Brief thoughts on Newman’s “Development of Doctrine”

On p. 47 of Newman’s An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Newman writes:

I have been arguing, in respect to the revealed doctrine, given to us from above in Christianity, first, that in consequence of its intellectual character, and as passing through the minds of so many generations of men, and as applied by them to so many purposes, and as investigated so curiously as to its capabilities, implicaitons, and bearings, it could not but grow or develop, as time went on, into a large theological system.

He’s correct on this point, I believe. Anything that impacts human beings is going to invoke human curiosity, and anything that claims to be as significant as Christianity will necessarily be the focus of a great deal of intellectual endeavor. I can’t imagine being human without some desire for consistency and coherency in what we believe, and I can’t imagine a human civilization without people who are focused on figuring out how each part of our social and intellectual worlds connects up to the other parts. If something big happens to humans – boom, humans are gonna start thinking about it. And arguing. And those arguments are going to get more sophisticated and subtle as time goes on, as flaws in earlier formulations become apparent, as various and sundry attempts are made to resolve the inevitable difficulties.
But Newman goes on to write:

…next, that if development must be, then, whereas Revelation is a heavenly gift, He who gave it virtually has not given it, unless He has also secured it from perversion and corruption, in all such development as comes upon it by the necessity of its nature, or, in other words, that that intellectual action through successive generations, which is the organ of development, must, so far forth as it can claim to have been put in t charge of the Revelation, be in its determinations infallible.

He’s wrong on this point, I think. He would be correct of the intellectual content of Christianity were its chief or most important characteristic. But if Christianity is the remnant and the witness to God having done something, and what God has done is more important than what we think or understand about what God did, then I can’t see any reason why God would find it necessary to preserve it from all perverson and corruption. As I understand Christianity, I can see how it would be important to shield it from a certain amount of perversion and corruption: what God is doing involves, among other things, making sure people learn about what God has already done. And there is an intellectual component to this. But it’s certainly not the only and probably not the most important component. Jesus said that all men would know that we were His disciples by our love for each other – and not, let us be clear, by the correctness of our theology. If that’s the case, I could see God being willing to put up with quite a lot of theological misunderstanding and wrongheadedness, for the sake of His people learning to be the sort of people He wants.

David Jang Summary

Over the last two years, I’ve done several deep dives into the theological distinctives of David Jang and his community. There was a lot of detail in those posts, and it’s easy to lose the forest for the trees. So I think it makes sense to summarize briefly my theory about David Jang’s community.

1. To a great extent, and certainly within the hearing of any outsider, David Jang and his churches teach recognizably orthodox Christian doctrine. If you visit any of their churches, you will find nothing obviously amiss.
   
2. However, until 2006, within this reasonably orthodox framework, the highest leaders in David Jang’s community encouraged a very heterodox teaching that David Jang was a key eschatological figure worthy of the title “Second Christ”. This belief was not universal but was very widespread, being taught explicitly or implicitly to new members in (at least) Asia, Europe, Africa, North America and Latin America.
   
3. Although David Jang probably (and privately) continues to claim a role for himself more significant than any mainstream Christian would be comfortable with, he has never explicitly claimed to be “Christ”.  He currently disavows this teaching entirely, but there is evidence that he knew others were making this claim on his behalf and allowed them to do so.
   
4. Since 2006, the community has ceased to actively promote the doctrine of a “second Christ”, though some members have made it clear as recently as 2012 that they still believed Jang to be Christ.
   
5. David Jang and his community initially denied outright that this teaching had ever occurred, have continued to minimize and obfuscate its extent, and respond harshly and even viciously to silence anyone who brings it up.

So that’s the theory. But is it true?

You know – I think it is. Perhaps not in every particular. There may be nuances which I’ve missed or mistaken, and the evidence for some claims is more solid than for others. (I have the most questions around #3.) As I gather more information, I may need to revise portions of it. I first wrote this summary almost two years ago, and have continued to revise it periodically, as additional evidence came to light. I will continue to do so. But as it stands, it’s my best explanation of the facts as I have them.

Of course, I may be wrong. There may be other theories which cover the facts as well or better. Maybe the 20 or so people who have made this charge are just lying. Maybe they think they’re telling the truth, but badly misunderstood what they were told. Maybe Jang’s leaders just went horribly off the rails, and kept Jang so completely in the dark that he honestly knew nothing about it. Maybe they intercepted all the confessions people sent to him. Maybe this is all just some huge misunderstanding.

Maybe.

I’ve done something over the last year and a half that I had never imagined I would do: I’ve all but accused a significant figure in American Evangelicalism of serious heresy, and done it in a public forum where I was confident he and lots of other folks will hear about it and pay attention to it. This is a very sobering thing to do. Given the fate of Jang’s other critics, I continue to share my sources’ fears of retribution, that I’ll be on the receiving end of more personal attacks or even a lawsuit. And even more, I have worried throughout that I might be wrong, that in leveling these charges  I have been slandering the name of good Christians and needlessly stirring up dissent and division in the body of Christ.

But even with those risks, I cannot stay silent. The evidence for the key charges seems to me not just strong, but indisputable. And the charges are serious enough that I feel eminently justified in bringing them to the attention of the Christian world at large.

And I suppose that’s why I’m bothering to wade into this fight again, after a year of sitting on the sidelines. I’m worried about the fact that despite the extensive evidence, many mainstream Christians continue to have close ties with Jang’s community. It is true that many have withdrawn. Around the time of the original Christianity Today article, Al Mohler and Daniel Akin removed themselves from the Christian Post board. The sale of Bethany University to Jang’s Olivet University eventually fell through; and Lifeway declined to sell them their Glorieta conference center. But many other groups and individuals have continued their affiliation. The World Evangelical Alliance is only the most notable and worrisome example. Walker Tzeng, a senior leader in Jang’s community, is on the board of both the Association for Biblical Higher Education and the National Association of Evangelicals. Richard Land, the president of Southern Evangelical Seminary, has continued on as the Executive Editor of The Christian Post. Will Graham (Billy Graham’s grandson) and Joel Hunter (megapastor and occasional spiritual advisor to the President) continue to allow themselves to be listed as a part of the CP’s “senior editorial advisors”. Donald Tinder, a former editor at Christianity Today, teaches at Olivet University, along with many other Christians whose orthodoxy is unquestionable.

