If there were a prize for the society at Stellenbosch University with the best advertising campaign, many will agree that Shofar Christian Church would be quite the contender. They usually have some of the most eye-catching posters and banners in some of the most prominent locations. For example, at the beginning of the year, a banner on the foot bridge over Merriman street, the only double lane street on campus. Welcome Students! With a lot of new blood entering the campus, societies do what they can to collect new members. Many of these would be unaware of the controversy surrounding Shofar.
Amongst much of the typical advertising brochures and posters we see every year, there was one fascinating pamphlet that caused at least a few raised eyebrows. This pamphlet had on its outside two quotes: one by Gandhi and one by Voltaire…
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” — Mahatma Gandhi
“If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act redeemed.” — Voltaire
And so starts the speculation. Do they have balls of steel, to have the audacity to use the very quotes that might be directed at them by many of their critics? Or are they starting to listen to their critics and trying to respond, or possibly improve? It turns out the pamphlet was indeed partly inspired by wanting to hear criticism and respond to it. There are people in Shofar that are concerned about the criticism to the point of wanting to make a difference.
But how much difference can someone make? A big institution with a large cultural inertia does not change easily. As the great reformers noticed. In the end, each of us can only play a part, make our own little contribution. This blog will be my attempt. The naive optimist in me dreams that Christianity could actually get back to a place of radical inclusiveness and reflect the character of Jesus again, but this optimist is typically drowned out by my other side. I’m not sure whether that side is a pessimist or a realist.
The pamphlet reads (translation from Afrikaans to English by me):
Stone Throwing…
“Let him who has no sin throw the first stone.” — Jesus ChristThe media often accuses Christians of intolerance and judgemental behaviour, and that they follow their leaders blindly without thinking for themselves. If you look at Christianity’s history, it looks as though it has at times been the case. The likes of Apartheid, the Nazi’s, imperialism and many other horrors committed by “Christians” is more than just an embarrassment to the Christian. The shallow consumer mentality often/sometimes seen in Christian media also doesn’t feel like an attractive alternative.
But is this the only Christian reality? Can it be that there is a family somewhere where the members are committed to one another despite human brokenness — an experience of community that brings people together instead of dividing them with cultural boundaries.
Inside are a few stories of people that feel they have become members of such a community. For them it is a reality.
Let us stop the mutual stone-throwing and the sentimental criticism. Let us start a discussion.
Chat with us at: klipindiebos at good old gmail
I realise I should probably keep a bilingual dictionary on my shelf, it could be quite useful. E.g. that last sentence feels like a bad translation. (”Kwaadpratery” and “wedersydse” to “criticism” and “mutual”…)
Sweet. Unlike many creationists, the author of this bit recognises that the Nazis were “Christians”. However, I am afraid this piece already sets off some alarm bells in my head. This again looks like an us/them thing: the members are committed to one another… not to the world? This again reinforces the stereotype of Shofar as a “we’re different, our community is better than others”, the very criticism that is often thrown at Shofar. “Separatists”? What I’d like to see is “the members are committed to everyone out there in the world”. Breaking down cultural boundaries within a new culture does not mean much, if all you end up doing is establishing a new culture with even stronger cultural boundaries.
Pastor Sias le Roux writes (my translation):
Welcome Firstyears! We invite you to become a part of our family.
We are a place where you can be and become what God called you to be. Stellenbosch is a place of possibilities and promises, a kaleidoscope of hope. It is in this environment, particularly, that we want to be a family for you, and create a place where you can develop during the most exciting period of your life.
Come, be inspired, empowered, and discover a true spiritual home.
This demonstrates well the dynamic of attracting first-years. Amongst first years, you find people unsure of their identity in a strange place, and are looking for a social support group. They are looking for friends. In particular, they’d love to find an easy answer to the question of their own identity. Not many societies offer that.
And they shouldn’t.
Receiving a “hand-me-down” identity turns you into a clone. Being handed an identity deprives you of one of the most important journeys you could embark on in your life. And if you don’t embark on it now, you might have to do so at 50, where a mid-life crisis could destroy your family.
Of course, a supportive community can be an invaluable asset in such a journey, but some kinds of communities can be much more of a liability than a help. They can end up telling you who to be, how you should feel about certain things, what music you should listen to, what movies to watch, who to date, who to vote for…
And Shofar has been accused of being that kind of community. Some people may argue, some people may find it is not the case for them, but still many people experience exactly that.
Are there needs that other societies or social structures are not responding to? (Apart from handing down an identity that is.) I suppose the first source of support would be student residences. What about people living privately? Societies cater to a particular shared interest, I don’t think there’s much that they need to do differently. I can’t really think of anything in particular, so I’ll leave the question hanging: are there needs that other societies or social structures are not responding to?
75 responses so far ↓
1 George // Apr 16, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Hi Hugo,
You wrote: “The naive optimist in me dreams that Christianity could actually get back to a place of radical inclusiveness and reflect the character of Jesus again, but this optimist is typically drowned out by my other side.”
I don’t think that is possible, without becoming “unchristian”. Christian dogma is inherently exclusive. It is based on having an adversary. I honestly cannot see how you could promote radical inclusiveness without altering Christian dogma fundamentally.
2 Hugo // Apr 17, 2008 at 1:36 am
So I’m hoping that Christianity will become “unchristian”? Yea, I guess so. No wonder I don’t call myself “Christian” anymore.
The “emerging church” is shedding much dogmatic baggage. Stellenbosch Gemeente seems to be following that path (and there I frighten people away from SG? hmm…), and I hear Moederkerk and SG have near-identical views on things. However, Moederkerk does have more traditional baggage, being a Dutch-reformed church. Their collection of creeds/catechisms makes them somewhat less flexible. I’ll be interested to see where that goes. Many say the Dutch Reformed church will end up splitting up (i.e. eventually stop existing in its present form). At that point, the necessary flexibility will be more accessible.
These are interesting times for people that enjoy studying the evolution of religion and culture.
3 Hugo // Apr 17, 2008 at 1:37 am
SG seems to be talking more about “the Way” than about “Christianity”. I don’t know how many members of the congregation notice this. Much of the things I “notice” might just be me looking for the patterns I’d like to see, and thus purely my bias speaking, rather than fact.
4 Hugo // Apr 17, 2008 at 1:42 am
And another afterthought. Sorry, I’m bad that way.
The Moederkerk is closely connected to the theological faculty, which feeds the Dutch Reformed churches. And that’s the source of Shofarian gripes about Dutch Reformed churches. Even Lesbigay isn’t concerned about the Dutch Reformed churches, on the grounds of “just wait for the next generation of theology faculty graduates”. Their concern is about intolerance preached from the more fundamentalist-leaning denominations (sorry, “non”-denominations…)
5 Ben-Jammin' // Apr 17, 2008 at 3:39 am
As long as the idea that ‘radical inclusiveness’ is good is justified by ‘Jesus said so’, Christianity will be inherently authoritarian, in my opinion. If you get to a point where you consider Jesus one mortal fallible human being who had good ideas among many mortal fallible human beings who had good ideas, is that still Christianity?
Oh, and to a different comment from your post: To an optimist, a realist is a pessimist.
6 Hugo // Apr 17, 2008 at 8:51 am
What about if Jesus is considered a personification of a certain ideal? I.e. with Christians adding a name to the ideal, but knowing in themselves what the ideal is? (Sounds a little humanistic, doesn’t it?)
7 George // Apr 17, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Naturally religion needs to evolve and adapt to society if it wants to survive. Christianity, no doubt, would also need to change. But I am not so sure whether it could change and retain its relevance.
When you no longer sell a solution to a problem you’ve created, what remains?
8 Hugo // Apr 17, 2008 at 11:44 pm
What remains? Community with a particular corpus of stories with which they raise their children and teach them a moral and appreciative worldview, with which they discuss how to live a good and compassionate life, a community working together to make a difference in their surroundings, working to make “the kingdom come”.
Something like that. Ideally.
9 The Big Chill // Apr 18, 2008 at 12:24 am
Ek het eergister ‘n Shofar-liniaal (to keep one on the straight and narrow?) van ‘n skerp en sublimely sarkastiese vriend gekry.
Ek dink nie midlife crises is beperk tot mense wat nie in hul twintigs die moed gehad het om al die moeilike goed in hul lewens uit-te-figure nie. Dis iets wat gebeur. No matter who you are.
10 Kenneth Oberlander // Apr 18, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Those posters with the “Lost” caption irritate the hell out of me…
Hugo:
Where did you hear this? If true, then this is an admirable thing for Shofar to do. Of course, if they are willing to hear criticism, then they should be able to take it…
Interesting use of the Voltaire and Gandhi quotes. So are Shofar (implicitly) admitting current versions of Christianity are flawed? If so, how is their (brand spanking new) version any better?
