of elder (pastor, presbyter, bishop, priest). A second related concern is the mutual sharing of authority and responsibility in the marital relationship — “mutual submission.” Biblical feminism does not directly challenge theological doctrines such as sin and redemption, and thus seems far removed from the more radical forms of feminism that have infiltrated the Church. However, the presuppositions and methods of interpretation that Biblical feminists employ have implications that directly and logically support the theological developments executed by radical feminists. In many ways, these conservative evangelicals are placing themselves at the same starting point as the more liberal theologians of the early 1960s.”^iv

Wayne Grudem wys vir ons uit dat die eindresultaat van liberale teologie, die aanvaarding van Homoseksualisme is. Die feit is egter dat die deformasie begin het toe die gesag van die Skrif aangetas is.

Mary Kassian skryf in haar boek, the Feminist Mistake:

“Biblical Feminists also altered traditional presuppositions regarding the inspiration of Scripture. Whereas Christians have traditionally believed that the whole Bible is inspired by God, biblical feminists maintain that only some Scripture is so inspired. The rest is so male-biased, so influenced by the writers’ own culture and prejudices, that it is inapplicable to the contemporary church.”^v

Hierdie boek (Feminist Mistake) van Mary Kassian se titel verwys na die boek van Betty Friedan met die titel: “The Feminine Mystique”. In effek is Mary Kassian besig om te sê dat Betty Friedan se boek ‘n “mistake” was.

Wie was Betty Friedan en waaroor het die Feminist Mystique gegaan?

Ons eie Suid-Afrikaanse News24 se vroue afdeling, Women24, skryf in Februarie 2006^vi:

“Betty Friedan, celebrated feminist and author of The Feminine Mystique, died this weekend on her 85th birthday…. Friedan was an icon and a revolutionary, whether she cinched in her waist or not. She’ll be missed.”

Hierdie ‘held’ van ons moderne samelewing is in 1921 gebore en het in die VSA groot geword^vii. As jeugdige was sy betrokke in Marxistiese Joodse bedrywighede. Na studies aan die Universiteit van Carlifornia, Berkley, het sy as joernalis gaan werk vir linkse groepe. In 1947 trou sy met die liberalis, Carl Friedan. Betty het egter meer en meer radikaal geraak en hulle twee het so erg baklei dat hulle mekaar met die vuiste bygekom het. Sy en haar man skei in 1969.

Feministe, soos Betty Friedan, het die Patriagale stelsel (die vader as die hoof van die huisgesin) as die bron van alle kwaad gesien. Die Patriagale stelsel moes vernietig word.

Later meer oor Betty Friedan en haar boek The Femine Mystique.

In Mary Kassian se boek The Feminist Gospel is daar ‘n afdeling met hierdie diagramme wat die ontwikkeling van “Evangeliese” Feministiese Teologie en Feministiese Sekulêre Teorie uitwys. Sy verduidelik die doel van die diagramme soos volg:

Die “Evangeliese” Feministiese Teologie (Feminst Theology) en Sekulêre Feministise Teorie (Feminist Theory) is afsonderlike bewegings, maar bo by die radikale gedeeltes begin dit saam te smelt.

“Evangeliese” Feminisme is deel van die Sekulêre Feministiese Kontinuum. Die presupposisies is dieselfde, maar hulle het dit (nog nie) tot die logiese gevolgtrekkings gebring nie.

“Evangeliese” Feministe het oor die tou getrap (Christelike Wêreldbeskouing definisies) deur die Bybelse interpretasie se reëls te verander om simpatiek te wees teenoor die Vrouebeweging. Om dit reg te kry moet “Evangeliese” Feministe ‘n kompromie rondom die Skrif maak en daarom volg dit dat FEMINISME ‘n kruispad na TEOLOGIESE LIBERALISME word^viii.

Vir ons doeleindes is ons die meeste geintriseerd in die Feministiese “Evangeliese” Teologie. Daarom sal ons primêr infokus op “Evangeliese” Feministiese Teologie (linkerkantse deel).

