Angus Buchan apologises for saying only 'Jewish and Afrikaans people' have 'covenant with God'

[rambo919]

If you ask me it sounds like he was referring to the actual covenant that was made by Jews in biblical times and then the covenant made by the Voortrekkers during the great trek.
That hardly covers all Afrikaners btw.
In any case I expect there has been many cases where groups have made some vow like that. So he is probably wrong.

It's obvious that this is what he was referring to. And yes there might very well be other such covenants that no one knows about, but of course we don't actually know.

 

[ToxicBunny]

It's obvious that this is what he was referring to. And yes there might very well be other such covenants that no one knows about, but of course we don't actually know.

There definitely are many other such covenants and with even a modicum of effort I'm sure you could find at least 10 others relating to segments of cultural groups and I'm sure at least 10000 times a day more than 470 people make group vows to their gods... So the voortrekker one isnt really all that special.

 

[Ponderer]

If one gives any credence to evidence at all, this is possible (not sure if proven yet?) as far as the evidence of god is considered. Atheists and religious followers would be equally intelligent or dumb irrespective of their god positions. Human brain is quite capable of compartmentalization.

*NDT did mention a survey once about elite scientists and whether they believe personal god or not. I vaguely recall him saying something similar that you said here.

Militant-type Atheists are no different than any other zealots.

 

[rambo919]

There definitely are many other such covenants and with even a modicum of effort I'm sure you could find at least 10 others relating to segments of cultural groups and I'm sure at least 10000 times a day more than 470 people make group vows to their gods... So the voortrekker one isnt really all that special.

Covenants are contractual and future generations binding vows, don't confuse that with normal vows.

 

[Ponderer]

I find this statement ironic, from my personal experience the vast majority of deeply religious Afrikaaners I've encountered are seriously anti-Semitic. Somehow they all find a way to work in an anti-Semitic statement into the company conversation within 5 minutes of starting the conversation.

Funny how militant-type Atheists will do likewise - they will find a way to work in "GOD is a myth" and "Atheists are more clever than non-Atheists" and "non-Atheists are stupid" statements into the company conversation within 5 minutes of starting the conversation.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Covenants are contractual and future generations binding vows, don't confuse that with normal vows.

Oh wait... So normal vows can just be ignored then? What's the point of saying them....

Alright then... I'll revise my numbers down... You can still easily find 10 covenants with a bit of effort.. And I reckon 1000 groupings of 470 people or more make covenants at least once a week.

 

[MrGray]

The only miracle is that so many suckers attend this bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic dinosaur's bible thumping circle jerks, covenant or no.

 

[MidnightWizard]

I'm going to regret this, but how is he a victim of the toxic South African MSM?

WWeeellll
Reading from the beginning of the article it appears that there is an insinuation that he was -- misquoted

Post #9

That article is a terrible twisting on what he actually said, though he could def have phrased it better.

WHAT does it mean when one is "misquoted" ... ?

 

[ToxicBunny]

Ahhhhh OK.. Well he wasn't misquoted by the article.. So no victim then.

 

[RonSwanson]

Other way around, the covenant was initiated Afrikaners in 1838. It's not that God chose them..... though there are odd similarities between Afrikaners and Israelites that cannot be ignored some of which being:

Pretoria and Jerusalem shares the same time zone
Areas on opposite ends of the earth that are crossroads that have world powers fighting for control of it from time to time.
Both have population cores that in some point in the past entered into a specified covenant with God
Both peoples are hated worldwide
Both peoples are highly religious
Both regions have large deserts
Both peoples are highly..... lets stick with stubborn as a euphemism
Both peoples think way too highly of themselves
In the past these two peoples were strong allies in general

That's all I can think of atm

Nice try. And I understand why you are doing it. But you're basically defending the theology of an ignoramus who didn't study all that well, and who uses input other than holy scripture. Covenant theology is very clear, and the characters / people / nations that are party to various covenants are not unclear, in fact they are very, very clear. The theology (if I can call it that) that you are defending is based on a VERY old NG Kerk / drie susters kerke doctrine. It is what we were taught many years ago, in katkisassie klasse, endorsed by Die Sinode. It is man-made and there is simply no biblical basis for it. Along with a number of other man-made theologies (such as sprinkling of water droplets on newborns) but these pale in comparison to the onslaught on the basics of covenant theology. Some things matter, mosquitos don't.
Afrikaans speaking people, like any people who are able to speak a language, are not singled out in any way whatsoever. There is simply no biblically-based theology today that observes a covenant between one language group vs another.

Angus' theology also has other problems, he is currently a dominion theologist, which basically places him at the same level as a politician, who uses biblical scripture to predict or justify man's desire to have heaven on earth. It's not going to happen (not according to prophecy in scripture anyway), and this is the key to why he is a false prophet.