Slightly off topic, what is the current status of the Moederkerk and SG, in terms of numbers of faithful? I know that a lot of churches in Europe are slowly emptying out as their congregants die, or are attracted to more charismatic alternatives. Is the same thing happening here in SA?
Anyone have any data to share on this?
11 Hugo // Apr 18, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Individuals. It basically means there is a Shofarian that cares, not that the rest of the leadership cares. And what can one person, or even a handful of people do, to help an organisation with that much cultural inertia, and wedded to creationism, prosperity gospels and insane “purity codes”? After all, everyone must submit to authority on matters of doctrine and governance. The infamous Clause 11.
I’ve been thinking what could happen if there’s a support group for Shofarians that want to lobby for science sanity. The thing is, once they break with such doctrines of their church, it’s probably best for the individual to just leave. Who or how many would care enough to stay and make waves?
12 Kenneth Oberlander // Apr 18, 2008 at 4:28 pm
I don’t think a science lobby within Shofar is possible. You have to choose, one way or the other. Either science is correct, and your ministry elite are lying through their teeth, or everything they say is absolute truth, so keep giving your tithes, and denying reality. I can understand that this is difficult for someone sucked into this mess. And if you can maintain that level of cognitive dissonance, well, that might be worth something, if only to psychologists. But don’t expect the rest of humanity to sit idly by whilst you continue to peddle this creationist shit as true.
The fact is, if Shofar attempted such a science lobby idea, they would be shooting themselves in the foot! I cannot see Shofar ever endorsing such a thing.
What prosperity gospels and purity codes (I shudded to think) are you referring to?
13 Kenneth Oberlander // Apr 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Not you personally, Hugo…;-)
In case that wasn’t clear…
14 Hugo // Apr 18, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Prosperity and Purity
See Prosperity theology on Wikipedia. If you believe enough, and you do what you should, God blesses you with prosperity. “Purity movement” (my name for it) is similar, if God isn’t answering your prayers or you feel disconnected, it’s because you’re not pure enough, and need to recommit, give yourself to Jesus all over again. Note: this is not mainstream Christianity, this is pretty much the opposite of it. Quite ironic.
Jesus challenged purity codes. When I wrote this:
…the ellipses at the end contains many thoughts. Jesus’ challenge to the purity code is best understood in the context of a sect that raises the banner of “be pure!” to idol status. As I understand it, the Pharisees of old was one of these sects. (Note that Christianity started as a sect, I’m not using the “sect” word in derogatory fashion here.) The irony I see is this: the very thing Jesus challenged, is still seen today. And in that context Jesus’ message is best understood.
The problem is just how to show them that, when they’re not interested in listening, because they have their idols, they have their community, and they don’t want to give that up. They don’t want to lose their new family. (And I can quote more Jesus here… about Jesus bringing the sword and the like.)
Shofar’s “moral guidelines” and “purity codes” are known quite widely. I’ve blog friends that haven’t actually met Shofar in person yet, but know about it.
Science Lobby
Yea, it’s hard to challenge your leaders. I had a friend that used to be in Shofar. Then he went to Bloemfontein, and came to the conclusion that Shofar’s Fred May isn’t right about everything. Why? Because he found a new revival pastor that said masturbation is okay, which contradicts Shofar’s teachings. (Kissing for the first time on your wedding day is held as an “ideal”, btw.) They obsess over sexual purity. Such obsessions create the very problems that they’re trying to fight, so it creates a self-fulfilling loop. It keeps people “in the loop”.
In my case, I was in Shofar for, I think something like three months. Long ago. The point at which it all started falling apart, thankfully, was when I heard one single lie told from the pulpit. Told as hearsay though, so a statement like “Fred told a lie” will not hold. “Fred told a story of a person telling a story”, and that latter story was a lie. But it serves to illustrate the spell that they have over at least some of their congregation. Acknowledge a single lie and you tend to fall out of step with Shofar.
And yet, I think there are people in Shofar that do not accept all their teachings. However, these people aren’t serious enough about it all to actually want to make a difference. Standard apathy. No wave-makers.
On changing an institution like that, I think it can only be changed from the inside. From the outside, it can only be destroyed. At most. I’d prefer to see it changed. I do agree that the problem is that they are too wedded to black-and-white thinking. They teach that merely accepting an inkling of doubt, runs the risk of going to hell. They would likely fall apart if they were to publicly and openly acknowledge that they were wrong.
Another piece of irony, they have pretty much spoken a self-fulfilling prophecy over themselves: an organisation divided upon itself cannot stand… and then they go and ignore what they should have learned from all the schisms in the past. They take hard stances on the very things that cause divisions, thereby creating divisions.
SG and Moerkerk
I have no hard data. I have anecdotes from people in leadership positions in those churches. In the case of the Dutch Reformed church, many people believe it has enough resources to survive long enough to serve the current generation, but not much longer. That congregation/well does seem to be drying up. Serving is good, these people have grown up with a particular world view and a particular need, the church provides them with it. It’s good. A difference between congregations and leadership though: often the congregation takes the Bible literally, and the leadership doesn’t. (And this is why so many people run away from Dutch-Reformed churches and into churches like Shofar. As Angus Buchan, of “Faith Like Potatoes” fame, writes in his Shofar testimonial in the pamphlet: “It’s a church that’s transparent with no hidden agendas [...] what you see is what you get.” I can’t help but wonder if this is a stab at trained theologians in charge of other churches.) Quite a dilemma, the leadership has quite a weight on their shoulder. And it is remarkably difficult to get people to think. I don’t envy their leadership.
One answer I got to the question of “what does the future look like for the NG church?” was “about the same as the future of the NP party two decades ago”. So I wonder if there will be an NNG-church phoenix rising out of the ashes of the old NG church?
Moederkerk is doing well. Studentekerk fell apart. Interesting? The Moederkerk is more connected to the theology faculty. They are more progressive. The leadership is more aware of and connected to the emerging church conversation. Stellenbosch Gemeente had a couple of dozen members a decade ago. Right now they fill the largest hall in Stellenbosch more than twice over, pretty much every Sunday. (They have three sermons every Sunday, except during holidays when students are away, and all three are the same sermon, so you only have to come to one.) Shofar tried to steal the hall out from under SG. Nice for inter-church relationships that. The resulting auction-between-two for the Paul Roos hall caused a huge drain on SG finances. So now both Shofar and SG are looking to build new halls.
SG and Moederkerk are important. I believe it is the path out of the quagmire that South Africa sees itself in. OK sure, the evangelical atheists think atheism is the answer, but that’s not going to happen without heaps of pain. I’ve been watching SG for quite some time. It looks good. It provides a direction of growth for the individual. There are fundamentalists there, and there are free thinking individuals there. And they encourage diversity. In that kind of environment, truth can grow, truth can be discovered. And Moederkerk thinks much the same as SG. I’d like to explain more of SG, but I lack the time. And I’m also scared that defending SG to the atheists can result in scaring away Shofarians, who will need SG if they ever break with Shofar. (Sure, there are many ways of breaking with Shofar, one might be Freethinking Maties, but that isn’t going to work for everyone. Some walk out of Shofar with wounds that are bleeding. SG is a place where they can heal. A place where they can get pastoral care that they really need.)
In the past, I’d now end off with “and I’ve said too much”, but I’m tired of being diplomatic. More straight-spoken is better for my own mental health. And maybe the philosophers of old’s ideals are influencing me, both as a result of podcasts I’m listening to, and books I’m reading.
15 Ben-Jammin' // Apr 18, 2008 at 11:35 pm
How many generations have to try and change it - based on the same collection of ancient writings in the Bible - before it’s time to give up?
16 Hugo // Apr 19, 2008 at 1:32 am
Ben… I don’t know how to respond. I was wondering about my word choice, and clearly they weren’t ideal. Destruction is not an option, as in, it won’t happen. Change has a better chance of success. I’d like to see a network effect.
Responding further proves frustrating, so I’m not even trying. (Or rather, I’m deleting my attempt.) The point is I’m trying to make the best contribution I can possibly think of. I’m putting in some effort. My other option is to give up and not try to make a difference, and simply getting on with my life. A friend said “don’t bother trying to help Shofarians, they’re not worth it”. I disagree, I’ve decided I find it worthwhile to at least make some contribution.
The less-effort contribution that other people advocate making? I can always try doing that later. But this particular contribution is now or never. And it builds the foundations for other potential future contributions.
However, it requires patience. Please be patient with my blog. Thanks…
17 Al Lovejoy // Apr 19, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Marketing, hard agressive marketing is usually spent on a hard sell product, which needs dressing up and a play on consumer emotional responses to move it…
First posted on Shofar is a cult on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2361749801&topic=3750
“Arlyn, my extensive research has identified the following as the generally accepted characteristics of a cult:
1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members.
2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society.
3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.