Diagram: WOMAN’s ROLE en die probleem van Patriagalisme

Betty Friedan het in ongeveer 1963 ‘n vraelys by ‘n reunie van oud klasmaats versprei. Sy het bevind dat hulle gefrustreerd was met hul rolle as moeders en vroue. Sy het gevra of dit te wydte is aan hul onderwys en of dit die rol as vrou is wat dit veroorsaak. Friedan het toe besluit om ‘n indiepte studie te doen wat toe tot die publikasie van die Feminine Mistique gelei het. In dierdie boek kom sy tot die gevolgtrekking dat daar ‘n teenstrydigheid is tussen die realiteit in vroue se lewe en die beeld wat vroue probeer voorhou en dat dit tot die ongelukkigheid van vroue gelei het.

Sy het nie ‘n naam gehad vir hierdie verskynsel wat vroue onvervuld gelaat het nie en daarom dan dat die “probleem” op hierdie tydstip “The problem without a name” genoem is. Teen die einde van 1960 het Kate Millet ‘n naam toegeken aan hierdie probleem^ix nl. “Patriagalisme” Hierdie woord kom van twee Griekse woorde nl. Pater wat vader beteken en arche wat regering beteken. Die probleem was dus die regering deur vaders.

Die oplossing is:

“It was not possible for women to fulfill traditional roles as mother and wife and concurrently pursue their own visions; so society would have to adjust its basic ideas about employment, marriage, family and home… It would be necessary to change the rules of the game to restructure professions, marriage, the family, the home… These second wave of [feminist] pioneers believed that inner wholeness could only be found through women leaving their traditional role in order to emulate men. They argued that women would only be fulfilled by joining the ranks of professional and educated, contributing something more concrete to society than motherhood and wifehood.”^x

Diagram: A PROBLEM IN THE CHURCH

As ons na die oorsprong van moderne Feminstiese Teologie kyk, dan moet ons terug gaan na die publikasie van Katherine Bliss , “The Service and Status of Women in the Church” wat in opdrag van die Wêreld Raad van Kerke (die oorkoepelende moeder liggaam van die Suid Afrikaanse Raad van Kerke waarby die GKSA onlangs by aangesluit het en waarvan die NG Kerk reeds etlike jare lid is) opgestel is in 1952^xi.

In hierdie publikasie wys sy daarop dat vroue baie betrokke is in die lewe van die kerk, maar dat hulle nie toegelaat is om in die leierskap aktiwiteite of lering, prediking administrasie of evangelisasie te funksioneer nie, alhoewel party van hulle gawes vir hierdie take het. Sy het toe ’n beroep gedoen vir die herevaluasie van manne en vroue se rol in die kerk – veral in terme van die bevestiging van vroue in die spesiale ampte. Hierdie publikasie is in die 1960’s afgestof om feministiese Christene se ontevredenheid hoorbaar te maak.

In 1964 het die Wêreld Raad van Kerke in hul Publikasie “Concerning the Ordination of Women” ’n beroep gedoen op kerke om ‘n “re-examination of their traditions and canon law” te doen^xii.

Mary Kassian lewer as volg kommentaar oor Valerie Goldstein se Artikel van 1966:

“The ordination of women required the development of a new theology and Biblical hermeneutic. The first step towards this end was pioneered by theologian Valerie Saiving Goldstein, whose ideas were in many ways ahead of her time. Goldstein’s article “The Human Situation — A Feminine Viewpoint” first appeared in the Journal of Religion in 1960. It was republished in 1966 when the current of feminist thought in Christendom was well established. Goldstein proposed that a theologian’s sexual identity had bearing upon that person’s theological views. At the time, it was radical to suggest that one’s gender would affect one’s interpretation of the Bible.

