Report of the Theocracy Committee to the Assembly of the Geloftevolk (August 2010) - PART 1 PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 09 September 2010 13:43

Cross

Report of the Theocracy Committee
to the
Assembly of the Geloftevolk
(Covenant People)


(August)
October 10, 2010

 

1. Background

 

1.1 History:

The history of the Geloftevolk[1] in South Africa is characterized by two main factors. The first is the visible and specific action of our heavenly Father.[2] The second is the continuing struggle for freedom and survival.

The religious persecution of the Roman Catholic Church in the 17th century caused the Protestant refugees to seek shelter in the Netherlands. Especially many Germans and many French Huguenots.  The Netherlands have recently broken the yoke of Spain’s Roman subjugation at the end of the Eighty Years War.  Since Spain's king was sour about this, he denied the Netherlands access to the port of Lisbon where the Asian goods were traded.  Netherlands consequently began its own trade and for this the refreshment station at the Cape was established.  In spite of many dangers and setbacks, our heavenly Father preserved and cared for the small refreshment post in such a special way that Jan van Riebeeck, two years after their arrival, felt obliged to make an undertaking to glorify Him. In this undertaking he also committed the upcoming generations to glorify our Father for this. Therefore we consider it as a vow.

Time and again the dissatisfaction with the government at the Cape has lead the people to move deeper inland.  Each time our Father emptied the land before us as the inhabitants were driven out by disease, drought and war.  The most important of these journeys was the famous Great Trek. This Trek too was a struggle for survival.  Eventually, the Voortrekkers with their backs against the wall looked for protection with their heavenly Father. They made the Covenant of Blood River. In this Covenant they again committed the ‘Voortrekkers’ and their offspring in their generations to give the glory and honor of the victory to Him. This time they went even further and undertook to establish a house to the glory of His Name. [3] Although many of us thought this promise is fulfilled  by the annual commemoration and the building of the little Voortrekker church and later the Voortrekker Monument, the essence of the Covenant is more than that. It is the establishment of a house (nation) to the glory of his Name.

The Boer Republics made a notable attempt at such a Godly establishment. The commemoration of the Covenant of Blood River were, however, neglected and the governments of the Boer Republics were also influenced by humanism.  Their freedom were constantly threatened by the Imperial British Empire. Again they turned to their God and they reaffirmed the Covenant of Blood River at Paardekraal. They were rewarded with a miraculous victory and freedom. The Boers and their generals received international honor. A few years later they found themselves in the tragic Anglo Boer War. Although they ultimately lost the war, the Boers and their generals acquired further international fame and honor for their bravery and military skill. We are so caught up in pride, that some of us to this day it still boast about this.

We got another chance with the miracle of 1948 when the National Party was victorious at the polls. The climax was reached with the government of Verwoerd. When we were kicked out of the Commonwealth of Nations, the young republic had to try it on its own. The international media predicted we will collapse within three years. However, Verwoerd and the people trusted in God and the Republic went from strength to strength. Satan and all our enemies isolated us with sanctions and boycotts. In spite of that, we experienced unprecedented prosperity and within six years we achieved the second highest economic growth rate in the world. We came to the conclusion that our nation is the best in the world - in every aspect of life. We forgot the promises of blessings in Deut 28, already in verse 1 saying: “And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth.” Even worse, we forgot the curses in verse 15 and further which says: “But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee” and verse 43: “The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.”

Many of our people in ingratitude and under the influence of liberalism, also despised these blessings as unrighteous that our Father blessed us above other nations. Many also forgot the admonition in Joshua 23:11-13 “Take good heed therefore unto yourselves, that ye love the LORD your God. Else if ye do in any wise go back, and cleave unto the remnant of these nations, even these that remain among you, and shall make marriages with them, and go in unto them, and they to you:  Know for a certainty that the LORD your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.” And they also forgot God forbids his people in Deut 17:15 to let a stranger rule over them.

 

Eventually He placed us in this shameful position that we are humbled before the nations around us. Since 1994 we are strangers in the land that our Father gave us. One after another we see the curses of Deut 28 realize before our eyes. Our ‘volk’ (people) faces destruction.