4. It believes ‘the end justifies the means’ in order to solicit funds and recruit people.
5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or the community it occupies.
Okay, let’s take a look at each of those points in relation to Shofar and find those tiny spoonfulls of poison in Abraham’s parable of soup.
1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members -
There is a fairly simple formula that Fred and Lucille May use to control people and which of course gets passed on and propagated by their loyal adherents:
a.) Firstly, when the May drones recruit people, those cold recruits first need to be convinced that up until that point, by not wanting to be a part of Shofar - they are simply not interested in a living relationship with God. You will notice this in their justificatory statements like: “We cannot help it if we choose to be radical for God”, etc… with the inference that if you do not want to join Shofar, do the whole song and dance - meaning total submission to the Mays will and follow their “Foundations” to the letter - you are actually REJECTING GOD - not Shofar.
b.) People in Shofar who eventually confront Fred May on his twisting of Scripture are usually isolated completely alone in a meeting with the leadership where they do get to present their case or point but almost invariably they are warned that questioning Fred May is the equivalent of being in direct rebellion to God Himself and in danger of being cursed. If such a person persists with their “sowing division” - they are ostracised, gossiped and slandered over by the Mays in private to key people, usually at the Mays house and folks are warned that they will suffer the same consequences should they persist in being friends with these “backsliders”. Diseases and personal difficulties or tragedies are welcomed by Fred and Lucille May and then used to justify and prove “God’s Wrath” in these silenced dissident’s lives.
c.) Fred May claims to have power over diseases like cancer. He claims to have raised the dead. He claims that people who question him get fatal diseases or will suffer terrible consequences directly from the Hand of God…
2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society -
a.) Shofar claims to be in the business of “taking the whole gospel to the whole world” but since Fred May managed to get a foothold on campus, “the whole world” has stubbornly refused to include the local coloured areas and extended only as far as lending the Shofar name and limited guerilla support to a set of NGO’s in Kayamandi called Prochorus.
b.) While the Mays and the “Inner Circle” of Shofar enjoy a luxury ex-wine mansion as their “Headquarters”, no local poor black “Prochorus” and coloured people were ever seen there by my wife and I while I was their neighbour for nearly three years and never ever any desperately poor children.
c.) Fred May has consistently preached against the N.G. Kerk, the Catholic church and any individual he can use as a straw dog to burn as the only keeper of the knowledge of God’s will and revealed purpose - of course always positioning himself and ONLY himself and Shofar above all others.
3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma -
a.) Self-appointed. No other pastor in Stellenbosch prayed over and anointed Fred May, he was not invited by the Administration of the University of Stellenbosch and he did not represent any other Christian organisation or have mandate from any discernable person other than God Himself. He also had no formal education from any recognised Bible College, not even a fundamentalist one! This is in spite of the fact that ample opportunity existed for Fred and Lucille May to join a growing renewal church called Stellenbosch Christian Fellowship, which was already a major student church and growing in the whole multi-racial Stellenbosch Christian community - instead preaching against it amongst the students and aimed against other mainstream churches to gain disciples for Fred and ultimately “Shofar”.
b.) Dogmatic. Dogma in the fundamentalist context refers to “doctrines”, something Fred May is obsessed with, especially “jezebel spirits” and “doctrines of demons”. His own doctrines of course, especially how he raises his money are reflected by his extra-Scriptural Shofar “Foundations”, which have to be completed before a contract is signed by the aspiring Shofar member wherein they sign away their personal responsibility and stewardship before God and instead place that authority in the hands of Fred May and his leadership allowing them open mandate to do as they please with people’s lives.
c.) Messianic. In the second last meeting my wife attended in attempt to formulate her own opinion of Shofar, in spite of being harrased and manhandled by Shofar “Ushers” under radio orders from Pastor Morne Bosch, she did manage to get to hear Fred May preach constantly and with smooth charming charisma about himself and how God had been speaking to him (and only him of course)… - something he has done ever since he first opened his mouth to preach the gospel of Fred May in Stellenbosch. If you do ever attend one of his sermons, analyse exactly how much he preaches about Christ and how much he expounds on Fred May and his unique, exclusive glory with constant reminders and colourful referalls to the long glowing resume of his HISTORY of incredible miracles. No one in Shofar has actually ever been a WITNESS to one of these dead raisings or cancer cures - in fact the very people whom the Mays personally advised to not get medical treatment or follow their oncologist’s prescriptions and instead listened to what Fred May told them (with obvious justifiable deniability) - ALL DIED.
c.) Not accountable. Up until a while ago - Shofar, i.e. Fred May was accountable to no one. Not the university, Not any other recognised Christian leadership in Stellenbosch - nobody except himself. Now he boasts the title of being the “Regional co-ordinator of the IFCC”. So he is at least aligned with another cultist with headquarters in another city, yet he still does as he pleases in white Stellenbosch and by recent personal experience - neither Fred nor Lucille will recognise and be accountable to local Christian leaders. One gets the feeling Fred would welcome them if they submitted to him and only him - FIRST, like his own leadership. He also needs to find “Sponsorships” by aligning himself with popular fundamentalist gospel media figures - giving the public impression that he recognises other Christian leadership.
d.) Has charisma - In buckets and more sincere than a snake-oil salesman.
4. It believes ‘the end justifies the means’ in order to solicit funds and recruit people.
5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or the community it occupies.
Arlyn, I’ve written a lot about this topic and even here you can see someone like Abraham (who aspires to being a “pastor” like Fred) pushing for paying people like him in a pyramid organisation, when Christ commanded us to give to the poor, something Fred May is opposed to so much that you will never find the desperately poor of Stellenbosch in a Shofar meeting, which flies in the face of all Fred May’s claims of involvement in the whole community - in the press. However, I think I’ve written enough about that topic and the message was clear and has been heard.
If I have time this week I will write about that fellow in George and we can get into mechanical solidarity, ignorance, arrogance and utter stupidity.
Al
P.S. Thanks for your comments on “The Smell of Tears” - you display a maturity rare in Christians, which is the reason why I am treating our conversation seriously and will continue it till a conclusion. God speed with your work…”
18 Hugo // Apr 21, 2008 at 3:59 am
The Big Chill (I’m curious about the nick):
Yea, true, a midlife crisis is not something you avoid by sorting things out in your twenties, but… yea, well, different crises for different people. … Naah, I’ll not dwell on examples.
A comment below the post, My Abstinence Education at d-C:
19 Al Lovejoy // Apr 21, 2008 at 7:31 am
I dunno H, I’m middle-aged, (you have no idea how much it hurts a hippy like me saying that) and at 45 you gotta start taking those Salusa 45’s and Vital over-45’s - so for me there is no backing out or denial.
20 vs. 40 -life crises?
I think the challenges of a young man are different. At that age - an education, a life mate - making a mark and finding your fortune (BTW, how is the States?) are the core of one’s pursuits and endeavours and the crisis one might experience are weighted accordingly.
A better example would be the transition to fatherhood for a man, something I am experiencing right now - and I am pretty convinced from interacting with other fathers, some my age and some in their twenties that age truly doesn’t have much to do with it - fatherhood (and motherhood for that matter and more so) is the same challenge with the same crises, regardless of how old you are…
It is much harder for anyone to live in the here and now and I try, and I mean really try to count the blessings I have become complacent with in the face of seeming disaster.
It helps me not to toss the baby out with the bath water when the takkie hits the tarmac…
20 Hugo // Apr 21, 2008 at 8:06 am
I hear ya. (Even if I cannot always understand everything I hear.
)
21 Andrew // May 12, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Thought I’ll add my perspective on this matter.
I think bulk of the offences that people have with Shofar is self-made.
I think it is a function of Afrikaner Nationalism that fathers of previous generation were/ are generally too busy with matters pertaining to money-making and race so they neglect their children emotionally.
This neglect manifests itself in a life long journey to belong somewhere.
Upon arrival in Stb, they find the perfect profile for a hero in Fred May. The black-looking cullert eloquent preacher with the blond wife!But this is a self-created idol and when the idol acts contrary to the person’s fantasies, the person freaks out and wants to tell the whole world about it. Sooner or later they find others like old Alex who is always ready to bitch and moan about Fred. Not that Alex is an Afrikaner.
If I could show it on a pie-chart it will be clear that most with offences against them are actually white and Afrikaner.
This is actually boring and those waiting for Fred’s downfall may well wait for a very very long time.
I’m not implying that Fred is without fault, but this is getting pretty pathetic now. Of course he has faults and has made mistakes…
Pls do not respond to this if you cannot reason logically.
22 Hugo // May 13, 2008 at 9:28 am
So far I have explained that I take issue with their rejection of science. In terms of the effect their teachings have on certain individuals, I hope to get an interview or two some time. I’m not sure they’re always aware of the lost sheep, the people that end up broken, due to their doctrines. This concerns me.