I would feel very differently about Jang’s community if they were honest, transparent and apologetic – in a word, repentant – about what had occurred. But given the extent to which the group continues to dissemble about their past, and their scorched earth tactics against their critics, I am uncertain as to why any orthodox Christian would continue to lend them their support. Their chances of playing a constructive role in the body of Christ seem diminishingly small so long as they have not mastered simple honesty.

You will of course need to make up your own mind. But whatever your conclusion, I and everyone else involved will certainly need your prayers.

The Community's Understanding of David Jang

One of the things that first confused me about David Jang’s community when I first started researching them is the wide disparity between the claims that their critics were making about their beliefs, and what Jang’s community themselves say that they actually teach. I remember reading all these people saying that Jang’s group was teaching that Jang was a second Christ (or “second coming Christ”); but whenever I asked any current members about their group’s beliefs, they unanimously insisted that they didn’t teach this, that they never had taught this, and that their community is perfectly orthodox.

As I said, this left me confused. And my initial conclusion was that the critics must be wrong, and I argued as much publicly. How could a group deny something that, if true, had to have been absolutely central to their belief system? If they actually believed their leader was the Messiah, why wouldn’t they just come out and say it? Like I said, it didn’t make any sense.

But then the first ex-member contacted me. And then another. And then another. And then lots, lots more. I think I’ve probably talked to something like 20 former members, but I’ve actually stopped keeping track, because it doesn’t seem important anymore to document every contact or take detailed notes on every conversation. Every former member I’ve talked to who was a part of the group before 2006 (at least a dozen of them) has told me fundamentally the same story. And the story is basically this.

Prior to 2006, they’ve told me, many and perhaps most members did in fact believe that David Jang was a second Christ. But it wasn’t normal for them to talk about it openly, even amongst fellow insiders. And the leaders, I’ve been told consistently, would almost never quite come out and say it. But when it came time to induct new members who were believed ready, a core member would sit down with the initiate and walk them through a series of lessons that were designed to bring them to a confession of faith in David Jang as a second Christ. Again, these lessons would never precisely come out and say it: but they left little doubt as to the conclusions they wished the new member to draw. (These lessons included the “New Israel” and “Genealogy of Christ” documents which I’ve recently analyzed.)

One source described it this way to me:

[T]he missionary on chage teach it until the studend hear certain number of messeges and is ready to hear "the truth" they certanly don't teach you that Jang is the second coming christ, directly... it's an inderect teaching, they allways are telling you this great word comes from our great pastor david!! And at the end when you hear the history messages about "new israel" and "christology" the missionary whrite a question mark ?? And ask you, do you know who is the second coming christ? And you ask, is your pastor, the david one? And the missionary will ask you, not you shall tell me, do you know or not? So after you get it from all the shocking thing, if you got the messeges correctly you will answer is Pastor David the second coming christ... they make you confess it, otherwise is not valid, you shall confess it like peter did it to Jesuschrist... and after you confess it, they will tell you, but shhhh, don't tell it to anybody, is a secret, we don't want that the world will kill the second coming lord as they did it to the first one.... we shall protect him...

Another source I interviewed said that after several weeks of directed Bible studies, her mentor walked her through one of the lessons which pointed towards Jang being a “second Jesus” (her words). These are the notes I took in my conversation with her (with “A” and “B” replacing the names of my source and her mentor respectively to preserve my source’s confidentiality).

[T]hen B finally asked, “What do you think about that?” A didn’t really follow what she meant, and said so. B had a sort of surprised look on her face and said, “So you don’t understand?” So A responded, “So are you saying that...?” And B responded, “No, really, absolutely.” Then B told about how an angel came to his mother, and how he is here to fulfill the ministry that Jesus didn’t complete. David was here to complete God’s work on earth. A didn’t believe her, but then they prayed, and then had lunch together. A says that she should have gotten up and left, but she didn’t.

Later on, at the conference, A asked B about it [David Jang being the Christ] again, and B would say it pretty much straight up. And she talked to some people at one of the Christmas retreats, and the girl was talking about how PD appeared to her in her sleep, hovering above her bed, and gave her an assignment. His spirit would float into their rooms.

Edmond Chua, the former editor of the Singapore edition of the Christian Post, wrote this in a chat session (CT described this, but this is a fuller version of the quote):

I made my confession on September 6, 2005, in the wee hours, just after midnight
I made it to Susan, who was my teacher
she then had me write a letter to Jang thanking him for bringing me into the Kingdom of God
this was after a long series of messages that evening
and explanation and counselling
...
I think Susan asked me so who is Pastor David?
And I probably said something like He is the Second Coming Christ!
I fully believed it
the '12 steps' Basic Bible studies I learned just seemed to point that way
it was very logical and deep
for the first time I felt that I knew the love of God
intimately
strange as that may sound, considering who Jang is

Ma Li, a former member from Beijing whom I interviewed at length, wrote this description of her experience.

On that day, we studied for a long time, ZNW did not permit us have slight wander time, and she drew pictures, wrote something on the white board, and asked us to make sure we were clear about what she was talking.… In the end, they added the clues in the “New Israel” which gives further reasoning, which said that David Jang will be the 'second coming Christ' who could clearly explain the 'eternal gospels'; hence those who have had the luck of following him and understanding the 'gospels' he was talking about would be the New Israel’s, and will write the new history of the 'Eternal Gospels', which will added right after the New testimony.

I was totally attracted by what she was talking, the way to analyze human's history, and the gospels relates to the future of the human beings. However, I am the person without any religion backgrounds, which meant that I didn’t have any previous theory to compare and analyze, and so was happy with ignorance; because I suddenly found myself became a selected person, who is living in the New time, and will write the new history.