In September 2009 a meeting of our ‘volk’ took place. We realized there is only one way out. We must once again humble ourselves before our God. We will have to return to the vows that bind us to Him. We recognize that the Covenant means that a house (nation) must be established to our Father's glory. The meeting also decided that a Theocratic political dispensation is required to comply with the Covenant. The meeting thus appointed a committee to investigate the feasibility of a Theocracy.

This is the report we propose to the next meeting in 2010.

1.2  Procedure of the committee

The committee has done research on the biblical requirements for a Theocracy. We also studied Theocracies, as well as God-fearing, religious and other political systems of the past. We also studied theories about Theocracy, Theonomy and Christocracy. We had three work-meetings during which we discussed the findings. We also have ongoing discussions by e-mail.

 

2. Findings

 

2.1 Starting point

As a starting point for the establishment of a Theocratic order we deem it necessary to clarify the following:

2.1.1 Our King is Jesus Christ, in Hebrew: JaHoshua[4] Mashiach[5]. He is our Redeemer and Saviour and He is the only path to salvation. Only by grace we receive faith in Him.

 

2.1.2 Our reference is the entire Bible, and specifically the 1933/53-Afrikaans translation. The source texts of the Bible (The Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus) are indisputable, and the authority for the Afrikaans translation.

 

2.1.3 Our ‘volk's’ freedom would be senseless if its primary purpose is not the glory of our heavenly Father.

 

2.1.4 The purpose of a Theocratic order is therefore above all to honour the One, true and almighty God of the Bible and to glorify His Name;

 

2.1.5 We also want to correct a misunderstanding: There is a perception that some of our committee members believe that biological descent from Israel ensure our salvation. It is not so. We all believe that our Saviour and Redeemer is Jesus Christ, or YaHoshua Mashiach. Only through Him is there salvation.

 

2.2 Our commitment:

2.2.1 He has chosen us as His children, we should be grateful to Him (Deut 28; Col 3:16);

 

2.2.2 Obedience is what He demands of us (ISam15: 22, Rom 6:16);

 

2.2.3 He offered us His commandments of love to keep (Deut 10:12; 11:13; I John 2:4,5);

 

2.2.4 As Covenant ‘volk’ we have a dear obligation to keep our vows to Him and

 

2.2.5 Therefore we have a calling as ‘Godsvolk’[6] to fulfil.

 

2.3  The Law

Our Father, YHWH, demands obedience to His commandments, His laws, His statutes and ordinances. This is an ongoing command in the Bible.

§ The whole chapter of Deut 28 is a good example. He begins by saying that “it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth: And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God.”


§ And see His promise in Deut 11:8-9 “Therefore shall ye keep all the commandments which I command you this day, that ye may be strong, and go in and possess the land, whither ye go to possess it;  And that ye may prolong your days in the land, which the LORD sware unto your fathers to give unto them and to their seed, a land that floweth with milk and honey.”


§ David emphasizes this throughout the Psalms. The whole of Psalm 119 is dedicated to this. He starts the song with: “Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.” He says in verse 72: “The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver.” We know the poignant words of verse 105: “Your word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path”. And in verses 151-152 he says it is everlasting: “Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth.  Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.” See also the requirement in I Sam 15:22 “And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.”


§ In the New Testament our Messiah confirms again the validity of the Act: In Matthew 5:18 we see that every “jot and tittle” of the Act remain valid.

 

§ In Matthew 28:19 Jesus/JaHoshua said that we should learn His disciples to observe all things that He commanded us.

 

§ Rev 22:14 “Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”


§ Rom 10:2,3: “For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.”


§ When Rom 10:4 continues by saying, “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth”, we should not mistakenly interpreted it as that the Act is abolished. It merely emphasizes the fact that compliance with the Act does not bring justice for us sinners. Our righteousness is only in Jesus Christ/JaHoshua Mashiach. Jeremiah 23:6 puts it this way: “In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” Also look at Paul's reasoning about the Law in Romans 6:14 where he says we are no longer under the Act, but under grace.  Then he immediately puts it in perspective in the subsequent verses  by emphasizing our voluntary obedience. It is thus clear that obedience to God is still an obligation. And see what he says in Rom 3:31 “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” 1Jn 5:3 aptly puts it: “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.”[7]

 

2.4  Positivating the law

If we look at the tenth commandment in Ex 20, verse 17 states: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.” Compare this with Deut 5:21: “Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.” While Israel was still walking through the desert, fields were not mentioned, but when they occupied the Promised Land, it became relevant. The principle, however, remains the same. In today's terms we might say "you may not covet your neighbor's car or cell phone or yacht" This is what we call ‘judicial positivation’.