I have some other concerns, but I’m not sure how large an impact these concerns have. I’ll share them with time.
23 Kenneth Oberlander // May 13, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Andrew:
This is an interesting possibility. Do you have any evidence to support your hypothesis?
I see. You think this is self-inflicted. Objectors are setting themselves up for a disappointment.
I would be interested to see these data. If you have them.
A logical response. Very well.
The folks at Shophar deny science and the scientific method, because of their beliefs. These beliefs are unquestioned and unquestionable. They are dogma. I have two issues with this:
1) They are being hypocritical. If they truly wish to deny things like evolution, and be honest about this, then they shouldn’t allow their flock to get flu shots, or indeed any other form of immunisation. Not to mention use cell phones, drive automobiles, or indeed use any other form of technology with its roots in the scientific method.
2) They are spreading this denial of fact to susceptible minds. I find this contemptible, not to mention that it makes teaching scientific concepts, which are literally the bread and butter of our worldwide civilization, extremely difficult.
24 Andrew // May 14, 2008 at 9:37 am
Kenneth
I have read for a long time now about how terrible Shofar is.
I was part of Shofar in the early 1990’s and left the church when I relocated to Gauteng ie the reasons were “geographical” if you like.
I therefore know the leadership very well. Now I’m not the asscreeping type that will want to score a few points and hence I speak in my personal and private capacity. No church can claim to be perfect, the same applies to very scientific individuals like you. Now that’s not an insult but rather a fact.
We all believe things that are hard to prove with science. For example, I believe in an Almighty God and I will make no attempt to try and prove that.
My thoughts are based on observations, having been there and understanding the dynamic of what goes down there. It is symptoms that I see on a national basis and again that is my view.
I cannot talk on behalf of Shofar, but blokes like Alex and others, are not entirely objective. Read the pieces that “Al Lovejoy” has written about Fred. It is soon apparent that it’s personal, he has some “beef” with Fred.
The challange to the “Alex’s” of this world is to go out there and establish something and doing it on a sustainable basis - 20 years and so on.
What I can confirm to you today is that Fred May is not without fault like you and me, but he is a prophet. This simply means that God uses him to speak into the lives of many people. It will be hard to gather this “data” but if we wanted to it can be verified. The Lord has also blessed him with giftings as he has blessed you and me with giftings. For instance, Fred is a very talented musician and song writer, now that sort of gifting is not from the wicked one.
So why do I respond to this? Well I love blogging and see it as a very useful tool to share views and opinions.
25 Kenneth Oberlander // May 14, 2008 at 10:01 am
Andrew
Why should I take insult? I am in perfect agreement with you on this point. The difference is between being fallible and being actively ignorant.
Why not? Shouldn’t you at least look for evidence of his existence?
I have read those pieces. It is clear that he has some beef with Fred. Have you considered the possibility that this beef is justified?
If he is a prophet, then you should be able to gather evidence that he is such a thing. The very name prophet implies certain actions and abilities that can be tested.
How do you know this? Why is this not a natural consequence of his genetics and hard work?
Now, back to my points. Do you agree that Shophar denies science, particularly evolution?
26 Hugo // May 14, 2008 at 1:46 pm
I’m mostly observing, but here I want to chip in:
I’d be happy if everyone can realise the existence of God isn’t something provable. And I still believe it is fine to believe in God, in a sufficiently pluralistic society. That means I will defend belief in God, as long as believers respect “unbelief” as well. I will defend the non-theistic world-view as well thus.
Why? Because: (a) People get much benefit from theistic belief, once they’ve grown up with that world-view, and de-conversion is an ugly experience that can come with an experience of all the criticism typically aimed at atheism (that criticism should be addressed not to atheism, but to “the process of loss of the theistic world-view”). (b) I really don’t see much difference between theists and non-theists, I consider it a different way of relating to the world, the universe, and “God” (theistic language). That’s “not much difference” in the bigger picture, considering moderate, scientifically literate believers. The big differences is in the small things, what I call particular beliefs about God, like the supernatural-intervention thing. Basically I look at the continuum between liberal Christianity, deism, and ethical non-theism (e.g. secular humanism).
For the rest, I will focus on emphasizing the similarities, that we might all understand and appreciate one another, and get over our differences.
Does this make sense? Any questions? Sorry, I don’t mean to hijack the thread.
27 Hugo // May 14, 2008 at 1:48 pm
liberal Christianity, deism, pantheism, panentheism and ethical non-theism…
28 Kenneth Oberlander // May 14, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I think you know my position on this Hugo. I agree it isn’t provable, but it is most definitely disprovable, in the sense that one can addres the things that this god is said to have done. He is said to have created the universe in six days, to have created birds before land animals, to have made Eve from Adam’s rib, to have caused a worldwide flood etc. etc. All of these claims can be addressed on the evidence. And all of them have been found wanting. So although the existence of god cannot be disproved, the actions attributed to this God have been.
Not always. I agree deconversion is hard, and unpleasant, for many people. Not all. And once through this, my experience is many people are happier than they once were…
I agree. Moderate, scientifically literate believers, however, are not what this post is about, are they? I don’t think you or I would put Shophar into that particular category, at least on the topic of science…
Andrew, in case you are still around, I am sincerely interested. Do you think Shophar is anti-science? Do you disagree with the statements I made several posts up, and why?
29 Hugo // May 14, 2008 at 4:03 pm
All the things you list are in Genesis 1-11. “Sophisticated” Christians agree these are mythological, not factual. These are the theists/Christians that I defend. I don’t defend a literal interpretation of the Bible.
A Dutch-Reformed preacher/pastor mentioned to me that there is a disconnect between leadership and congregation: the congregation typically takes the Bible as the literal, factual, inerrant Word of God, whereas the leadership has a more educated stance on the matter.
Yes, I said educated. And I stand by “sophisticated”. These are value judgements, I guess. I have to emphasize that the leadership’s position is “good”, because merely mentioning this, already causes people to run away to literalist churches. (That’s what makes it so hard for these preachers/pastors to say things directly as they are. It’s so difficult to get people to start thinking for themselves.)
The reason I take this stance: for many fundamentalists, the best path to accepting science is to go to Stellenbosch Gemeente or Moederkerk (or a number of others I’m sure, I don’t know them well) instead of Shofar. I would like to keep all avenues open, while addressing only the biggest problems. I believe this is the most effective. But yes, I cannot prove it.
I emphasize a continuum, based on my beliefs that it is “for the best”. Others emphasize little boxes, little labels, and insist on switching from one label to another. I don’t think that is healthy. And I also don’t think that our contemporary “converting to Christianity, accepting Jesus into your heart” in a singular event, is what early Christianity was about. I’m a big supporter of early Christianity, when seen within their context, and understood the way I understand it: i.e. I realise other people don’t think the same of it as I do, and that makes statements like “I’m a supporter” tricky. I’ll be explaining this opinion at a later time, but in summary: Jesus’ challenge to the Pharisees and their legalism and purity codes, is still extremely relevant when you still have Pharisees with legalism and purity codes… teach the Pharisees what the Jesus they claim to be worshipping taught, provides, in my opinion, quite a “clean way out”.
I want the moderates “on board”. They’re not typically very evangelical, but I’m hoping we can still equip them with an understanding of Jesus’ teachings, and get them inspired to help out with the work. (Yes, I’m not a moderate Christian. I’m more of a “liberal Christian”, as the “conservative” Christians would label me. Weird labels, when I personally believe my views reflect Jesus’ views more accurately. But don’t all Christians believe that?…
)
Sorry about the verbosity. I hope Andrew is still around, and can ignore my comments.
30 Kenneth Oberlander // May 14, 2008 at 4:21 pm
On a side note, Hugo…some more letters in the Matie…I think you will like them.
Are you still going to the nuclear talk tonight? If so, I’ve got photocopies of the articles for you to read. I don’t think the Matie website has been updated for the most recent edition yet…
31 Hugo // May 14, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I’ll be there, thanks.
32 Andrew // May 14, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Kenneth
Mate, I more of a sports blogger than this type of topic.
But let’s see…
“Andrew, in case you are still around, I am sincerely interested. Do you think Shophar is anti-science? Do you disagree with the statements I made several posts up, and why?”
I personally do not think that Shofar is anti-science. Bear in mind there are different types of science, like social science which I’m more interested in.
But you and Hugo seem to be intellectuals. Actually an unfair comment as I did not really read your entries in a lot of detail.
That’s boring to me. Sorry I’m not always politically correct either. Certain things I just believe. Like Jesus who raised Lazarus from the dead, Who died on the cross.
These are life-changing believes for me. I know that I know that I know.
Your paradigm seems to be different from mine.
You seem hung up on facts. Truth however is in a higher dimension…
Please, no further patronising questions like, have you considered that Alex’s issues are correct. I know both parties. Shofar is definitely not always correct, but certainly aiming for God to touch lives.