Surprise, exciting, on the fortune I thought I had. Even though I had not learned the Bible for the previous years, I could meet 'Christ's fellowship' during the first time I learning it. When ZNW looked at me and LLJ seriously and asked us: "Have you understood? All the content?" I answered firmly: "Yes". Then she asked me separately: "Who is the Pastor David?" I answered without thinking, just followed what I heard just now and answered: "The second coming Christ!" She said 'shhh' calmly, and then, 'Dont tell others'.

I felt like a little bit like cold waters had been poured on my head: why could she be so calm? Isn’t this a big event? And it is such a great thing! But the cold feeling soon disappeared totally, because to be 'New Israel' was such a big blessing, that I would like to sacrifice myself to protect it.

ZNW then told LLJ and me formally: "You are born today!" I didn’t know what was meant by 'born'; but my feelings told me that it was a good thing. ZNW then explained that as soon as we understood the 'gospel', the new life starts; and are our 'birthday of spiritual lives'; and each day today on the followed years would be our new lives' birthday, which should be remembered.

My feelings of being surrounded by the big happiness could not been explained, and I appreciated it so much, that I could neither laugh nor cry, just jumped and ran to the kitchen and told Haiyang (HY) who is preparing the breakfast for the second day 'I was born!'

'Really?'

'Really!'

'So fast, and you are so much blessed'

'is it?'

'Yes!'

Within few minutes, the whole Center knew that LLJ and I had been born, and we filled the 'Body Card', NaWenZhang (ZNW) announced us as 'Bodies', and others sang the song of 'Blessing Song'. We got blessings and encouragement from each one, and LLJ and I were standing on the right and left side of the ZNW, while others joking calling ZNW was our 'mother' because she fed us, and joked to let us call her 'mother'. ZNW did not accept because she was shy. XZ asked us to sleep earlier, and said to us in mystery way: "You might have dreams in the night, and see what you will dream of."

However, we could not sleep at all. In the sisters' rooms, LLJ and I talked all the time. LLJ was not as excited as me, and seemed she was holding back something. I was too self-centered at that time, and did not understood what it was, but thought if I was happy, she must be happy too. After the lights were turned off, Jifang Bing and TT Lu came in, after hearing LLJ and me discuss about the three gospels and the conclusions, they joined in our discussions.

Other former members whom I am not at liberty to quote directly have told me very similar stories about their confessions that David Jang was the Christ, sometimes to very senior leaders of the community. And a surprising number of them have told me that they sent written copies of these confessions to David Jang himself.

As I’ve said, there’s substantial evidence that the group stopped teaching these lessons around 2006. But even after that, there was apparently confusion amongst members as to what they were supposed to believe. One former member told me that around 2007 or 2008:

I was kind of exposed [to the “second Christ” teaching], but by another member, he told me in a conversation
one simply told me, like a comment and stop talking, it was weird. It was even more weird I didn't ask him before hand, he just popped up the topic. It was like that, I was a "lamb" learning and I felt I wasnt able to ask things.
He said something like:
You know, PD is Christ.
I thought he was crazy.
So I asked to leaders.
And they just asked me "What do you think?"
They never said yes or no
just tried to put it into my mind making me to answer myself

Another member was frustrated at Jang’s subsequent denials, and said, in reference to a particularly difficult choice:

And i accepted that time bc hey made me believe jang was christ
If not i wouldnt do it
And then ...
And jang denied he is the christ?
So many years of my life believing a lie?
Everyone where I worked believed it
And now he is dening?
It was a shock for me

All of this goes some way towards explaining why I was so confused. Jang’s community - and Jang himself - have genuinely adopted the language and to a great extent the content of orthodox, mainstream Christianity. There are very real and important differences in this respect between Jang’s community and, say, the Unification Church. If you compare Jang’s sermons fairly with those of Sun Myung Moon, you’ll find that Jang’s messages inhabit a very different world of discourse: no teachings about a “Divine Principle”, no references to him invading the spirit world to finish Jesus’ work, no talk of “True Parents”. My Southern Baptist friends would find nothing objectionable in at least 99% of what I’ve found in Jang’s sermons, whereas I can hardly go a paragraph in one of Moon’s sermons without finding something to raise my theological hackles. Yes, many of the group’s members and senior leaders did in fact believe and teach that David Jang was a second Christ; but that belief was never formalized into anything like a public creed, and however unorthodox and dangerous it may be, it seems to have been awkwardly inserted into an otherwise reasonably orthodox theology. Jang’s identity really was secret, certainly the biggest and most important secret in a community that seems to have more than its share.

One way of the ways of bridging this gap between an orthodox soteriology (say) and a highly unorthodox Christology seems to have been a novel application of the New Testament principle of “Now and Not Yet”. At least some members may have believed that while David Jang would eventually be proclaimed Christ, this hadn’t yet happened: it was something that was going to happen, but only if they did their jobs and got on with making the Kingdom of God. And until then, they were eager to enter fully into the life and community of mainstream Christianity, so as to eventually lead it altogether. David Jang’s identity thus wasn’t something that should be proclaimed, at least, not yet; the rest of the Christian world would acknowledge it soon enough and in its appropriate time. Until then, to reveal it too soon was to risk becoming a “Judas”, endangering their leader’s mission and their leader himself.

That David Jang was to be crowned king or anointed Messiah only at some point in the future may have been what many members believed (and is implied in many of the lessons). But there is no doubt that others went a great deal further. Edmond Chua says that he prayed to David Jang, and thought of him as God. Others have said that they felt like they could communicate spiritually with him. I mentioned in a previous blog post that I have a very personal document from a current member, something like a journal entry, which repeatedly refers to David Jang as “Christ”, and is full of praises for a man the author clearly regards as divine. Unfortunately, I’m not at liberty to reproduce that document more specifically to preserve the confidentiality of its source. I’ve recently seen portions of several similar documents, from a different author, which I am also not at liberty to fully describe or quote from. However, I can say that in these documents the writer unambiguously refers to David Jang in Messianic terms, for instance, as “the One who is to come” or “the King”, and at one point, even expresses a desire to worship him.