Angus screwed up. He has apologised. Time will tell (and that which comes out of his mouth on the pulpit) whether he has actually repented or not.

 

[daveza]

WHAT does it mean when one is "misquoted" ... ?

Synonym for 'taken out of context', 'it's a metaphor '.....

 

[TysonRoux]

Is this con artist a descendant of the "Blou Rokkies" ?

 

[daveza]

Is this con artist a descendant of the "Blou Rokkies" ?

Haven't seen one of those for years.

 

[rambo919]

snip

You said an awful lot without actually countering it though.

"Stupid people before you believed something I think is stupid and you are stupid enough to defend it.... you are stupid"

See summarized it in one sentence for ya.


EDIT: it's not a NGK theology, the NGK was against it at the start and only accepted it because of broederbond pressure.
EDIT: also I am not defending either him or his theology, it's not even he that was the target here he was just the patsy.

 

[rambo919]

Oh wait... So normal vows can just be ignored then? What's the point of saying them....

Alright then... I'll revise my numbers down... You can still easily find 10 covenants with a bit of effort.. And I reckon 1000 groupings of 470 people or more make covenants at least once a week.

Again, you are confusing covenants with vows. A vow is a deceleration to do something, a covenant is a contractual vow that also binds your descendants.

You also get two kinds of covenants, one to other people before God and one to God before God. For a covenant to actually be binding both parties have to accept it, both parties have to have responsibilities, etc.... this is not the case with normal vows that are typically one-sided.

 

[TysonRoux]

Again, you are confusing covenants with vows. A vow is a deceleration to do something, a covenant is a contractual vow that also binds your descendants.

You also get two kinds of covenants, one to other people before God and one to God before God. For a covenant to actually be binding both parties have to accept it, both parties have to have responsibilities, etc.... this is not the case with normal vows that are typically one-sided.

Dang, .......... isn't there a layman's interpretation of that available?

Both parties have to accept it - how do you know if god accepted it?

What is god's responsibilities and how do we know if he's meeting those?

 

[ToxicBunny]

Again, you are confusing covenants with vows. A vow is a deceleration to do something, a covenant is a contractual vow that also binds your descendants.

You also get two kinds of covenants, one to other people before God and one to God before God. For a covenant to actually be binding both parties have to accept it, both parties have to have responsibilities, etc.... this is not the case with normal vows that are typically one-sided.

How do you know God accepts it? Seems to be a piss poor contract if there is no evidence of both parties accepting it....

 

[RonSwanson]

You said an awful lot without actually countering it though.

"Stupid people before you believed something I think is stupid and you are stupid enough to defend it.... you are stupid"

See summarized it in one sentence for ya.

Which you appear to have not read or understood, so let me make it easier. Covenant theology is pretty simple, there are only six biblical covenants. Three have been fulfilled (Abramic, Noahic, Mosaic). The remaining ones (which continue, and are not yet completely fulfilled) are Adamic, Davidic and New. Of the remaining ones, the first addresses all mankind, second addresses the Jews, and the third also addresses all mankind.
Exactly which of them address the "Afrikaner" people exclusively in support of Buchan's statement? This is the key question, because Buchan purports to be an elder, and as an elder needs to be able to teach the truth from holy scripture.

EDIT: it's not a NGK theology, the NGK was against it at the start and only accepted it because of broederbond pressure.
EDIT: also I am not defending either him or his theology, it's not even he that was the target here he was just the patsy.

The NGK Sinod in the 70s and 80s clearly made it part their (flawed) doctrine. The "likeness to Israel" at that time (ostracisation from the rest of the world, drought, warfare) was exploited to indoctrinate the "Afrikaner" people in the belief that they were specifically shared in the covenants that God had with the Jewish people. This was the basis for Apartheid, which was justified in the light of the fact that Jewish people were prohibited to marry people of other tribes (in order to keep the bloodline clean for the saviour, Jesus Christ, in fulfillment of the Adamic, Davidic and New covenants).

Again, I have to ask you, exactly which of them address the "Afrikaner" people exclusively. What is it that you are defending, if not Buchan and his theology?

 

[RonSwanson]

Fake theology, false prophet:

 

[Polymathic]

Funny how militant-type Atheists will do likewise - they will find a way to work in "GOD is a myth" and "Atheists are more clever than non-Atheists" and "non-Atheists are stupid" statements into the company conversation within 5 minutes of starting the conversation.

Maybe you are the one bringing up god into the conversation within 5 minutes? Ever thought about that?
But yeah it seems there's a trend of people with a serious chip on shoulder for a group they hate, always having the urge to switch the conversation to about the group of people they hate.
I guess these people are obsessed about the group they hate.