?

Log in

No account? Create an account
RSQUBF LiveJournal Community
John Jun promotes anger 
26th-Dec-2005 08:31 pm
John Jun promotes anger.

This is an excerpt from John Jun’s message on 1 Samuel 17:1-58. In this message he promotes burning anger like a volcano.

Burning anger consumed him, like a volcano. He took the disgrace as his personal insult. Out of his spiritual anger, he committed himself to killing this enemy of God, and removing the disgrace of Israel and the insult against God. David’s challenging spirit came from his holy spiritual anger.

God’s people must have spiritual anger. Once, Apostle Paul was preaching the gospel to an important official who had a spiritual desire (Ac 13:4-12). But a sorcerer tried to turn him from the faith. Then Paul, filled with holy anger, cursed him saying, “You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right!”. Then the enemy of God became blind. Here we can see that if we truly love God and God’s flock, we come to have spiritual anger naturally. I pray that we also love God and God’s flock from the heart, and challenge the enemies of God with spiritual anger.
Comments 
27th-Dec-2005 02:41 am (UTC)
He focuses on David’s anger. He encourages UBF people to become angry like David whose burning anger consumed him, like a volcano. Is this message spiritually appropriate? First of all I cannot imagine a Christian whose burning anger is consuming him like a volcano and commits himself to killing this enemy of God. Isn’t this more like a picture of a Taliban suicide bomber? Is he telling UBF members to fight for UBF like Taliban suicide bombers?

He claims that God’s people must have spiritual anger. I don’t get this. I grant that God’s people come to have holy indignation WHEN they love God more than anything else. I grant that it is possible for God’s people to have burning love that can consume them like a volcano. At this point a man of God can have spiritual anger. I think it is spiritually wrong to maintain that there is such a thing as spiritual anger standing alone apart from the love for God. God’s people must have love for God before they can talk about spiritual anger. When we love God, it is natural that we resent the enemies of God. We cannot just have spiritual anger without loving God more than we resent the enemies of God.

The point of David’s story here is that he loved God so much that he could not resist his indignation against the blasphemer. Jun is wrong to say that since David, a man of God, was filled with spiritual anger, we must also have spiritual anger against the enemies of God. This is what Talibans say. The point of David’s story is not that we must have burning anger that will consume us like volcano but that we must love God even more than we resent our enemies. Then the question of whether or not God’s people must have spiritual anger will be answered naturally.

Jun’s spiritual maturity and his biblical understanding are well revealed in this message. He seems to be also very emotional in his interpretation that he is missing more important points. He says that “I pray that we also love God and God’s flock from the heart, and challenge the enemies of God with spiritual anger.” But he sounds like that God’s people must love God in order to challenge the enemies of God with spiritual anger. He seems to be desperate to make his people to fight for UBF instead of making them to love God. I wonder why. Is his soon-to-be organization in some kind of trouble?

Matthew Henry uses the word ‘resent’ in his comment on the passage. It seems that there is a difference between resent and anger according to Dictionary.com. Jun needs to refer to Matthew Henry’s comments to understand nuances of different words in the passage.
27th-Dec-2005 07:09 am (UTC) - Righteous indignation
I wonder why JJ didn't use the example of Jesus overthrowing the tables of the moneychangers?

Anyway - the problem with the entire message is pretty much that we should be angry at "the enemies of God". What JJ doesn't get across is that God in Jesus Christ doesn't preach us to "hate your enemies", but to "love your enemies".
While a father may be indignant about his children's actions, he will never hate them. He will not act out of hatred, nor out of any other "lower" motivation. A father's driving force is his love.
And God is our Father! We are not His enemies, no man is. He loves all of mankind. He never sees us as enemies, and neither should Christians should see other people like that. Talking about "seeing with God's eyes", are we, UBF?

The only enemy in this universe is Satan, and we have all the right to be angry with that one - but we can't beat Satan on his level. On a level of discrediting, twisting, bad-mouthing, lying etc., Satan in unbeatable. You want to beat Satan? Don't do it by claiming that everyone who disagrees with UBF is an enemy of God - that's going to Satan's level and using his weapons, making you Satan's brother-in-arms. You want to beat Satan? Do what he hates most: love those whom you consider enemies. Meet them in brotherly love! THAT is genuine spiritual warfare.
Preaching hate, anger and temper is not the way to go, it's preaching the message of Satan!

I want to repeat it here what I said so often: I do not hate the people in UBF. I also do not hate God. But I do get indignant and angry about the deceptive system that UBF is in order to keep people away from experiencing Jesus Christ in the reality and binds them in fear and man-imposed rules. UBF is a system that glorifies men, and that is enmity to God - speaking the truth isn't enmity to God.
The enemy is Satan, and he's working through the UBF system. The enemy is not your own brothers and sisters in Christ!
27th-Dec-2005 08:13 am (UTC) - Re: Righteous indignation
I would like to straighten one thing out here. If you are talking about an "enemy of God" how do you define this? If you say "somebody who God hates" then I think you're right. God hates nobody except Satan and the sin that separates people from God. But there are people who hate God, who work against God and the gospel. These people can also be rightfully be called "enemies of God". "Enemy" is a two-sided term. You can be an enemy of God, but that does not mean that God hates you and treats you like an enemy. According to Rom 5:10, we all have been enemies of God. Unfortunately, many of those who claim to be "God's servants" are still enemies of God.