I was recently shown portions of a chat session from 2005 in which someone identified as “[SF]Tracy” makes the following comment about Africa “receiving her King, at long last”:

[Praise Report!] God has given me a special reason to rejoice. Pastor announced earlier this week that he would pay for me to go with him to Kenya for the retreat taking place there December 2005! Thank you Pastor David for this opportunity!! ^^ I feel like all of Africa is already dancing in anticipation of receiving her King, at long last. And I am overwhelmed to be a witness to this historic event. Thank you again and again…

Tracy’s reference to Africa’s “King” is, I suppose, technically ambiguous. However, since Africa has had a Christian presence for just about as long as there have been Christians, it seems pretty unlikely that anyone reading it would have understood “King” to refer to anyone other than the David Jang who is apparently about to make his first visit to Africa. (And even in the unlikely event that “King” refers to Jesus rather than Jang - what, it’s only when Jang gets there that Africa is going to become Christian?) It is also worth noting that Tracy Davis, the President of Jang’s flagship Olivet University in San Francisco, told the New York Times, “People somehow insinuated that [Jang was a messianic figure] though no one explicitly told them”. One does wonder how they could have gotten that impression.

Other documents make it clear that members considered Pastor David to be, at the very least, a uniquely significant teacher. One document from 2006 describes the newly established Olivet University this way:

Now, the time is changing and in order to be a leader at all, someone must train at Olivet. Because Pastor will train leaders himself when they come to Olivet, the learning our members receive here is another dimension from the world like the difference between clouds and water in a lake.

The group also sometimes describes itself as playing a role parallel to the early apostles. For instance, in a lesson on how to evangelize, members are reminded of the importance of keeping good notes:

When we write down the messages we must do it with awareness of history. The future generations are going to look at out notes and they will see this is what they studied and learned.... the letters of apostle Paul became part of the NT. You think he knew? It’s not like that. Later the future generation and the Holy Spirit, because in the letters there was such precious meaning, it became part of the bible that the next generations could read. Even our notes, the future may look at it.

This desire to preserve the group’s early teachings as something approaching holy writ is probably the explanation for some of the stranger documents I’ve seen. In March 2004, for instance, David Jang visited California, and spent time with some members of the group. They apparently recorded and later transcribed some 13 pages of Jang’s ramblings, so that future generations might be able to share in such edifying pronouncements as:

Do you know about our history? We should know our history. Do guys teach these things in SD? Tennis player, I should play tennis with them before they go. SF and here is so different. It feels like I came to a different country. There is like jet lag. Atmosphere and climate is different. It’s really strange. Same state. In America, it’s 50 countries. In California, even within same state, I drove all the way down from Vancouver, it was so difficult…

And there’s more. But after a while, more evidence just becomes more evidence. And if this isn’t enough to convince someone that the group has very shaky foundations, I can’t quite imagine what will.

I should reiterate that this belief was not universal amongst members of the community, even before 2006; and indeed, some members from that time seem to have been kept entirely in the dark about what the others believed. I’ve heard this sort of thing from lots of people, but most recently one of my sources wrote this (names changed):

the one I hear that didn't confess that Jang was christ was A, the one that did Jubilee mission for a while... I knew it because B told me that... oh he doesn't know about Pastor...

To return to the question with which I opened this post, given that the belief was present and encouraged, why was it never openly proclaimed? My suspicion is that the community’s tradition of secrecy, circumspection and studied ambiguity was largely pragmatic. I think they knew instinctively that they would have difficulty recruiting new members, and probably even in retaining some existing members, if it was clear to all and sundry that they regarded their leader as a second Messiah. It’s also pretty clear that they were aware of just how controversial such a claim would be, and knew that if wind of it reached the larger Christian world, their group would have difficulty attaining its larger goals. As one of my sources wrote:

David or Borah tell you, “Don’t write this down, if it gets outside…” then there will be “misunderstanding.” They had in mind to censor this from the beginning. They keep all the “history” messages private and do not allow any copies of these controversial messages to be distributed. This is not even revealed to people such as Wagner and the like.

Another motivation may even have been that members of the group harbored greater aspirations for their “King David” than David Jang harbored for himself. But that’s a topic for another blog post.

David Jang and the “Genealogy of Christ”

In my last blog post, I analyzed the various sermons entitled “The New Israel” that were given at different times and by various leaders from David Jang’s community. In this post, I’ll be walking through another set of documents from the “History Lessons” his community used to give to new members, these with the title “Genealogy of Christ”. In the process, I’m going to need to do a deep dive into some weird corners of eschatology and Biblical numerology, so I have to ask you to bear with me. I really am heading somewhere, and (I think) somewhere important.

To start off, let me briefly describe the six instances of the lesson that I have. They range from 2001 to 2005. Two of them are in German; one is a rough set of Japanese notes, with an English translation; the rest are in English. I received these lessons over two years from four independent sources, sometimes including the same document from different sources.

As befits messages delivered by at least four different speakers, in at least three different locations, times and languages, there are differences between the various documents. But the similarities significantly outweigh the differences, and there is no doubt that they all share a common, well, genealogy. To take just a few examples, they all focus their attention on Matthew’s genealogy of Christ and entirely ignore Luke’s; they all see Matthew’s 14/14/14 generational pattern as critical; they all compare the resulting 42 generations to the 42 months/1260 days of the prophecy in Daniel 12; all but the oldest (critically) describe Jesus’ ministry as fulfilling 1293 of the 1335 “days” mention in Daniel 12:12; and they all strongly imply that the remaining 42 days which Jesus’ ministry left undone will be completed by Jang’s community, if not by Jang himself.

I’m bothering to point all this out to drive home my conviction that the documents taken as a whole genuinely represent a consistent teaching of the community, at least over the years in question.

Obviously, the best way to get a sense of what these documents teach is to go read them yourself, and I encourage every interested reader to do so. But I thought I’d summarize what they have to say, and highlight some of the more, well, interesting theological moves that they make.