To support her contention, Goldstein cited the works of two contemporaries:

Anders Nygren and Reinhold Niebuhr. These male theologians, in addressing the question of the human situation, had defined the basic sin of mankind as pride and had defined grace as sacrificial love. Goldstein contended that the human situation was quite different for women. She said that the sin of men may well indeed have been pride and the thirst for power, but that the sin of women was just the opposite. The sin of women, as she saw it, was the “underdevelopment or negation of the self . . . triviality, distractibility, diffuseness, dependence on others for one’s own selfdefinition.” In sum, Goldstein claimed that the female perspective on sin was the antithesis of Niebuhr’s and Nygren’s definition. The sin of women was too much sacrificial love and not enough pride in themselves.”

Mary Kassian som die inpak van Goldstein en Bliss feministiese publikasies soos volg op^xiii:

“The immediate impact of these writings was not highly visible. However, just as Simone de Beauvoir’s and Betty Friedan’s books had laid the foundation for a major upheaval in secular society, so Kathrine Bliss and Valerie Saivings Goldstein laid the foundation for a major upheaval within the church. As William Douglas prophetically stated in 1961: ‘The place, the status, the opportunities for service of women within the Church are rapidly changing. A silent revolution is now under way.’ ”

Diagram: THE CHURCH AND THE SECOND SEX

Mary Daily se boek The Church and the Second Sex in 1968 het ‘uitgewys’ dat die vroue in die kerk ‘n groep is wat onderdrukking ervaar weens hul geslag. Vrou binne die Kerk het hulle dan ook begin identifiseer as die onderdruktes – die Second Sex.

Daly lewer self kommentaar oor hierdie boek:

“As a result of . . . The Church and the Second Sex, I had been hurled into instant fame as exposer of Christian misogyny and champion of women’s equality within the church. . . . I lectured to academic audiences and women’s groups across the country about the sexism of the Christian tradition. . . Often in the late sixties I encountered hostility in women, not toward the patriarchs whose misogynism I exposed but toward me for exposing them. But by about 1970 this phenomenon of misplaced anger had almost disappeared. More and more people had caught up with The Church and the Second Sex, and the lines that formerly had elicited hostility brought forth cheers. But the “I” who was then standing before the friendly audiences and tossing out the familiar phrases was already disconnected from the words, already moving through a new time/space. I often heard the old words as though a stranger were speaking them — some personage visiting from the past. My concern was no longer limited to “equality” in the church or anywhere else. I did not really care about unimaginative reform but instead began dreaming new dreams of a women’s revolution. This was becoming a credible dream, because a community of sisterhood was coming into being, into be-ing. In the hearing/healing presence of these sisters I had grown ready to try writing/speaking New Words.”

Diagram: FEMINIST LIBERATION THEOLOGY

Mary Kassian identifisseer ‘n verband tussen Marxistiese Vryheidsteologie van Suid-Amerika en Feminisme. Sy stel dit so^xiv:

“Two female theologians, Letty Russel (Human Liberation in a Feminist Perspective: A Theology, 1974) and Rosemary Radford Ruether (Liberation Theology: Human Hope Confronts Christian History and American Power, 1972), began to develop a theology specific to the liberation of woman. They based their work on liberation theology, newly introduced in Latin America… Feminists borrowed Guttierez’s [vader van Liberation Theology], analysis but believed that the key to true liberation was deeper than mere social and political change. According to feminist theologians, the key to world liberation was the liberation of the world’s largest oppressed class: women. Feminist theologians believed that the liberation of women would induce the end of poverty, racial discrimination, ecological destruction, and war.”

Grudem maak die opmerking oor die pad van Feministiese Teologie^xv:

“Following the denial of male headship in marriage, and the denial of any restriction of leadership roles in the church to men, and the denial of anything uniquely masculine other than the physical differences among human beings, it is to be expected that egalitarians would begin to blur and then deny God’s identity as our Father. This is exactly what has recently happened in egalitarian writings. Ruth Tucker, in her book Woman in the Maze, encourages women to call God “Mother” in private prayer”

In die middel 1970’s het die National Council of Churches USA (WRK!) ’n taakspan aangewys oor seksisme in die Bybel.