Where are you based? Are you Dutch? Pls dont take offence to that, I just want to get a better feel for where you come from.
Hugo, same for you too pls. I am South African, cullert in National Party terminology and a believer that Jesus, an innocent man, died in my place so I can have eternal life.
Also - when conveying your thoughts, keep it short, or the bottomline as they would say.
33 Hugo // May 14, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Andrew, I’m in South Africa, but I lived in The Netherlands from 1990-1995.
I can’t classify as Dutch though, they wouldn’t give me a passport. 
I grew up with a Christian background, but have read enough stuff by Bible scholars that the conservatives won’t label me “Christian”. Based on my understanding of Jesus and what I believe it means to follow him, I still consider myself a follower. Borrowing from Terry Eagleton’s review:
I have a scientific mind and world view, and I think too much. Labelling me an intellectual might be correct. Typically I dislike labels, stereotypes, though I recognise that often they’re a necessary evil.
Too long? The “bottom line” is too subjective, language and world-view has too much of an impact on understanding. I think “bottom line obsession” is the root of much evil in the world: if we could build relationships before making judgements, we’d be better off. But, yes, again, we’re limited in the number of relationships we build, and are simply too interconnected. From there a struggle to adapt to living in a village of 6 billion people.
34 Hugo // May 14, 2008 at 6:16 pm
And here is an example of the sentiments that I point to when I suggest people distinguish between facts and not-facts. In the language of Meh and Lah, Andrew is talking about his “Meh”, while Kenneth is talking about “Lah”. When we discuss facts, we talk about “Lah”, or reality, which is the thing we share. “Truths” in subjective world-views?
The question here then, is whether Andrew would accept the statement “ok, never mind it’s truth then, it isn’t necessarily factual“?
Your truth, my truth… how does the post-modernist define “truth”? Andrew, can something that is “factually incorrect” be “true”? (I believe it can, depending on that definition. I’m not quite sure how to define “truth” when separating it from “fact”…)
Some story-cultures had stories start with the following: “I don’t know if it really happened, but I know it to be true…” Something to think about. Especially when translating “true” from non-modern culture or worldview.
35 Kenneth Oberlander // May 14, 2008 at 6:35 pm
@Andrew
The definition of science I am using is the pursuit of knowledge via the creation of hypotheses, and eventual evaluation of those hypotheses against evidence.
The reason I say Shophar is anti-science is because they disavow knowledge that has been gained by this process. Knowledge such as evolution. By doing so, they are denying, on the basis of faith, the very basics of the scientific process. Normally I have no problem with people’s beliefs, but in this case their own disbelief has led to spreading lies about science that directly impact my students and my profession. I find this to be poor manners and a most unChristian attitude, not to mention hypocritical, as I tried to explain in my previous posts.
I am sorry that my previous post sounded patronising. You are right in that I don’t know the various people involved. But I do know biology. I understand how immensely important biology is for our world, and for human prosperity and happiness. And it makes me very angry when people spread ignorant lies about science simply because they disagree with it.
36 Andrew // May 14, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Hugo
No, of course something that is truthful must be factually correct. You’re over-complicating the stuff.
Is it not interesting that Jesus said ” I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”
Fact then is a subset of truth. I somewhat battling to string my thoughts together on this topic, as I have not done so in a while.
Today is Wednesday is a fact. That’s it. Jesus died on the cross. Its fact first but more NB truth, difference then in what the implications are of that fact. Truth contains life-giving essence, and perhaps of spiritual substance.
” the truth will set you free”
In the spiritual realm where God, angels and demons live things are a lot simpler. You are either for God or against Him. It’s either Life or Death.
That’s it mates, chat again some time.
37 Andrew // May 14, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Kenneth
You chose not to indicate where you are based?
But from the other posts I gather that you are at Maties. And must be a lecturer or something.
” my students”
Dont let that worry you too much mate.
Oh now I get it… are you the lecturer who had some students walk out of a lecture? Read and heard it via via…
Hugo
vd Merwe - darem seker van Hollandse afkoms?
38 Hugo // May 15, 2008 at 12:32 am
Yup, I’m from Dutch descent. And my mother tongue is indeed Afrikaans.
Fact and Truth
OK, with Fact as a subset of Truth, it means we can have Truth that isn’t fact. I assume your above statement thus meant to say “something that is truthful must not be factually incorrect”… is that okay? And “Today is Wednesday” is a fact as well as a “truth” (if fact is a subset of truth)?
I understand that you mean that “truth” can be something more than “fact”, something beyond fact. I agree with that, in the sense that myths can communicate truths, without being factual. (The tricky part is how to find an example of these “truths” that are not also in some way arguably factual, to get to grips with the difference.)
I am the Way, the Truth and the Life
That is apparently a very interesting piece of theology, according to one of my pastors, though I haven’t had the chance to look into it, and the conversation didn’t go beyond mentioning the “interesting theological aspects”. Theology is complicated. And the statement is metaphorical, like the statement “I am the bread of life”.
Now where things get interesting, is that the Gospel of John is typically considered, by scholars, a highly theological text, rather than a strictly factual one.
In particular, please consider reading this comment on the Real Live Preacher blog.
But pointing out that the Gospels are accounts written by humans, and that John was the latest one written (much later than Paul’s letters, later than the synoptic gospels), and largely influenced by the developed theology and their understanding of Jesus, rather than what Jesus himself necessarily said, is not something that sits well with literalists…
Matters of Life and Death
I don’t believe in the literal understanding of that realm. And I don’t believe in such black-and-white ways of viewing the world. I’m not sure how that impacts me?
39 Kenneth Oberlander // May 15, 2008 at 8:30 am
Not choose per se, more forgot to mention. I am a PhD student who has been involved with teaching the 1st year Biology course over the last 5-6 years.
I get worried when students walk into our administrators office and refuse to study the section of the work devoted to the “E” word because they believe it is Satanic.
No, that’s not me…when did this happen? Did it happen in a Biology class?
40 Andrew // May 15, 2008 at 9:53 am
Hugo
Ok mate, so now I know who I am dealing with, in a very broad sense. I’m not going to put you in a little box now.
I see your reasoning and see that you are a curious indiv.
What do you make of my comments on 21?
You are right, theology is complex. Life too.
It’s a journey and one needs to consistently revisit ideas, perceptions etc.
Seeing that you guys are at Maties I’ll continue with the exchange of thoughts. A courtesy I extend cause I like the fact that your Rector is cullert and your new Chancellor is Van Zyl Slabbert.
I am unable to correspond during the day and it will be on a “as and when” basis.
Jesus once crossed the Sea of Galilea and encountered a man full of demons. The demons recognised Jesus as the Son of God and wondered he had come early to punish them - their punishment reserved as per Revelations.
Cheers man
41 Andrew // May 15, 2008 at 10:03 am
Kenneth
Well maybe I thought that’s what I heard - that some student walked out of a lecture. I may well have committed an error.
I agree that there are ways to handle and demonstrate disagreement. Being tactful is always more sustainable.
I am deeply concerned that Shofar is perceived to be these freaks as I can tell you that they are not. I still have contact with lots of old- Shofarites and I can tell you many of them are making fantastic contributions to society
Many are very successful in the “real world” out there.
I am proud that I was once a Matie - albeit for only 6 months - and look forward to pursue some further studies through the Graduate Bus School.
I dare you to visit the church and drop your defences. Whatever you dont understand or disgagree, just say - ag it’s cool man. Then when you believe you have really seen enough, make up your mind.
This would be the scientific way of gathering information.
42 Hugo // May 15, 2008 at 11:06 am
If anyone is interested enough to want to go visit, let me know. I’d like to go visit again some time.
43 Hugo // May 15, 2008 at 11:54 am
I gave my short answer in comment 22. I take note of your thoughts, and other people’s criticisms of e.g. Al Lovejoy’s way of handling the matter, and I go to great lengths to remove my own personal bias or vendetta. This does take a lot of effort and thought.
In terms of comments on “the bulk of offences”, I cannot say much. That requires knowledge of the typical opinion, the cross section of the people offended. I only know of my and my friends’ complaints. Mine I’m trying to share here, carefully, as de-biased as possible. My “offended” friends were never at Shofar, so your explanation doesn’t work for them.
One friend told me of another friend going hungry because he was giving too much money to Shofar, leaving himself with too little. They invited him over for dinner, to make sure he doesn’t starve. Another friend’s wife had a history with His People (now Every Nation), which is similar to Shofar. In their case the complaint I hear most, is about their fasting practises. Picture a medical student, needing to study, not eating enough to retain the information etc. They are much more critical of fasting than I am, I’m still reserved in my opinion, until I can understand the benefits and functioning of fasting. (I look for the good, before I allow myself to criticize.)