Despite their names, the documents that comprise this lesson don’t really focus on the genealogy of Christ in any normal sense, though they do use the 14/14/14 generational scheme of Matthew’s genealogy as a way to introduce the Messianic number 42 (i.e., 14+14+14=42). This is important, because it’s how they connect Matthew’s genealogy to the “1260 days” – i.e., 42 months - of Daniel 12. As 2005b puts it:

Let’s say I am waiting for someone, when is he going to come.  When is that time?  So Daniel 12, there is this saying, when is Christ going to come.  There is an answer to this.  It says after 42.  The number 42 comes out.  When number 42 is all fulfilled, Christ would come.  Then, as soon as they read Matthew 1, they are really amazed.

Jesus came after 42 generations.  This is the fulfilment of the prophecy of Daniel. 

The idea being there, of course, that Daniel 12:7 says the end will come after “a time, times and half a time”, which is widely understood to mean three and a half years, i.e., 42 months. Nor is Jang’s group the first to point out the connection between Matthew’s 14/14/14 schema and Daniel 12:7.

I suspect - though I’m no expert - that Jang’s group is also not the first to make the second theological move: that of connecting the second number of the Daniel 12 prophecy, namely, the “1290” days of 12:11, to Jesus’ life and ministry. If Jesus was born after “1260 days”, and was 30 years old when he began his ministry, then that makes for “1290 days”. As 2004b says:

*1260 -  it was Jesus coming to this earth (baby Jesus) and 1260 was fulfilled by his coming

*1290 - was the number (1260 + 30 years later) when Jesus started public ministry – fulfillment of 1290

And 2005a:

Moving on, all four documents say that since Jesus’ public ministry lasted for three years, then “1290+3” actually gets us to 1293 days. And that’s important, because it means that Jesus’ ministry actually left another 42 “days” unfulfilled out of the 1335 total days mentioned in Daniel 12:12 (e.g., 1335-1293=42). The Japanese notes (2004a) very helpfully include a diagram:

2005b doesn’t have a diagram, but is working with the same ideas:

1335 days.  When was Jesus born?  He was born in 1260.

Do you understand?  Daniel prophecied that Daniel would come after a time a time and a half.  42.  HE came finally.  Then how long do you have to go for the temple to be recovered completely.

1335.    This was the prophecy of Daniel.  If you go up to here then you will be blessed.  Don’t you want to be blessed like this.  Christ finally came.  He lived for 30 years.  30 years of Private life, he lived 33 years.  So then what remains is 42. 

Their math is as impeccable as their interpretation is implausible, but it’s their next theological move that’s critical.

After introducing this problem of the “missing” 42 years, the 42 years that Jesus was unable to finish, the lessons then make a startling suggestion. Perhaps those 42 years are supposed to be fulfilled by someone else, or some other group. Or maybe even their group.

2005b makes the connection explicit. Although it doesn’t quite say, “We’re the ones that are going to fulfill the missing 42 years,” it leaves no room for doubt as to how it’s going to play out:

The time has come.  Actually going around the big circle came back.  The time that we have been waiting for has come.  We must make this remaining History.  What remains?  The 42 remains.

The ones who go up to this.  Now we have got to look at the History of our Church.  It started in 1992.  It was a historical time.  How old were you.  You lived with no thoughts.  At that time, it was our spiritual conversion. Really, there were so many spiritual things that happened. 

2004b follows the same pattern, but starts by asking a question:

Everyone, who will fulfill the remaining 42 years of history?

And then immediately answers:

This time, right now, this is the time to fulfill this remaining history.
Pastor, taught us what the true life of Jesus Christ was. He taught us that his cross was great victory and not failure. He was the one who testified amazing obedience, sacrifice and love inside of Jesus Christ. And he was the one who let us know that this is the time of emergency. And that there is the history that remains. And the time has come to fulfill this.

I don’t see any way to read those paragraphs except: “Who will fulfill Jesus’ unfinished ministry? Pastor David will!”

This interpretation is confirmed by numerous passages later in the documents, which describe the group’s own (past and future) history in terms of precisely those “missing” 42 years. 2005b says that the “42” self-understanding was revealed over time:

Riught now we are speaking of the 42 year History.

The first 7 years.  1992-2000, for the first seven years, Pastor never spoke of 42, no one would have come.  At that time, he only spoke of 7 years.  Just go seven more years.

And during those initial seven years, it was the members’ close connection to David Jang that made the difference:

There is this Grace of the HS.  Because they were all close to Pastsor.  When we are close, when we are away, we lose all our strength.

In 2004b, “Pastor Deborah” described their community’s current status with a reference to the “first 14 years”:

So following Pastor, people who wanted to follow the will of God started to increase, so now our church has become 12 years. So first 14 years is almost over. 2 years remain.

And 2005b uses a typology found commonly amongst the lessons, that of dividing up the 14 years into “stalk, head and fruit”:

Now, among the 42 years, we are going in the 1^st of the 14 years.  We are going on the 1^st of the 14 years.  It is stalk head and fruit.  Right now, we are going on stage of stalk.  We are thankful that we came right now within the first 14 years.  Those who go until the 1335 will be blessed.  It will be thirty years from now.

So what does all this mean? And what is its significance? Anybody who’s actually made it this far has to know that there are few areas where there is more disagreement amongst Christians, or more creativity and diversity of interpretation, than eschatology. So let’s grant that David Jang’s group has a weird eschatology, and thinks that some obscure apocalyptic numbering scheme refers to them. David Jang himself has said repeatedly that the only real difference between his group and most Christians is in their different understandings of what the end times mean. There are lots of Christian groups with weird eschatologies whose fundamental orthodoxy has never been impugned. Who cares?

Well, for starters, most Christian denominations don’t believe that they are the specific group that is being called upon to initiate the end times; nor am I aware of any that have dated the initiation of said end times to their pastor’s birthday. Against a shifting backdrop of weird eschatologies, that one stands out as particularly notable. And more than that, particularly dangerous. If you want to manipulate impressionable young people, that’s a pretty good way to start.