 

If the Bible says we should obey the law, it means we must obey the principle of the law. Whatever is right and wrong in the Bible, is still right and wrong today. James 1:17: “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.”

The laws of Moses and the other directives of the Bible should not necessarily be taken literally, but the principle of the law must be applied. The state's laws should always be tested against the biblical principles.

 

2.5  The application spectrum of the Law

Some believers think that all the laws of Moses still apply. Others believe that the ceremonial and sacrificial laws were temporarily, and their function was only to point to the redemption of Jesus / JaHoshua. Although we pray for, and strive to consensus – also on  this – it falls outside the scope of the state because the state should only apply civil laws. The other laws are in the sphere of other terrains of life, such as the church and the family.

 

2.6 Theocracy

2.6.1 Theocracy means "God reigns."

 

In the first place, the whole creation is a true Theocracy,[8],because God rules it by His counsel and management. Secondly, our King, Jesus Christ / JaHoshua Mashiach, will once again establish a true Theocracy with His advent.

 

We must also remember that any religious government, who consider a god as their ruler, or who claims to be officials governing by divine inspiration, can be considered a theocracy in the science of politics.

 

Within our sinful order we as humans cannot establish a real Theocracy. Some people are for this reason uncomfortable with the idea that we want to establish a Theocracy in this sinful temporary existence. Several objections are put forward:

o Some say we can only strive for a 'Theonomy' or God-obedient government. The government of the judges and the kings of Israel would then still qualify as a Theocracy because the prophets could ask God directly and then convey God's own decisions to the judge or king. The argument is simply that we really do not have a Theocratic relationship with God, because He no longer gives direct commands through his prophets. On the other hand, we might argue that we have God's Word and its natural- or creation-order in which the directives of His will are clear.  If a government tests its decisions throughout upon this, and asks our Father's guidance seriously in prayer, we believe that we can still say: God reigns.

 

o Others believe that the Old Testament laws no longer apply to us is because we are 'free from the Law’ in Christ / Mashiach. As we indicated above, however, God still demands obedience to His Law.

 

o There is also an established view that, after the coming of the Messiah, Theocracy or Christocracy can only exist in the church and that the state may not be governed such, but rather in the interest of all - believers and unbelievers. However, we believe the Bible (Mar 12:30; Rom 12:1) claim that our entire life, with all its facets should be in the service of God. We believe it is a logical inference that our Father will be pleased if we erect a God-obedient political dispensation.

 

o There is an objection that we should not try to establish a society where we push out the infidel. As authority for this view, Matthew 13:24-30  is given where Jesus/JaHoshua compared the Kingdom of God to a field where the farmer's enemy sowed weeds among the good seed, and when the servants wanted to pull out the weeds, the farmer replied  “Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn”. This, however, is not an assignment.  It is simply an explanation of the Kingdom.  By contrast, there is a command in 1Cor 5:7 “Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us”.[9]


o There is also a concern that we are striving to attain the kingdom of the Messiah with this. We must be clear that this is not our intent.

 

We must also make it clear that the laws and regulations of the entire Bible will be the basis for positivating the laws in the Theocracy, not just the laws of the Old Testament. We furthermore are of the opinion that we should go further than merely establishing a government who rules according to the laws and directions of the Bible. We expect of the decision-makers to also ask guidance from our Father for their decisions and we can also expect that the Holy Spirit will indeed grant guidance on the strength of His promises and His work.[10]

 

Because we do not claim that we will reach the level of Theocracy at the time of Moses or Samuel, we considered the phrase ‘Theocratic Republic’, but since ‘republic’ is derived from the Latin ‘res publica’, which means ‘the concern of the public’, we decided that would be too man-centred. We must be completely God-centred. We stay with the phrase ‘Theocracy’ in the broader sense of the word where we include a God-obedient government.