The rest of my critical friends have less explicit complaints, and more general “they believe crazy stuff” and “they are holier-than-thou, separatists”, “homophobic”, etc. kind of opinions. None of these fall into your explanation. And then there’s the odd case I’ve come across of people falling out of Shofar, spiritually and emotionally broken by their doctrines. (There’s one particular person I’m now thinking of, a pastor told me about him.)
So when it comes to your comment 21, I agree with:
…and I note it as such. It warns me of another kind of bias I need to avoid, on sharing my own opinions, and on interviewing other people for theirs. Thanks!
44 Andrew // May 15, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Hugo
And I think the friends’ experiences are all valid.
Question is: to what extent did they contribute to the state of affairs?
It’s easy to try and cum (ie 75% plus) Christianity and then over-give. Eg I have a R100 so I should probably give 10 bucks. But maybe if I give R100 then the Lord will bless me 10 fold. Then there’s no money. Who is the problem here?
Fasting. I remember back in the day Shofar and I mean Fred used to caution okes who needed to write exam.
Again, if someone is coming from a background of “gatkruiping” meaning seeking acceptance, approval, endorsement through what you DO as oppose to who you are - then one is susceptible to the OVERDOING thing. You know very often there is a thing in Afr families of: I love you because you cummed your degree and not because you’re our daughter/son. A bit exaggerated but you get the gist.
My personal experience is that Fred, with the way that he is - a big picture guy - needs to focus on making those big things simple and practical for the average over-eager Matie who joins Shofar. The problem I think also lies to a large extent with interpretation as oppose to what is being said. But then Fred and those around him need to take ownership of that.
Ironically - Shofar right now to my mind needs scholars like yourself to get in the mix - like Paul who was a fine scholar needed to get in to take the message to Gentiles ( Dutch and their offspring from nativess too) The other blokes who just happy to stick around in Jewish territory or Jerusalem. So put that in your pipe and smoke it …
45 Scientists Have To Believe In Evolution… // May 15, 2008 at 12:33 pm
[...] wilfully ignorant of the evidence, you can get by while ignoring evolution. Maybe that explains why some students refuse to study the section of the work devoted to the “E” word, too “satanic” to even say the word… They choose ignorance, maybe suspecting that [...]
46 Hugo // May 15, 2008 at 1:33 pm
At the point of starvation, you’d go for the 10% guideline, not more.
I’m quite certain that Shofar wouldn’t like to take advice from me. I’m not even a member, and I cannot become one. And members are to submit to authority on matters of church doctrine etc anyway. From there the only hope I see is that some people at Shofar, that are close enough to leadership, can make a difference, inspired by some of the “emerging church” authors, or by my blog.
47 Al Lovejoy // May 16, 2008 at 9:57 pm
The only fool bigger than the one trying to name something un-nameable is the one that thinks that it can buy something from it … Andrew, for me there is absolutely no point in engaging you in debate - oftwel in die Lovejoy gesin se huistaal of nie (mense soos ek is seker maar soos Afrikaans sprekende hotnotte vir jou wat die konsep van nie-Afrikaer, seker maar Christen ook … aanbetref … ek het sommer ‘n lekker woord vie jou, noem my maar ‘n Afrikaker, dan kan ons in ons huistale gesels en jy kan nog altyd jou Shofar Afrikaner Whatever “sub-set” behou …) - you display a complete lack of intellect or even the capacity to remain with the parameters of your own challenge to logic discourse.
What a tit.
A Jewish Communist medical doctor in Soviet Russia came to believe in Christ whilst serving out a sentence in a Russian gulag, he was only able to share his experience of faith with one other man before he was murdererd … that man happened to be Alexander Solzhenitsyn and he told his story to the world.
You have obviously never read Acid Alex, like I said - what a tit … take that from old Alex and smoke it.
48 Al Lovejoy // May 16, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Dit was glad nie ‘n uitnodiging om met my in Afrikaans - of oor geloof in my Vader - of debat te knoop om ‘n stuk gemors soos Fred May en sy liewe-heksie vrou met haar vuil bek en hulle geld gretige makkers…te verdedig nie - glad nie , please don’t misunderstand me literally or logically in the tiniest…
What a stupid
tit.
49 Andrew // May 16, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Alex
To be perfectly honest I actually forgot that you were part of this exchange of ideas. I promise you that. You are not as compelling as what you think you are…
I then read your comment and went back to mine to get a backdrop for your umpteenth tantrum, and saw that I stated the following:
1. You are not entirely objective
2. You have personal issues with Fred May (beef)
3. You should, as oppose to criticising an establishment, go do your own thing ie lead by example
Now based on your response, I must have hit a raw nerve there. Look at the tone of my exchanges with Hugo and Kenneth - all pleasant if you ask me.
But you must always play the man and not the ball. I did not invite you to engage me. It will be boring, ’cause when you can’t have things your way you will hurl insults. I’d say that is pretty pathetic behaviour …notice I’m referring to the behaviour.
Right now, you are embarrassing yourself here.
By the way, you have been quite adamant with the “Al Lovejoy” concept; who knows - maybe this could well be thing that you run with in a sustainable basis.
I think at first people were quite prepared to give you a hearing, but as the weeks and months went by people started saying to themselves, let’s not jump to conclusions here.
I know you have the intellect Alex, but I think you need to invest in character development. You dont just your ass only to look after now.
Note: This is not an attempt to engage you. I’m doing in the context of my constructive exchanges with Hugo and Kenneth.
50 Al Lovejoy // May 16, 2008 at 11:41 pm
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
51 Hugo // May 16, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Thanks guys, that served for a good chuckle. I hope you’ll leave it there.
52 Al Lovejoy // May 17, 2008 at 8:14 am
Ag, Hugo - I’ve got better things to do than dance in the same silly little circles with yet another adoring May clone. This poor tit doesn’t even realise how much he sounds like the Mays and reasons like the Mays …. hit a nerve? don’t play the man? What an utter fool - he, wants “logical” discourse, “objectivity” - everything he is unable or unwilling to give because I said a perceived nasty about his idol. He cannot refute one single point of why Shofar is a cult as listed above “logically” or even superstitiously - the real problem of course is not the May’s being uneducated, uninvited, money parasites for Jesus in Stellenbosch - it’s my deplorable character!!!!
Let us test this great “prophet”, this “curer of cancer” and “raiser of the dead” - shall we??? You made the statement Andrew, no one else here did - now put your dripping disdain where your groot bek is and follow this through. We all already know exactly what sort of a cunt you think I am - so don’t waste our time with me, my irrelevance, my diseased mind, whatever, whatever, whatever…, you know - the same crap the May’s drag out to try use to backfoot insecure people. I understand - I’m not insecure, I don’t pander superstition, I don’t leech money off people for Jesus and get them to adore me for my fake historical miracle stories, ergo I am an ineffective child of God. We heard you, no need to re-invent the wheel. Instead, let us test this “prophet” of yours.
Fred May’s last words to me were: “Alex, God has told me to tell you that I must trust you…”
Now Andrew, you have to agree that the Prophet May spoke into my life that night and he even took time out to come to my front door to tell me personally, so we cannot even blame it on one of his wild nonsensical outbursts under “The Anointing”…
Logically, it is either a statement that demands an amen or he is a false-prophet. It is that binary. And for argument’s sake, let us suppose that I actually do have more integrity than to come and talk kak or lie here. He said it okay … now you judge your prophet and tell us if he is false or not, because my advice to Fred and Lucille is to either take responsibility and face me publicly for their despicable deeds and the filthy lies they continue to say about me and others - or shut up, give the money back and get out of Stellenbosch.
Second test: When brother C contracted cancer back in the early days, Lucille said publicly that he got sick because he refused to change his views from what Scripture states and amend them to Fred May’s Shofar doctrine. Just like me. He defied Fred and God struck him down with cancer for his rebellious and jezebel spirit. That Andrew, is prophesy. A witch’s prophesy but one never the less. Let’s test this witch, shall we?
The test lies in this, C’s cancer went into remission and he is healthy, happy, a father and still a committed Christian - just like me and far from repenting to Fred and Lucille and submitting to their small wills, he is yet another public witness from the original Shofar “inner-circle” and an “elder” who maintains that the Mays are utter fakes and financial frauds. So once, again - either she is real or a fake
…somehow it speaks for itself.
And Andrew, how many witnesses does Shofar need? Scripture only requires two.
53 Andrew // May 17, 2008 at 10:35 am
Ok Alex I hear you.
I think I better bring this to conclusion as you may be a bit on the thin side when it comes to self-control.
And I want you to “druk jou snawel in ‘n klompie Omo water en gorrel lank, jy vloek lelik man, skaam jou”
It is not clear that you can remember me, but you seem to not too bad with remembering last words, so here goes ” I want you to prosper Alex.”
Cheers son.