But even putting that aside for the moment, it’s critical to understand that for Jang’s group, at least in these lessons, eschatology is Christology; and nobody thinks that Christology is a secondary issue. You can get a sense of this just from the great emphasis these lessons place on David Jang, and on his 43rd birthday (October 30, 1992) being the turning point which initiated the final 42 years. But it’s also critical to note that in the group’s reading, the number “42” is inherently Christological. It was 42 generations that have brought about Christ; and it is new 42 years that will anoint a second Christ. 2005a calls this figure the “second coming Jesus”:

What was JS supposed to accomplished? He was supposed to accomplish 1260, 1290 and 1335. all this prophesies in numbers were supposed to be accomplished.

We must know about the second coming Jesus. The 2^nd coming son in the continuation of Christ. it is like running a relay.

We first need to know how far the first runner went up to. The second one continues from the point and finishes the race. We need to know how far Jesus went.

If Jesus finished his running, the second son does not need to come. However, he will come to finish what Jesus did not accomplish.

2005c says that “the second Christ” – “der zweite Christus” - will pick up where the first left off:

Wir müssen die Geschichte verstehen.

Es war eine Prophezeihung, aber im bestimmten Punkt dieser Prophezeihung endete Jesus, weil Er umgebracht wurde.

Also in diesem Punkt, in dem Er aufgehört hat, wird der zweite Christus anfangen.

In English:

We need to understand the history.

It was a prophecy, but at some point this prophecy stopped referring to Jesus because He was killed.

So at this point where he left off, the second Christ will begin.

This “Christ”, 2005c goes on to say, will emerge from the “New Israel”, which in this context is clearly code for Jang’s community:

Jeder fragt über das zweite Kommen von Christus.

Wie wird es sein?

Wird Er ein Mensch mit langem Bart sein.

Nein, der zweite ist ein Mensch, der das fortführen wird, was Jesus angefangen hat.

Ein Mensch, der die neue Welt öffnet.

Ein Mensch, der mit Neuem Israel ist, der ist Christus.

Der Neue Israel.

Von dort kam Christus.

In English:

Everyone asks about the second coming of Christ.

What will it be ?

Will He be a man with a long beard?

No, the second is a man, one who will continue what Jesus started.

A man who opens the new world.

A man who is with the New Israel, this is the Christ.

The New Israel.

From there came Christ.

It is worth pointing out that this is also the fundamental message of other important documents, such as the “Two Stone Tablets” lesson from Borah Lin, which collapses Christology not just into eschatology but also into ecclesiology. This second Christ is the head and center of the renewed Church (i.e., David Jang’s community), which is also the Second Coming.

The first Messiah God sends.  God sent him.  That is Jesus.  He has come.  But his own people did not receive him.  They rejected him. He will come again.  Messiah will come again.  This is prophesized.  How will the second Messiah come?  We need to carve it out like the first one.  The second Messiah needs to be made on this earth… The Kingdom of God and the great body of Christ needs to be established and from their Christ will come out. . . Who is that one Christ?  The one who started this body of Christ, the one who becomes the center of that body of Christ, becomes the Christ.. . The body that makes the Kingdom of God is the body of Christ.  That becomes Christ.  That is why we need to make and establish it.

That we need to establish the Kingdom of God is pretty close to heretical, in and of itself. To say that in doing so, we somehow create a “second Messiah” is not pretty close to heresy. It’s heresy, straight up, no shaker. It’s not a pedantic debate over some obscure detail of timing, like those interminable pre- or post-trib debates that haunted my youth. No, this is as fundamental as it gets. In Christianity, there only gets to be one Christ, and that job is already taken.

David Jang and “The New Israel”

It’s been a while since I published anything about David Jang’s group. There are a variety of reasons for that, most clustering around the notion of having better things to do. I’ve already laid out enough evidence that anybody who looks at it fairly can hardly avoid the conclusion that the group has in the past taught doctrines that mainstream Christians would consider heretical. (And I use that term advisedly, not just meaning doctrines that I happen to disagree with, but doctrines that conflict with the basic, fundamental teachings of Christianity.)

The key issue, of course, is whether Jang’s community ever taught or encouraged members to believe that David Jang is a second Christ. In recent years, the group has repeatedly denied ever doing so. And as I’ve said before, I’ve heard from nearly a dozen former members who confirm that the group did in fact stop teaching this after 2006 or so (when it first became public in Asia and Africa and began to threaten Jang’s relations with the wider Christian world). But these same members also confirm - and I think it’s undeniable - that prior to 2006, these beliefs were in fact taught and encouraged by senior members of Jang’s community, repeatedly and consistently. And it is a serious problem that the group has refused to acknowledge this and repent.

I don’t want to rehash all the evidence I’ve already laid out that initially drove me to these conclusions. You can read my last major blog post on the group for more of that. But I do think it’s worth following up on a few points I made. After I wrote that post, something like half a dozen additional members of the group have reached out to me, most of those having joined prior to 2006, and everyone from that time has confirmed that this belief was common (though not universal) throughout the group.

One former member in particular has recently provided me with a great deal of information, documents, and even audio recordings of the group’s “history lessons”. Now, most of this information is not precisely new, and the majority of the documents he’s given me are variations on lessons that I already had, especially the “history lessons” that were given to new members. Because these lessons were given at different times, by different members, and in a variety of different languages, there are many versions of these history lessons floating around in members’ personal archives. There are of course divergences between these instances, but also undeniable, overarching similarities.

One of the more interesting examples of these lessons is entitled “New Israel”. Some five different sources have given me a variety of different “instances” of this lesson, and I’ve thrown deduplicated versions of those instances out onto a single shared Google Drive folder, so that folks can peruse them at their leisure. These files include 11 different English versions, two German versions (one with the original audio files), and English translations of separate Japanese and Chinese versions. To distinguish the various documents, I’ve chosen to identify them using a combination of the year the message was given, followed by a distinct letter, e.g., “2002a”, or “2005g”. Reading through them all is admittedly mind-numbing, but it should disabuse anybody of the notion that the teaching was limited in scope to just a few over-eager students in one or two places.