In 1976 publiseer hulle The Liberating Word: A Guide to Nonsexist Interpretation of the Bible.

Een van die outeurs was Letty Russel (dieselfde vrou wat Feminisme as die ware Liberation Theology beskryf het)^xvi

Hierdie verwysings na God as Moeder word bevorder deur die literatuur wat verkoop word deur sogenaamde Evangeliese Christene soos Christians for Biblical Equality (www.cbeinternational.org). Daar is selfs kerke soos die United Methodist Church, wat kerklike liedere goedgekeur het waar Metodiste eer moet sing aan “die Sterke Moeder God, wat dag en nag werk”. Die groep wat weggebreek het van die Southern Baptist Convention toe weer terug gekeer is na die Bybelse rol vir vroue in die kerk (Cooperative Baptist Fellowship), het hul jaarlikse byeenkoms in 2001 in Atlanta VSA geopen met liedere en gebede tot “Moeder God”^xvii.

Virginia Mollenkott

Dit is egter nie net sogenaamde nie-Protestante teoloë wat met hierdie anti-Christelike feminisme hulle ophou nie. ‘n Prominente Feministiese Teoloog, Prof Virginia Mollenkott, se agtergrond word as volg deur Mary Kassian beskryf^xviii:

“Virginia Mollenkott was a religious feminist with a strong evangelical heritage. She was brought up in American fundamentalism and received her undergraduate degree from Bob Jones University. In 1975, she wrote a twopart article for the Reformed Journal which passionately argued for women’s equality in the Church, which would be evidenced by woman’s ‘access to all privileges and responsibilities of governance and the ministry.’”

Mollenkott was deur die Committee for the Production of the Inclusive Language Lectionary van die National Council of Churches (WRK!) uitgenooi. Dit lei tot die publikasie van haar boek The Divine Feminine: The Biblical Imagery of God as Female. Sy skryf:

“We can resolutely learn to speak of God in an all-inclusive way… For this reason, God is the most truly absolute Thou any mind can conceive. This Thou, this Absolute Relatedness, may be referred to as He, She, or It because this Thou relates to everyone and everything. . . .”

Virginia Mollenkott se eie webblad raak die volgende oor haar kwyt^xix:

“… With Letha Dawson Scanzoni, she co-authored “Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? … Her other books include “The Divine Femine: Biblical Imagery of God As Female”; … Dr. Mollenkott was a member of the National Council of Churches’ Inclusive Language Lectionary Committee… In 1992 she received an Achievement Award from New Jersey’s Lesbian and Gay Coalition, and in 1999 a Lifetime Achievement Award from SAGE (Senior Action in a Gay Environment).

Mollenkott’s twelfth book, “Omnigender: A Trans-Religious Approach”, has been warmly welcomed by pastoral counsellors, theologians, psychologists, and GLBT people of various religious backgrounds as well as by people working for sexual and gender justice.

Annually, on the weekend after Labor Day, Mollenkott facilitates an event called “Sisterly Conversations: Current Concerns Among Lesbians of Faith”, held at Kirkridge Retreat and Study Center in Bangor, PA, in the beautiful Pocano Mountains.

She is also a featured speaker at Kirkridge’s annual “Christian People of the Rainbow” event, held on the second weekend of June. The event is very popular and draws a large number of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered Christians along with their supporters and friends each year. For more information on these events please visit http://www.kirkridge.org. Ms. Mollenkott is an active member of the Evangelical and Ecumenical Women’s Caucus (www.eewc.com) and in CLOUT (Christian Lesbians OUT). With her life partner, Suzannah Tiltm, Virginia lives in northern New Jersey and co-grandmother’s their three delightful grandaughters.”