Ad hoc examples from the Bible: Elymas the sorcerer and false prophet (Jun's example), or Judas Iscariot or the Pharaoh. Interestingly, God gave all of them several chances. If he cursed them (the plagues in Egypt or the blindness of Elymas), then it was only to give them a chance to repent (note that Elymas was explicitly only blinded "for a time"). Judas got a last chance at the last supper. In the end, these people condemned themselves by hardening their hearts and not repenting (maybe Elymas repented, we don't know, but the Pharaoh and Judas did not). Remember: "God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

In the example of Elymas I would rather emphasize a different aspect. What Paul did was not only rebuke and temporally curse him with blindness, but more importantly: Paul *revealed* who Elymas was: "You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right! You are full of all kinds of deceit and trickery." It was not clear to the people who have been deceived by Elymas that he was a sorcerer. He claimed to have the name "Bar-Jesus" (which means "son of Jesus") and claimed to be a prophet. It was Paul who through the Holy Spirit revealed that this man was *not* a son of Jesus and *not* a prophet, but a charlatan and enemy of the truth, a fraud. He pulled the mask off the face of this "servant of God" and revealed his real name and face.

So this passage does not teach to curse enemies of God, but in the first place to clearly reveal those people who claim to be God's people but are enemies of everything that is right, who use all kinds of deceit and trickery, like Samuel Lee and John Jun. To call things by name and not beat about the bush when talking about Samuel Lee or even praising him as UBFers do.
27th-Dec-2005 06:28 pm (UTC) - Re: Righteous indignation
If you are talking about an "enemy of God" how do you define this?

This is a good point. John Jun seems to define "enemy of God" in terms of UBF business only. Jun does not define "enemy of God" with respect to God himself. Jun says the following in the same message.

When our young Bible students decide to live as Jesus’ disciples, the first obstacle they often face is persecution from their parents and friends. They are persecuted because they can’t spend as much time with family and friends. Some parents threaten them, saying that they wouldn’t give any spending money if they don’t listen to them. This makes our young shepherds worried. Because of the spiritual battle they had to fight against their parents, they become burdened and fearful. Because of fear, they can’t say a word to their parents and become easily hard hearted.

Jun seems to say that parents are "enemy of God". This is very disturbing message. What is he exactly trying to imply here? He might as well say that everyone is "enemy of God" except John Jun. Does he ever think that he might be acting as an "enemy of God" by preaching something like this? St. Peter acted like "enemy of God" when he was full of human business on his mind to defend Jesus' ministry from human point of view. He didn't clrealy understnad what Jesus' ministry was all about. I think Jun is doing the same here. I don't think he clearly understands what a Christian ministry is all about. He only knows UBF business and UBF theology fabricated by his current boss, Samuel Lee. (Even though he is dead, he still is the current boss of UBF organization.) Jun is full of UBF business on his mind when he encourages young students to fight against their parents for the sake of expanding UBF business. His message is not about fighting against parents for the sake of Jesus. It is all about UBF business.

If a news media reports some questionable practices of a religious organization, it could be the work of God against the organization which has lost the ability to recognize its own problems. Considering the level of self-glorification rampant in UBF organization, UBF has already passed the point where it could use its own ability to recognize the systematic contradictions and solve them in its system. Just consider the event of its organizational split a few years ago and how UBF handled the problem. It was a clear sign that UBF system is not working. It seems to be very clear why it didn't work and why it is not working even now.
27th-Dec-2005 05:44 pm (UTC) - Re: Righteous indignation
Ditto.

27th-Dec-2005 07:35 am (UTC)
The main problem is here that Jun jumps directly from OT to NT.

The NT says that "when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son" so if God did not hate and curse us because we were his enemies how should we do so? Jesus told a lot about how to behave towards enemies, and he never spoke about hating and cursing.

The second problem is that he does not define who the "enemies of God" are (of course, every UBF member knows that enemies of God are critics of UBF). That's so typical. Everything is between the lines and ambiguous.

In a proper message, if you make such a statement then you need to make the transfer to today and practical application. He did not give any practical application how to "challenge the enemies of God with spiritual anger." He did not explain who is Goliath today for us. But this is of course on purpose. They never teach directly and clearly, they always let YOU make the last conclusion. We talked about that already in the context of Samuel Lee's horror stories.

Third, you see another typical UBF method. He talks only about the one aspect, anger towards enemies, which admittedly has its place, but completely ignores the other much more important NT teaching, love towards enemies. The main pastor in my church always covers both aspects of anything he is teaching. He always talks about the limits, he mentions the other side of a medal, he warns about exaggerating one good thing etc. But UBF only preaches one thing at a time. One day they may preach hate, another day they may preach love. UBF members are not accustomed to the thought that the Bible is ONE CONSISTENT message that cannot be one day hate and another day love. They purposefully make the mind and horizon of UBF members very small so that only one thing at a time fills it completely, but can never compare and put the puzzle together and become "holistic" Christians.

The 4th problem is the double-tongued speak here. Do you remember how they rebuked any critics of UBF leaders? "You may not be consumed by anger", "your postings are full of hate" etc. etc. One UBF member told me we may NEVER curse (=criticize in UBF), only bless. And this was of course interpreted that we were not allowed to say anything negative about UBF or Samuel Lee, no matter what they do. This is a completely different teaching. UBF is only double-speak and "situative teaching".
27th-Dec-2005 05:48 pm (UTC)
I agree with both of your comments 100%.
4th-Jan-2006 03:17 am (UTC) - "We must HATE the enemies of God!!!"
I posted something about a similar sermon written by Sam Lee and performed by Ron Ward. It can be read at http://drchungj.blogspot.com/2004/05/we-must-hate-enemies-of-god.html.
This page was loaded Aug 22nd 2017, 7:07 pm GMT.