As I mentioned, despite the differences that you would expect, there are important, critical similarities. Every version I’ve found lays out some variation on the idea that there are in fact “three Israels”: (1) the original, historical Israel; (2) regular Christians; and (3) Jang’s community, the 144,000 of Revelation 7 and 14. This is a rather idiosyncratic - not to say alarming - ecclesiology, not least because several of the lessons explicitly state that this “third Israel” will be brought into being by (or will itself bring into being) a “second Christ”.

2005b describes the “third Israel” this way:

Because already the inheritance of the vineyard was passed over to the second Israel. All the blessing of God has already passed. So now the selection for the new era, this is being chosen from the second Israelites. This is the third Israel, New Israel. So they are the ones 144 000 and they will start New era.

2005d (delivered by “Pastor Deborah” in London, apparently to someone named “Xia”) also uses the language of the “3rd Israel”:

So then, there is this 3^rd Israel, among the many Christians in this world, he chooses and chooses.  This one group is being made, this is the hope of God.  Through them, god wants to make a new world.

2002d - notes from a sermon delivered by David Jang himself - doesn’t specifically use the language of a “third Israel”, but does make it clear that he endorsed this basic scheme:

1.ISRAEL----------------------------------2.NEW ISRAEL----------------------------------------3.NEW ISRAEL

Jacob = 12 tribes                  Jesus=12 disciples                                144 000 chosen people

However, in 2004d, David Jang does explicitly use the “third Israel” language, and says that it is this third Israel who will “make the kingdom of heaven”:

This is about Satan’s number 666, they say look at this well. And in Revelation 14, it increases to 144,000. Who are they? They are creative minority, and they will receive the eternal word. That is the third Israel . . . What is he looking for? The true olive tree. What is the symbolic of true olive tree? It is the third Israel, the people who will make the kingdom of heaven . . . I will even tell you the things that Apostle Paul did not talk about. But this is the form: first, second and third Israel.

2005e (a German translation from an English original that I don’t possess) describes the selection process this way:

Die Offenbarung spricht von der 3. Auswahl .

Von allen Christen Gott wählt Menschen, wofür ?

Für das HR. Die Menschen, die HR bilden.

Gott hat Israel gewählt und sie versagten, deswegen Christen sind da, aber Gott sagt, das ist nicht alles. Gott wird die Inneren auswählen und das ist das 3. Israel.

Or in my translation back to English:

Revelation speaks of the 3rd selection. Of all the Christians, what is it that God chooses people for? For the Kingdom of Heaven. It is people that build the Kingdom of Heaven. God chose Israel, and they failed; Christians came next, but God says that’s not all. God will select the Inside, and this is the 3rd Israel.

2005g describes the “Third Israel” this way:

The twelve disciples of Jesus were all Jews, right, but it is not that all of the Jews followed Him, but this remnant, with the centre of the remnant, the history of Second Israel is opened up. It is that these remnants became the foundation when the Second Israel was opened up. They became the foundation for the Christians, the Second Israelites are the Christians, even among them God is choosing the remnant, the 144,000 refers to the remnant. Even now there are as many Christians as the sand of the sea. God will choose the remnant, they become the foundation for the new history, there is a centre again, the history of the Third Israel starts, the name didn’t come out, we just say: “New Israel”. These remnants belong to New Israel. God will choose these people, when? At this important turning point, when we enter the era of fruits, at this important starting point God will choose this remnant and with them as the centre God will open up a new history.

The same document makes it equally clear that this “third Israel” is to be identified with Jang’s community.

These remnants, they received the eternal Gospel first. They received the glory of receiving the EG first. It is the new Word. God gives them the Word, the new Word, the EG. They are the ones who proclaim this. This is New Israel. What kind of hope should we have? Let’s be the new Israel. We have this hope. What kind of church is our church? Our church is kind of different. Our identity is different. What is the identity of our church? We are the new Israel. This is the identity we have.

This identity is closely connected to the fact that Jang’s community is destined to open a new era in the divine history. 2004a identifies an “important turning point”:

The 140000 is referring to the remnant. The Christians are so many like the sand by the sea. Among them God will choose the remnants. They will become foundation for new history, with them as the foundation, history of third Israel comes out.

3^rd Israel : New Israel

God will choose these people. When? At this important turning point. When we enter the era of fruit, at this turning point, at this time of beginning, at this starting point, God will choose these remnants, with them as the center, God will open up the new history. How good if we could be one of them.

2005c says that we are living at this “turning point” that will “open up the new era”:

So this place right now, in Revelation 7, is here. The 2000 years of the history of NT came, and among the Christians, he will choose again. And will open up the new era. This is the same type. So we are living at this turning point.

Similarly, 2004c says:

So right now 2000 years after the New Testament has passed by. So now we are in kind of new era.  So it is era when something is beginning again. So the history of God we can separate into 3 periods. There is Old Testament, New Testament and New Era. So where are we right now? We are standing in this New Era. And New Testament was 2000 years ago, and now it is even 2005. So already the New Era has started.

The speaker in 2004c (identified as “Pastor Deborah”) then asks where this new era will begin, and answers her own question with a creative exegesis of Revelation 7:1-4:

In v.2 it says that angel will come from the east, sun rise from the east, when you look in this world, where is it? Do you know where it is right? Far east Asia. In Korea sun rises very quickly, really early. And right now in Korea is already evening, it is 8 hours faster. Already it is evening. It is because it is in the far east, so angel appeared from there.

The reason that this can begin now is that the “Eternal Gospel” (see Rev. 14:6) has been revealed to Jang’s community, though not yet to the wider Christian world.

There was this pain in Jesus, he couldn’t say everything, many people doubted him and attacked him, and wanted to kill him, so he couldn’t  say everything, but now. So he promised this later time, I will come again and reveal everything, therefore, when the time will come, this is when the eternal gospel will be proclaimed and everything will be clear. So this day when everything becomes clear will come and this is the time.

Once the 144,000 have been gathered, they will become the “mold” in which the rest of the Christian world will eventually be remade.

We are making the form of the Kingdom of God that has been lost, we are making sample, in everything you need sample. When you have sample, you can follow. So making first is very hard.