Note:
I know who brother C is. He is a man that I have the highest regard for, among others for his intellect. Not everyone that can cum your Mech Engin degree. I know about his situation and will chat to him in person when I’m down there again.
He has a great sense of humour and very likeable. Congrats C on your baby, may there be many more for you and L !
Hugo, thanks for the platform and congratulations with the Masters, eventhough you felt you underperformed. It’s in the bag.
54 Al Lovejoy // May 17, 2008 at 8:07 pm
“Sooner or later they find others like old Alex who is always ready to bitch and moan about Fred. Not that Alex is an Afrikaner.”
“but blokes like Alex and others, are not entirely objective. Read the pieces that “Al Lovejoy” has written about Fred. It is soon apparent that it’s personal, he has some “beef” with Fred.”
The challange to the “Alex’s” of this world is to go out there and establish something and doing it on a sustainable basis - 20 years and so on.
“Alex, but I think you need to invest in character development. You dont just your ass only to look after now.”
You don’t know who I was born to, you don’t know my legal name, you don’t know my wife, you don’t know our home language, you don’t know my son, you do not even know how I make my living, what I’ve achieved or where my boy was born - and more than anything you don’t know how much we love Robbie - Go fuck yourself you snivelling little prick, and here is a promise, a serious solemn promise: You want to take me on hardcore passive-aggressive - insult me personally, play word games and try and deride my character to defend a dirty slimy fucking piece of parasitic shit and his poisonous bitch of a wife … you want to make it that personal do you? You a tough guy? Really? I solemnly promise you, if I have the pleasure of meeting you again - I will give you the fine benefit of a different sort of insult to be on the opposite end of - for no good reason too and I will carefully fuck you up badly girlfriend in my finest professional style and I’ll do it just for the “I want you to prosper” horseshit and because I can.
Gee fuckface, now you really have something barbaric and obscene to deplore and when we meet …
(P.S. I said I’m going to fuck you up, that means I don’t fight clean pinhead)
55 Al Lovejoy // May 17, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Hugo, I’m going to leave you to the next three years of wasting your time with these idiots. I mean it about slapping him though, I will take almost any insult but he crossed the line with my son.
He will get a slap if he is stupid enough to cross my path. I will continue the other conversation with you elsewhere … I am just to sick and sat of these fucking Shofarians climbing into my character whenever I question the Mays and their fraud and bullshit - do you know the day my son was born I celebrated 10 years of being clean from smack. A ten year milestone in my journey out of organised crime. Acid Alex has changed thousands of lives worldwide - they send me letters.
These sick freaks would far rather have me in a shit hole with a needle in my arm than a happy married father - anything to get me to shut up about the thieving hotnot they worship.
And of course, I know it freaks you out when I lose my temper … so I should shut up and go … my apologies to the scientist “athiests” (I have my own opinions on that), I think you are all cool, intelligent, well read and as sure as shit - you weren’t so weak and pathetic that you handed over your heads and 10% to some slimebag without the scientific or theological education to even speak … I’m usually a lot more reasonable
Al
56 Al Lovejoy // May 17, 2008 at 8:44 pm
I’ve had the dubious fortune of being incarcerated some of the most evil men on this planet and I could understand most of them - but lying filth like Fred May, a sleazy social parasite who has nothing to give of his own hands because everything he has came from his lies and from someone else’s sweat, an evil man who lied and would have had me put in prison for a crime I did not commit just for telling him the truth about Christ to his face … I don’t understand, and I never will…all I can do is shout and when necessary fight until I can’t any more.
Ciao, I’ve a got a little boy to go see to…
This is for those who don’t know who brother C is:
Hi Alex
I hope this gets through to you. You might not remember me, but I was part of Shofar when you were around, in fact, you slept over in my room for a couple of nights while me and a mate watched over you during one of your drug rehabilitations or detoxes. This was end of 1993. We even brought you cigarettes when you were in Stellenbosch Hospital! I have followed, with interest, your campaign against the Mays.
I am not really interested in getting involved in all of this, but I am not too sorry to see them sweat a bit. When I contracted cancer in 1994 they dropped me like a hot potato, even though I was a member of the “inner circle”. The sad thing is their hold on our minds was of such a nature that my first reaction was to consider what I had done wrong, where my sin was. I even went back to Shofar once the chemotherapy was over. But by this time my eyes had been opened and I realised that they were not the sincere “nice” Christian people I thought they were. In a confrontation with Fred just before we left he started out by telling me what my big problem was and why I could not go ahead with God. I stopped him in mid stride and told him that I had felt betrayed when they dropped me with the cancer-thing. He actually admitted this and apologized, but the simple fact that he had never from his own convictions apologized was enough for me. We simply left.
Afterwards we found out that Lucille was telling everybody that I had contracted cancer because I had defied Fred. I assumed that these statements followed because I had told Fred once that I do not accept his doctrinal views on a certain matter. He then wanted me to promise him that I will only share the Shofar doctrine and I responded that I could not do so with a clear conscience. The discussion ended with him telling me that I should be willing to accept the consequences of my actions. They must have been overjoyed when I contracted cancer.
Over the years I have met so many people who were damaged and hurt by the Mays. Even Lucille’s own sister was kicked out of Shofar and Lucille basically spoke a curse over her life when she and her husband left Shofar. Lucille is a venomous person; I really have no time for her. Fortunately I have very little fear of these types of “curses”. Her sister seems fine too lol. By the way, my wife helped them (the Mays) out at home for a spell and after that she would refuse to go to any form of counselling where either of the two Mays was involved. It seems they often told their house guests about things that people shared with them during counselling sessions. My wife was really shocked by this.
I have moved on, you say that you are doing this to help those currently involved with Shofar. I hope this is the truth, because life is meant for positive things my friend. I have recently become a dad for the first time. A miracle as we thought we could not have kids (not bad for a “cursed” guy!) You might remember J, he and his wife are now helping drug addicts somewhere in Europe, they have two lovely kids. They also left Shofar under a cloud (I think his wife claimed that Fred had acted inappropriately towards her at one stage). But since only 1 person has ever been kicked out of Shofar (big lie!) I guess they left out of their own free will. But he is a lovely person, a real Christian. What happened to Guys? I often think of him and wonder if he ever “made it”. He was such a deeply hurt human being. I think nobody at Shofar was ever qualified or equipped to help someone with such desperate needs. In the end so many of us were really sincere but naive young people. We really believed that there was something special at Shofar, and the truth is that in the beginning things were beautiful. I have so many fond memories of these times. When you were not on drugs you were a joy to have in a small group. I am glad you are drug free. You are a better person without.
There is a dark part of me that desperately wants revenge. I would love to see them suffer for the lies they have told, the lives they have damaged. But I have better things to do. I think we all believe that at some stage they will come to a fall - that this type of extortion and exploitation will stop. But you do as you see fit. Just remember that there is a difference between Shofar and the people involved. I will never call the former a church, it is a business, the latter is the church and with her we should be gentle.
C
PS: I see you are sporting a new range of tattoos. I could not help but chuckle, does one of the old ones not say: “Child of Destiny” with a dagga-blaar at the top! LOL
Hi Brother C
I’ll stick to that because I don’t know how well known your internet handle is and I want to retain anonymity outside of the old “inner circle” because I am going to publish this. I don’t really know quite what to make of your letter, so I’ll deal with it in sections.
It is truly wonderful that you overcame cancer, praise God. And what a blessing it is to be a father, even expectant like I am currently. Not bad for two cursed guys!
C, have to tell you, I do find it saddening that you remember me mostly as a mandrax addict whom you watched detox once a long time ago. If that detox were a murder, I would have served my time for it already and been paroled. I don’t know if you have read Acid Alex yet, but I make it clear that in my opinion addicts of all species and plumage are living out their internal emotional pain, fears and spiritual damage. When I look back at the way I attempted to kill that agony with ugly debilitating drugs – I do so with different eyes, and I do not look down on myself in any way because I have looked deeper than that and done it through the eyes of grace. Some of my friends are in the very same place today and I would never, ever look down on them for trying to quit no matter how sick it makes them. And Tash and I would do anything to assist. And I would never ever take them back to that place when they had recovered to remind them of it fourteen years later. I would not want to embarrass them or attempt to make them feel small. But that is just me. My wife Natasha is a very gentle and beautiful woman but her blunt comment to your letter was: “Jy kan iemand uit Shofar neem - maar kan jy nou actually Shofar heeltemaal uit hulle neem?”, admittedly she was being cynical because in her recent nasty interview with Lucille – she dwelt on that specific detox deeply and contrary to your account, it was actually her and Fred who stood by my bed day and night until I was better. I remember your account more accurately.