 

2.6.2 Democracy vs. Theocracy

We got used to democracy as decision-making system. This system however has its roots in the liberal Humanism (which honors man). The system we know is in fact rather majority decision-making, because democracy means ‘government by the “volk”’ – and we see little of that these days. But let’s call the system ‘democracy’ as we commonly got used to it. Since decisions are always dependant on the majority, the system is inclined to please the majority. In such a democratic decision-making system a God-obedient government is even possible, provided that the majority of the citizens are serious believers. Yet, practice taught us that the public communication-media like the radio, TV, movies and newspapers completely manipulate the judgment of the average modern person. Now, it is also a tragic fact that these media (with the exception of a few brave, smaller ventures) are controlled by enemies of God who focus upon leading our ‘volk’ away from our Father and to eventually destroy our ‘volk’ completely.[11]

 

The alternative decision-making systems which man designed, did unfortunately not bear a satisfactory solution. It is precisely because the alternative governing systems, namely monarchy and aristocracy was so unsatisfactory, that democracy became popular. However, because the majority of people cannot think independently, democracy inevitably leads to olicharchy.[12] In fact, democracy therefore is no more than an illusion.

In addition, democracy is not Biblical. Ex. 23:2 clearly states: “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.”[13] Moses, Samuel and David asked our heavenly Father guidance in everything.[14] God also stipulated that His decision must be asked by lot.[15] Besides this, every (greater) family had a representative and these ‘elders’ advised Moses.

 

Contrary to democracy, the purpose of Theocracy is entirely for the sake of God. Paul calls it our ‘reasonable service’ to dedicate our whole life to Him in Rom 12:1,2 “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”

In the discussion of Theocracies that follows, we will see how theocracies also can degenerate to please man.

 

2.7 Historical overview on Theocracies in the Western political tradition

We must ask ourselves whether we are simply occupying ourselves with a theoretical exercise. If we really are serious to obey God in practice, we must learn from history and in particular we must look at the sustainability of Theocracies and God-fearing governments. We even looked at other religious systems.[16]

 

We must take particular note of the prophetic warning Joshua gave the Israelites in Jos 24:14-22:

“Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD.
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
And the people answered and said, God forbid that we should forsake the LORD, to serve other gods;
For the LORD our God, he it is that brought us up and our fathers out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and which did those great signs in our sight, and preserved us in all the way wherein we went, and among all the people through whom we passed:
And the LORD drave out from before us all the people, even the Amorites which dwelt in the land: therefore will we also serve the LORD; for he is our God.
And Joshua said unto the people, Ye cannot serve the LORD: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins.
If ye forsake the LORD, and serve strange gods, then he will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that he hath done you good.
And the people said unto Joshua, Nay; but we will serve the LORD.
And Joshua said unto the people, Ye are witnesses against yourselves that ye have chosen you the LORD, to serve him. And they said, We are witnesses”.

 

The history of Theocracies paints a sad picture. Time and again it is started with good intentions, but within a few generations the sinful nature of man takes over. Then theocracy becomes a mighty system of unrighteousness with the authority of religion.

 

2.7.1 The time in the garden of Eden, before the fall of man, was a true Theocracy. With the fall of man came disobedience. Up until the second coming, we will suffer this fate and any Theocratic system will come under attack from Satan.

 

2.7.2 The first Theocratic state the Bible tells us about, is the one of Moses at the time of the Exodus of Israel. In spite of the disobedience of the ‘volk’, and that of Moses himself, we can describe this Theocracy as sustainable over a time of 40 years.

2.7.3 Then the Theocracy was continued in the time of Joshua, although he warned the ‘volk’ that they will not be able to sustain it, because of their disobedience.

 

2.7.4 Joshua’s prediction became true only in the next generation, when Israel strayed by mixing with other ‘volke’ (peoples).

 

2.7.5 Next, the period of the Judges were also characterized by disobedience and straying.

 

2.7.6 The period of the kings of Israel had its moments (especially in the time of David, who continually consulted with JHWH), but eventually they could not sustain the Theocracy. They murdered the prophets, who were supposed to guide them.

 

2.7.7 The next Theocracy was the Maccabeers. They served their ‘volk’ and God with great zeal – unfortunately in that order. Although they were initially motivated to restore the honor of YHWH and to purify the temple, their zest was later aimed at the ‘volk’.