Ons belydenis is duidelik dat God uit drie persone bestaan nl. God die Vader, God die Seun en God die Heilige Gees. (Sien HK Sondag 9; NGB Artikel 8; Apostoliese Geloofsbeleidenis; Die Geloofsbelydenis van Nicéa; Geloofsbelydenis van Athanasius)

Feministiese Teoloë wil dit egter anders hê. Hulle wil niks weet van God as die Vader of die Seun nie, want hulle wil ontslae raak van alles wat manlik is. Feministiese Teoloë wil ontslae raak van ons belydenis en nie meer praat van die drie-eenheid nie. Hulle wil die drie-eenheid vervang met sulke alternatiewe soos^xx:

• “Creator/Redeemer/Sustainer”
• “Source/Servant/Guide”

Diagram: FEMINIZATION OF GOD : Afgodery?

Die vraag is nou: Aanbid Feministe ’n ander god as die God van die Bybel? Wanneer ons na die betekenis van die eerste en tweede gebooie kyk en ons kyk ook na die sonde wat Aaron en die Israeliete gedoen het toe ’n beeld van God gemaak is, dan is dit duidelik dat ons baie versigtig moet wees dat ons die God van die Bybel moet aanbid. Sondag 34 Vraag 95 antwoord die vraag “Wat is afgodery” soos volg: “Dit is om in die plek van die enige ware God wat Hom in sy Woord geopenbaar het, of naas Hom iets anders uit te dink of te hê waarop jy jou vertroue stel.”

Een van die opstellers van die Heidelbergse Kategismus lewer soos volg kommentaar op die vraag “Wat is Afgodery”^xxi:

“Evenzo degenen die wèl belijden dat zij de enige ware God dienen, Die hemel en aarde geschapen heeft, maar Die in hun verbeelding (letterl. Fantasie) en gedachten een andere god bedoelen, die sijn zichzelf verzinnen, en niet zoals Hij Zichzelf in Zijn Kerk door Zijn Woord heeft geopenbaard en heerlijk betoond. Daarvan zijn Joden, de Arianen, de Mohammedanen of Turken niet vrij, die wel enigszins beweren dat sij de enige, eeuwige en onbegrijpelike God, de Schepper der wereld belijden, maar die Hem niet dienen Zoals Zich in Zijn Woord openbaarde, naamlijk Eén in Weze en Drie in Personen (Joh 5:23, 1 Joh 2:32, 2 Joh 1:19). Dus vallen zij van de belijdenis die schijnen te willen bekennen, af, en door Hem te verloochenen, vervallen zij tot een andere god, die geen God is, maar van wie zij zichzelf gedroomd, verdicht en ingebeeld hebben, dat hij God is.”

Met ander woorde, ons definisie van wie en wat God is, moet op God se Woord gebaseerd wees, anders is ons besig om ’n ander god as die ware God wat in die Bybel van gepraat word te aanbid.

Diagram: HOUSEHOLD OF FREEDOM

Letty Russell, argumenteer in Household of Freedom: Authority in Feminist Theology, dat “die woord van God nie identies is met die bybelse tekste nie.” Volgens Russel kan die Bybel dus nie as die enigste bron van van gesag vir praktiese teologiese lewe gesien word nie. (Feminist Gospel p. 169)

I.p.v. om gesag in die Bybel te kry, het feministiese teoloë besluit dat die gemeenskap van gelowiges die bron van gesag is. Russel merk dan op dat dit beteken dat die nuwe paradigma se interpretasies van die Skrif anders kan wees as die tradisionele Christelike Teologie.

DUS: Letty Russel se Feminisme het nou ‘n vorm van Humanisme geword.

Mary Daly: In Pure Lust moedig Daly vroue aan om alle inhibisies af te werp – om “buite beheer” te raak in hul opstand teen die manlike stelsel van Judeo-Christistelike patriagalisme.