C, I was a drug addict. A bad one. It nearly killed me and had me hospitalised on numerous occasions. I’ve faced life imprisonment for it, yet I consider it ALL joy that I came through that dangerous trial because it took me to a place where I was taught what grace really is, and that it is God and Him alone who led me into a relationship with Our Father and who always has and always will watch over us. Like J and his wife, I have a deep compassion for people hurting themselves with chemicals and self-destructive habits, but don’t see anything on the outside – I’m only interested in the pain and fear that drives it. I met an old friend in the parking lot of Boord Spar the other day and although M is still the remarkably beautiful woman she always was, she had a thin scar dissecting her neck in a sine wave type cut. I inquired carefully into the injury and she told me it was from surgery in her own fight with cancer. She also beat it and it is in complete remission but she laughed when I asked if she had been frightened because she reckoned, like me she had beaten heroin addiction – and she was more frightened of that while it was happening than she was with cancer. Crosses come in all shapes and sizes and we all have to bear our own and I am certain that Our Father allows us this for a purpose. My brothers, my true brothers are mostly men like me. Rob, John-John, Verster. Rob is a drug of choice juice junkie like me and Sterra and John-John coke heads. We’ve watched each others backs through relapses, clean time, more relapses, bad times, back on the wagon, etc and it has made us stronger and love each other as brothers more and more. For Rob and me, we are currently both on the wagon and his second laaitie and our first are going to be separated by about seven weeks. John-John is on the back end of secondary phase recovery. And we tell each other everything. Including when it goes wrong. That is love in it for the whole distance, exactly like Our Father is with us in all our trials.
I am doing this for a lot more than Shofar C. What Fred and Lucille represent is an extreme example of the festerous sore that has become entrenched, evident and accepted throughout the Body affected by the Word of Faith movement. That means Rhema worldwide, and more importantly Ray McCauley, the IFCC and every other abusive ministry like the one the Mays are running as a business right here in beautiful broken Stellenbosch.
The reason why I have taken the May’s to the mat on simple social and financial immorality - is because an imbecile worshipping a stone could tell you that transferring hard earned money from a single mother’s savings account to Shofar’s corporate current account for any reason takes food from her child or children’s mouths. Hard cold fact. Telling you God cursed you - we can debate for days. That is why I focussed on money directly.
You must remember Griesel. It utterly sickened me watching Fred become his best friend and weave his spell of blessings and curses over him to get his hands on the inheritance money - “for the Lord’s ministry”. See, it’s like Koos Kombuis said in the Rapport on Sunday - anyone who hands over money to the Mays is doing it of their own free will and it isn’t against the law to do so – but when people are carefully and deliberately lead to believe they will either be cursed or blessed by God Himself for something as base and corrupting as money – depending on their heartiness and generosity – we have moved onto an old criminal activity in organised crime, something Jesus called extortion. Making someone fearful or guilty before God as a means to extract cash from them or playing into their subliminal greed with esoteric promises – is nothing more than criminal extortion and confidence trickery. And it is born in pure unbelief that God is not He who supplies all our needs in Christ Jesus. People give only in the expectation that they will be blessed and that is a terrible thing because it does not lead the church away from materialism and into a life marked by selflessness - of which our finances only play a small part and in which we are all equally responsible in the dispensation of our stewardship before God.
A woman on her own with a child is a person who suffers the most burdens of anyone in any society anywhere. And to isolate her further through guilt and add to her burdens financially in the church is not only contrary to every single passage that speaks of the fatherless in Scripture - it invokes all the terrible warnings upon the church to actively engage in doing so – for that and that alone is the primary Pentecostal and evangelistic task of the church.
Exactly the same applies to orphaned students. The deep insanity of it is that this is exactly the sort of thing that Martin Luther was opposed to!!!
Of course they are going to claim everything from their house, cars, to mansion offices, designer clothes and salaries are all “blessings” from God in the form of “gifts”. They are really not that stupid. But we are Christians C. If God “blessed” me with Oude Molen – it would be Oude Molen Kinder Huis right this second. It is and always will be – WHAT we do with our gifts that matters to Our Father.
I too have no idea what poison possesses Lucille’s spirit. I have become a member of a lovely family, from Oupa and Ouma all the way down to my beautiful little nieces. I cannot imagine any reason for any person in our family to curse another. Especially in the event of a frightening illness. That is something that comes with unconditional acceptance because while our family is not perfect, it is the love in it that binds us together so closely - through both success and disaster. I have no fears for the future, because if something happened to me and Tash, Robbie would still grow up surrounded by love and care every single day of his life. There is no currency worth more than that.
I am long over the May’s C. I have my own walk and ministry with my Father. Our personal dream is to achieve financial success independently for our personal children’s trust fund and begin our own private children’s home. With everything we have, we both want the maximum amount of children the law will allow us, and whom no one will have to adopt as our own. But we promised ourselves that we would trust Our Father and Him alone for the material means to do it – and I am determined to realise that through sales of my literature and photographic fine art, both here and overseas. After seeing so much ugliness through money in the church, neither one of us will ever ask for help like that. Not using the children’s plight as an excuse. I became involved in doing that for a while but when I examined my motives, I found myself wanting – so I will trust that my Father looked ahead and instilled enough talent within me to satisfy my overwhelming need to be a father to the fatherless. Christ not only tells us that we must bear our cross He also promises to bear it with us.
My crusade to see Oude Molen into Oude Molen orphanage is more than an attempt at flushing the Mays out over their blatant emotional and spiritual manipulation and sleazy financial scamming; it is to bring to the student Body of Christ the hands on importance of understanding that faith without works is dead. And here in our contemporary world we are surrounded by a silent, massively growing population of fatherless children - who are going to impact on our futures as predictably as global warming unless something utterly radical is done to recognise the seriousness of the problem and actively change almost every activity the lends to its growth. That means learning first hand, day in and day out as a greater church how to care for them and love them right here in Stellenbosch. For each believing student, this period in their young spiritual walk should be marked by the memory of this ministry they were all involved in while they were studying. The truth of the matter is that if Oude Molen were turned into an orphanage next week, in the future, there would be students graduating with their doctorates in hand with heartbroken tears as they say good bye to children they’ve come to love deeply - who under any other circumstances would have been dead before they graduated, degree, Christian books and super gospel band CD’s in hand.
The student Body of Christ, regardless of denomination, are One Body in Christ and among them, the only voices raised in heated contention - all surround Shofar, its doctrines, theories, foundations and social practises. The greater body of students don’t see this as the direct influence of the Mays and their curses and blessings brainwashing – they just see the logo the t-shirt and the smug self-righteous expressions and respond in anger, irritation and rejection.
Those who attempt to mimic the Mays should be stopped dead in their tracks, with absolutely no nonsense tolerated - exactly like the Mays need to be stopped, because regardless of how offended they might feel at the time, the Christian part of them should be screaming that there is something wrong. But C, you know as well as I do that it is a spirit the Mays brought into Shofar from the beginning and which is perpetuated and has been perfected in its replication by the Mays through trial and error. People like us, in all the laughable irony of one domino pushing down another to please and defend the bitter ego of one man and his poisonous wife – were their learning curve. They learnt to deal with people like us by firstly convincing us we are out of God’s will and have unclean motives and spirits that only Fred can discern and expel. If we did not bow to his will and his leadership’s threats we were ostracised, gossiped and slandered over and called cursed.
So many beautiful Christians suffered this and had their friendships and fellowship torn apart – and almost all of them were usually confronting Fred May on his twisting of Scripture and false doctrine. I know that there are students in Shofar, who are not in it just for the fun social ride and the thrill of being considered controversial because they have been convinced they ahead of the pack spiritually – they are led by the Spirit and find their final authority in the Word.
They are going to suffer the same fate as the rest of us when they scrape up the courage to confront the Mays. And I will not stand by and watch it still happening indifferently. The Mays must be exposed to the world for exactly the nasty people they really are. And I don’t think that has anything to with revenge, it is meant as warning and a prophylactic measure to those who are not completely sucked in.
Stay well and all the best for you as a family, may you have more children to love.
Al
Hi Alex
Fred once told this story, way in the beginning, of a lady he had prayed for with cancer who got healed. When my dad was nearly at the end I finally managed to convince Fred to come and pray for him at home. He did exactly as he did in the story he had told. It was then that I realised that this was all a hoax, all of this was fake and the stories were just stories. Needless to say we buried my dad shortly afterward.
I once visited you with J in the house across from Fred and Lucille in Die Boord. Fred arrived at some stage and crapped you out about something. He said that you would do well if you just followed in J and my “spiritual” wake. Those were his exact words. At the time I felt really flattered but afterwards it made me feel rotten. You never said anything during the session. It was kicking a man who was down. I am sorry about that and for that I apologize. But the rest was an experience. I always thought of you as a highly intelligent person who really had a shit life as a kid and had had to, as a result, struggle through addiction etc. I did not remember your tattoo because it showed you up as an addict, it was just something I remembered about you. Like the way you sometimes spoke: s