 

2.7.8 Then followed the Jewish Sanhedrin. Although they stood under the authority of the Roman Empire, it is nevertheless considered a theocracy. It is infamous for their stringent laws. Eventually they strayed so far that they murdered the Son of God, the Messiah and Redeemer.

 

2.7.9 The next theocracy was the Roman Church. Especially through the Middle-Ages this Church-government went far astray and, on the authority of religion, sent out pilgrimages who committed murder and violence. These atrocities and injustices reached its climax with the massacre of the reformers at the time of the Inquisition.

 

2.7.10 At the same time the Orthodox Church reigned in Eastern Europe. There the Church did not invade the domain of the state to the extent that the Roman Church did and therefore it cannot be considered a theocracy. Because of their man-made religion which elevated the church to absolute authority whose ordinances carried the same weight as the Bible, they also strayed in any case.

 

2.7.11 Geneva had a short-lived theocracy at the time of Calvin which does pass the test of viability, but its life-span was too short to be described as durable.

 

2.7.12 The Protestant governments of Europe after the Reformation, was God-fearing governments, but unfortunately Satan had his plans ready and the rise of liberalism which following the French Revolution, took down these God-fearing governments.

 

2.7.13 The Puritans established a God-fearing government in the early colonial years of New England in the North East of the USA. Tragically, neither they could escape the destructive work of liberalism.

 

2.7.14 Also in the West of America the Mormons established a theocracy which was later restricted to the state of ‘Utah’. After the state became part of the USA, their laws (especially on polygamy) came in conflict with the federal government and in time the theocracy weakened.

 

2.7.15 The Boer Republics was, by the grace of God, in the unique position that they were cut off from the rest of the world after the Great Trek. Even before the Trek they were already alienated to a great extent. This caused them to escape Satan’s Liberalism to a great extent. Unfortunately they neglected to keep their vows and to give all the glory to God. They were, however, not destroyed by liberalism, but were subjected by force in the Second Freedom War (Boer War). – After that, the liberalism could freely pollute the hearts and minds of the ‘Boervolk’.

 

2.7.16 Again we got a God-fearing government in 1948, but after we received the promised blessings, our own pride undermined it so that, after the death of Dr Verwoerd, it made a speedy decline towards a humanistic system.

 

2.7.17 The Vatican, which are governed by the so-called Sancta Sedes, is a different example of a religious government. Even though it is considered a theocracy and it is maintained over a long period, it cannot serve as an example, because the Vatican’s circumstances are unique and its total population is a mere 826. We also consider it an enemy of the true religion.

 

2.7.18 Although the ‘Amish’ in Pennsylvania do not run an independent state, their way of life can be considered a Theocracy in a certain sense. This unique system, which honors Christ/ Mashiach as King, is an example from which we can learn a lot. The Amish’s system certainly is a sustained success up till this day, despite the fact that they stand under a secular government and its laws. They do have considerable influence on the laws of the state of Pennsylvania, which makes it possible to create room for their view of life. Their success is probably due to the maintenance of discipline.

 

2.7.19 Another example of apparent success is the establishment of the state of Israel. Although a minority of them are very religious, the state itself is no longer characterized by that. Their religion is based on the Talmud, which is a deviated form of the Law. They seem to be religious, but adhere to a man-made version. We furthermore must caution that the country are financed mainly by foreign Jews who support the cause. We therefore can also not hold this as an example of a sustained theocracy.

 

2.7.20 It is ironic that the most successful theocracies is the governments of Islam. They succeed in maintaining discipline. Probably because Satan do not have such a big problem with them.

 

We see therefore that the history of Theocracies and God-fearing governments were tragic. Satan succeeds in convincing man to create his own religion time and again. He also undermines the discipline. To be sure, if a Theocracy strays, it is more dangerous than a liberal democracy, because then the injustice is committed on authority of religion. Our conclusion is therefore that a Theocracy can, humanly speaking, not be maintained, because humans can not fend off Satan’s assaults.

 

On the other hand we have the promises of YHWH. Luke 18:27 “…The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.” Ps 119:4-6: “Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently. O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes! Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.”