Om hul onderdrukking te oorkom, het Daly gesê dat vroue die reëls van moraliteit, spirualiteit en etiek moet verbreek. Vroue moet vry wees om hulle te vergryp aan fisiese pret soos lesbinisme en geestelike ondervindings soos heksery en afgodery. Dit wat voorheen as taboe beskou is moet nou aangegryp word weens die hoër feministiese bewustheid. (The Feminst Gospel, p 232)

Diagram: WOMAN CHURCH

Feministe het tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat hulle nie altyd hul godsdienstige feminisme kan uitleef binne die ‘patriagale kerkstrukture’ nie. Daarom het Feministe begin om onafhanklike aanbiddingsgroepe te begin wat die ontwikkeling van die godsdienstige feministiese visie kon toelaat.

Een van die feminste, Fiorenza, noem dit “Ekklesia of Women” en Ruether noem dit “Women-Church”^xxii.

Volgens Ruether verskil “Women-Church” van die tradisionele kerk omdat dit poog om die pastor af te skaf omdat elke vrou ‘n pastor is.^xxiii

Die Feminis Rita Nakashima Brock skryf in haar boek “Christian Feminism: Visions of a New Humanity, ed., waaroor Women Church gaan^xxiv:

“The feminist Christian commitment is not to a saviour who redeems us by bringing God to us. Our commitment is to love ourselves and others into wholeness. Our commitment is to a divine presence with us here and now, a presence that works through the mystery of our deepest selves and our relationships, constantly healing us and nudging us toward a wholeness of existence we only fitfully know. That healed wholeness is not Christ; it is ourselves”

Mary Kassian som die afval van Women Church soos volg op^xxv:

“The feminist quest for a usable future transcended the boundaries of Christianity and extracted from all traditions that which contained value for women. Feminists deemed that religious practices borrowed from witchcraft, neo-paganism, and the New Age were legitimate (at least in part), as were ancient heresies and sectarian philosophies of the Biblical and patristic era. They claimed that men, in the interest of retaining power for themselves, had labeled these valid philosophies heretical. Religious feminists argued that the men who wrote the Bible did so with their personal interests in mind, as did the men who chose which books were to be included in the canon.”

OPSOMMING

Mary Kassian som dit waaroor dit alles gaan soos volg op^xxvi:

“Many who were conservative have now adopted radical views, and many who once called themselves “Biblical feminists” are now far from the Bible. This is because feminism and Christianity are antithetical. Accepting the feminist precept into one’s worldview immediately initiates a change in one’s view of truth and absolutes. It places an individual upon a slippery slope which can lead, and usually does lead, far away from God. My point is not that every individual who calls her or himself a feminist is damned to Hell. I am not implying guilt by association. What I am saying is that the presupposition of feminism is not in harmony with the Bible. Accepting the feminist precept, even to a small degree, necessitates some degree of compromise. Although for a particular individual, this may not lead to a total rejection of the Bible and God, such is the logical and immanent end.”

KERK KANKER GENEESTELIK?

By ‘n kerklike vergadering in September 2023 het ‘n predikant na die Feminisme wat in die kerk inkom verwys as kanker. Hy het dit mooi omgesom. Dit is ‘n vernietigende siekte wat onbehandeld lei tot die dood van die kerk.

Die vraag is egter of dit wel suksesvol behandel kan word. Daar is drie voorbeelde waarvan ek weet waar die liberale agenda gestuit is en liberales uit die kerk gesmyt is:

• Die een is waar Prof Dr FN Lee in 1991 beswaar gemaak het teen die vroue in die ampte in die Presbyterian Church of Australia^xxvii. Die Sinode het Prof Lee se Bybelse argumente ter harte geneem en die vroue wat reeds as predikante bevestig is op permanente pensioen gesit en hulle is verbied om ooit weer te preek. Die Liberales was so ontsteld dat hulle uiteindelik die kerkverband verlaat het en ‘n ander kerkverband gestig het.
• Die tweede voorbeeld is waar die regsinnige gelowiges in die Southern Baptists in 1984 daarin geslaag het om die liberale rigting van vroue in die ampte om te keer en die besluit geneem het “that we encourage the service of women in all aspects of life and work other than pastoral functions and leadership roles entailing ordination.”^xxviii
• Die derde voorbeeld: Die Missouri Sinode van die Lutherse Kerk het in 1974 die president van die Concordia Teologiese Skool in St. Louis afgedank weens sy liberale sienings. 45 van die 50 fakulteitslede van die Teologiese Skool was so kwaad dat hulle hul bedankings ingedien het. Die bedankings is aanvaar en die liberale invloed is verwyder.^xxix

Slot

Ons het gesien hoe Liberalisme en Liberale teologie ons samelewing binne gedring het met verwoestende nagevolge.

Ons het gesien dat “Evangeliese” Feministiese Teologie in sy finale vorme saamsmelt met Sekulêre Feminisme. Hierdie is ‘n valse godsdiens.

Ons het gesien dat “Evangeliese” Feminisme ‘n kanker is wat die kerk bedreig.

Ons het gesien dat “Evangeliese” Feministiese kanker genees kan word en drie histotriese voorbeelde is genoem.

Mag Christene in Suid-Afrika se oë oopgaan vir die gevare van Feminisme. Mag daar ‘n diepgaande bekering terug na God se Woord plaasvind… Sola Scriptura…

EINDNOTAS

iEvangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, Wayne Grudem, 2004, Multnomah Publishers, ISBN 1-57673-840-X, p. 500 – 536 . Hierdie boek en nog vele ander kan afgelaai word by Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, http://www.cbmw.org/resources/books.php

iihttp://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?event=AFF&p=1012601&item_no=09183

iiiThe Feminist Gospel – The Movement to Unite Feminism With the Church, Mary Kassian, Crossway Books, 1992, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p225-226

ivThe Feminist Gospel – The Movement to Unite Feminism With the Church, Mary Kassian, Crossway Books, 1992, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p216

vThe Feminist Mistake, The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture, Mary Kassian, 2005, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-570-4, p. 235

vihttp://www.women24.com/Women24/Life/BodySoul/Article/0,7173,1-2-4-63_9089,00.html

viiBetty Friedan se biografie kan gelees word by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Friedan

viiiThe Feminist Gospel – The Movement to Unite Feminism With the Church, Mary Kassian, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p217

ixMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel – The Movement to Unite Feminism With the Church, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 23

xMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 22-23

xiThe Feminist Mistake, The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture, Mary Kassian, 2005, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-570-4, p. 29

xiiThe Feminist Mistake, The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture, Mary Kassian, 2005, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-570-4, p. 31

xiiiThe Feminist Mistake, The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture, Mary Kassian, 2005, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-570-4, p. 39

xivThe Feminist Mistake, The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture, Mary Kassian, 2005, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-570-4, p. 63 – 64

xvEvangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, Wayne Grudem, 2004, Multnomah Publishers, ISBN 1-57673-840-X, p. 509

xviThe Feminist Mistake, The Radical Impact of Feminism on Church and Culture, Mary Kassian, 2005, Crossway Books, ISBN 1-58134-570-4, p. 136

xviiEvangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth, Wayne Grudem, 2004, Multnomah Publishers, ISBN 1-57673-840-X, p. 512

xviiiMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 237

xixhttp://www.geocities.com/vrmollenkott/

xxMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 145

xxiHet Schatboek, Ursinus Zacharias, Den Hertog – Houten, ISBN 9-789033-104459, Vol 2, p. 266

xxiiMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 196

xxiiiMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 198

xxivMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 201

xxvMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 182

xxviMary Kassian, The Feminist Gospel, 1992, Crossway Books, ISBN 0-89107-652-2, p. 239

xxviiAdventures with God: Some of the Lord’s dealings with Francis Nigel Lee, Lee, FN, 2019, Lulu, ISBN 1093456639, p144-165

xxviiihttps://www.sbc.net/resource-library/resolutions/resolution-on-ordination-and-the-role-of-women-in-ministry/

xxixhttps://www.nytimes.com/1974/02/19/archives/professors-ousted-by-lutheran-board-in-seminary-dispute.html