 

Then, we as believers must confess that a Theocracy is feasible after all if it is God’s will. The failures of the past can not be attributed to YHWH as everlasting King. The “perfect” governing system is still available to the covenant people to put into practice. We cannot for a single moment say that, because there are masses of so-called Christians, who are a shame and grief in YHWH’s creation, that it is pointless for us to seek His face and His favor.

 

2.8 Status of this document

This is still a concept document. It is however, not a theoretical exercise. We have our Father’s unchanging promises that He will deliver us if we turn to Him with an unfaltering heart. (II Chron 7:14; Math 22:37). With this document we show the whole world that we trust only in Him to deliver us. We do not prescribe and our prayer is still ever that His will be done.

 

This report will DV be presented to the ‘Volks’-assembly of 8-10 October 2010 for approval. In the pages that follow we discuss the guidelines for a Constitution. Considering these guidelines, and ultimately tested under the Biblical principles, experts in the various topics must verify and enhance the wording of the Constitution and the specific laws.

=======================

The original text is in Afrikaans.
The English translation will be completed shortly.

 


[1] Covenant people. We are very aware of the objection to the term 'Geloftevolk’. There is difference of opinion among our people. The proponents of the name 'Boerevolk' says the Boers are a separate ‘volk’ from the Afrikaner people and that our identity has now been denied long enough. The proponents of the name 'Afrikaner' feel we create discord with that position and that the division is in fact a conservative-versus-liberal philosophy. We hope and pray that soon we can get consensus on this. The name 'Geloftevolk' is not an interim compromise. It is an attempt to gather together those who belong together. For the purposes of this study, namely a political system to glorify our Father, the central theme are the ‘volksgeloftes’ (covenants). While the debate over the name continues, we endeavour to equip our people with the Biblical truths.

 

[2] He determines everything, but the wonder of his actions in our history is remarkable.

[3] As far as we know, all Theologians are aware that our heavenly Father's holy Name is YHWH. In the King James translation of the Old Testament there are two forms of the title 'Lord'. Where only the 'L' is a capital letter, the original Hebrew, ‘Adoon', which means 'master' or 'proprietor' or 'ruler' (hence the title 'Lord'). The second form is ‘LORD’, where the whole word is written with capital letters. The original Hebrew reads "YHWH". It is a Name with a rich meaning. In Ex 3:13-15, the Name is explained as "I AM WHAT I AM." This means that He ever and ever exists, that He is the origin, the beginning and end of everything. The name "YHWH" is used continually in the Old Testament. The pronunciation is YaHWeH '(soft' w '). Because God specifically prohibits the use of His Name in vain, the Judahites who returned from exile refrained from pronouncing the Name, and wherever the name "YHWH" is in the Bible, they read ‘Adonai’, which means my Lord'. This practice was later followed by translators. The Dutch Statenbijbel has therefore translated YHWH with HEERE. They did have a footnote adding that the original text reads YHWH. The Afrikaans translation has unfortunately omitted this footnote (the ’Bybel met verklarende aantekeninge’ – Bible with explanatory notes – does note it).

 

It is a fact that the Bible in many places emphasises that we should know our heavenly Father's Name. Cf eg

  • · Ps 91:14 Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name.
  • · Is 42:8 I am YHWH (the LORD): that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
  • · John 17:26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.
  • · And behold these harsh words in Jeremiah 23:26-27: How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal.
  • · More texts that highlight the significance of his Name, are: Ps 30:4, 97:12, 102:12, Isaiah 26:8, 54:5, Hos 12:5. This is an ongoing theme of the Bible.

Following the instructions of our Heavenly Father and his Son, our Saviour, we therefore make known His Name to the ‘Geloftevolk’. We respect, however, still use the title 'Lord' and where we quote from the Bible, we will continue to use the form in which it stands because we realize the Name is still strange to many of our people.

[4] The name 'JaHoshua' means' YHWH is saviour’. Because Judah spoke Aramaic (closely related to Hebrew) at the time of the birth of our Saviour, it is likely that His Name was close to this form: JHoshua / JaHoshua / Jeshua / Joshua / JeHoshua. We're not exactly sure. The Hebrew language has a way to change names. Because the universal language at that time was Greek, we received the New Testament in Greek. There our Saviour’s Name is given as' Iēsous. This is an adaptation of the Hebrew name and the meaning lies in the Hebrew, as described above.

 

[5] ‘Mashiach’ means ‘Anointed’. Some believe that it is ‘Mashiah’, but our research has shown that it is not a reference to YHWH. The Greek New Testament uses the word “Christos”. This is a translation of Mashiach "and also means "Anointed". The Name in the English (as in the Afrikaans) translation is also derived from Greek, namely, Jesus Christ."
Because some of our people prefer to use the name 'Jesus Christ' and others the name 'JaHoshua Mashiach', we persistently use both forms in the report. Sometimes we refer only to the 'Messiah', a title that we think all feel comfortable with. We are not prescriptive about it and people should feel free to use the Name with which they are comfortable.

 

[6] “God’s people” -  Ex 33:16; I Pt 2:9-10

[7] More texts that shed light on this are: Lev 18:4; Deut 15: 5; 27:10; 30:16; Psalm 19:8-11; Ecc 12:13; Isaiah 58:13,14; John 15:10-14; I Peter 1:14; I John 2:3-5; 3:24; Rom 3:24; Gal 2:16; II John 1:6; and Rev 14:12.

[8] We write it with a capital ‘T’ because "Theos" = God

 

[9] Even texts which give the command are: Gal 5:9 and II Corinthians 6:17.

[10] Isaiah 8:19, 30:21, Jer. 33:3, 42:1-7, Zephaniah 1:2-6, John 15:5, James 1:5

[11] The intention of the international media is not only to destroy our ‘volk’, they are merely collaborators of Satan who tries to destroy God’s creational order in totality. He especially attacks the western civilization because we are the carriers of the gospel. He wants to destroy all the building-blocks of God’s human society. The building-blocks are the family (household), the greater family (relatives) and the ‘volk’. He is very successful as well, because he already succeeded in destroying the (greater) family relation. The family (household) is in process of crumbling and the ‘volk’ is discredited in the liberal western opinion. He also uses other means. Even churches preaches liberalism nowadays.

 

[12] Olicharchy means that a few people govern. It is, however, not an aristocracy which is based on classes, but rather an exclusive group who deliberately manipulates the political system and social order to shape the so-called ‘public opinion’. In our modern context this is mainly the international monetary powers, the media bosses and the international church movement.

[13] There are indeed texts, like Acts 14:23, where an argument can be made that the early churches appointed candidates for office by a majority of votes. The text may also mean that the apostles picked persons ‘with their hand’. In any case, it is not unbiblical to appoint candidates by way of voting, provided that the ‘voters’ have God’s honor in mind and they are acquainted the candidates so that they can take an informed decision. We are also convinced that the final decision must be prayed from our Father. (Luke 16:15; Acts 1:23-26; 15:8; I Chron 14:10,14).

 

[14] Ex 18:15,16; 33:7; I Sam 22:10,21; 30:8; II Sam 2:1; 5:19,23; I Chron 14:10,14.

 

[15] We already showed with textual reference how important it is that our ‘volk’ must consult our Father. We also know that we must do it in meekness and with prayer. Further it is known that we must do it with a pure heart, otherwise He won’t answer us or He will answer us with a lying spirit for our destruction! (Prov 21:2; IISam 22:26,27; II Chron 18:3-6,17-22; Ps18:25,26; Ezekiel 14:3-9, 20:1-4, 20:31,35; Judges 8:27). However something that is strange to many of us, is that He stipulates the use of the lot as a means to consult Him. (Ex 28:30; Lev 8:8; Num 27:21; Deut 33:8; I Sam 19:21; 22:10-15; 28:6; I Chron 24:31; Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65; Prov 16:33; Acts 1:26). We have now also seen that the stones used for casting lots, are called ‘Urim and Thummim'. These stones were placed in a breast-plate which the high priest wore together with an ‘ephod’ (Ex 25:7; 28:1-4; Lev 8:5-8; I Sam 2:18; 14:3; 21; 9; 22:18; 23:6,9; 30:7,8) Also note that the casting of the lot does not force a decision. It works in such a way that the question can remain unanswered if our Father so wish.

 

[16] We are aware that most of these systems are not true Theocracies, but it is still instructive to take note of them from a scientific point of view.