So first it needs to be complete and than everything will go easily. So 144 000 they are making small Kingdom of God. It is like a mini-sample. For example going to this one city, they made it small, they made  a small sample of the whole city.

So there is this huge world, but this is the fallen world, so from here, we are really making the small world, small sample, 144 000 people gathered together. So following the word of God and making this small world.

2005j says something similar:

The second coming is the one who continues the dream of God and continues the Kingdom of God and brings the Kingdom of God, building the sample Kingdom of God. It is not like the second will come the same way of Jesus - Jesus already fulfilled His commission. The Kingdom of God means it's a community. It's a church. Ultimately the ones who become the sample, the Kingdom of God are the 144,000, the New Israel.

Even the term, Christ. That term Christ can't be termed until the Kingdom of God is established. Through the sample if the Kingdom of God, that term Messiah can come out.

That one person cannot do everything. It's that group of people that come together to establish the model of the Kingdom of God. This is the responsibility of the New Israel.

The connection between this renewed people of God and David Jang becomes clear in 2002b, which states that the “second Christ” will only (publicly?) acknowledge his identity after the group’s mission has succeeded and Christianity has been renewed:

This body has to rise up.  This Kingdom of God has to rise up.  This second coming of the great body of Christ has to stand up.  After that, we can call him the Christ.  After that, the term second coming of Christ can come out…

The stone tablets symbolize Christ.  The first Christ, God sent.  How about the second Christ?  We must make him.  On earth, he has to be made.  Then God will write on him.  God will then acknowledge him.  Make one and make the Kingdom of God.

In other words, the one who creates this new community, who inaugurates this new age in eschatology, will be acknowledged as a second Messiah. The Chinese lesson (2004b) similarly uses the language of a “second coming Christ” to identify this figure:

The first coming of the Lord and second coming Christ will be separated with the everlasting gospel. We should know the Time and Era. God spend six days for the creation. A thousand years is as one day and one is as a thousand years. Now is the year 2000. The second coming Christ will use “Everlasting Gospel” to open a new era. What the gospel are you listening now, a metaphor gospel or a clear explained gospel? Where are these sermon coming from?

2005i distinguishes between “Jesus” (who is not the subject of the second coming) and “Christ” (who is):

Wir sagen, dass Christus wieder kommt, nicht Jesus. Es heisst, dass Elias wieder gekommen ist. Aber nicht wirklich, sonderrn in Johannes dem Täufer kam er. Dieser hat die gleiche Aufgabe.

In English:

We say that Christ is coming again, not Jesus. It’s like when the Bible says that Elijah was to come back, even though it was really John the Baptist. This works the same way.

It then goes on to describe what “this angel, this Christ” will look like:

Wir sind schon in der neuen Zeit, aber es muss auch jemanden geben, der dieses Wort gibt, diesen Engel, diesen Christus. Der schon in der Kindheit in Gottes Wort gewachsen ist, immer nach Gott gefragt hat, immer mit Gott gelebt hat.

Die, die als erste das tiefe Wort bekommen, sind das Neue Israel. Jesus fand Seine Jünger, gab ihnen das Wort, versiegelte sie mit dem Wort und sandte sie aus, um das Wort zu predigen. Genauso war es mit unserer Gemeinde.

Es gab eine Frau, Pastor Borah, die wirklich Gott verstehen und für Gott arbeiten wollte. Sie wusste aber nicht wie. Dann hörte sie von einem Lehrer, der lehrt und wieder weiter zieht. Sie entschloss sich, diesen Menschen zu suchen und zu sehen, ob er ihre Fragen beantworten könnte. Sie fand Pastor David. Sie hatte so scharfe Fragen, aber PD konnte alle erklären. Dann weinte sie so sehr und sagte: dieses Wort müssen wir verbreiten, gründen wir etwas.

Pastor David und Pastor Borah verbreiteten das Wort. Die Mission verbreitete sich nicht nur in Asien, sondern nach 7 Jahren auch in Amerika und in Europa.

So hat alles angefangen.

In English:

We are already in the new era, but there must also be someone who gives this word, this angel, this Christ. He has spent his childhood in God's Word, has always asked God, has always lived with God.

Those who receive the first depth of the word are the New Israel. Jesus took His disciples, gave them the word, sealed them with the Word and sent them out to preach the word. It was the same with our community.

There was a woman, Pastor Borah, who truly understood God and wanted to work for God. But she did not know how. Then she heard of a teacher who taught and moved on again. She decided to look for these people and see if he could answer her questions. She found Pastor David. She had such sharp questions, but PD could explain everything. Then she cried so much and said: We must spread this word, we have found something.

Pastor David and Pastor Borah spread the word. The mission spread not only in Asia , but after 7 years in America and in Europe.

And that is how it all began.

I won’t draw any more general conclusions at this point, other than to note once again that none of this is particularly new. It’s basically just confirmation of the concerns that Ted Olsen and I raised in the two Christianity Today articles we wrote last year. But sometimes just having more evidence of what was already pretty convincing is worth noting.

[Edit 1/3/14 – Since posting this, I’ve received two more instances of the “New Israel” teaching. I’ve added a quote from one of them above, and updated the paragraph about how many of what sort I had.]

New York Times article on Olivet University and David Jang

Lately, Olivet University (the university associated with David Jang that managed to get an undue amount of my attention last year), has been expanding. IBTimes, their sister media organization, recently purchased the remains of Newsweek, and Olivet itself recently purchased the campus of a psychiatric hospital in the Town of Dover, New York.

Somehow, this managed to get the attention of the New York Times. For the most part, Joseph Berger’s article doesn’t break any ground, as it mostly just covers the existing controversy around David Jang. Tracy Davis’ denials may be new – I don’t recall any on-the-record quotes from her about Jang before – but in light of the extensive evidence that (at least before 2006) Jang’s lieutenants taught, and many new converts believed, that Jang was a messianic figure, I’ll confess that I have trouble taking her denials very seriously.

None of that would warrant me commenting on the New York Times article, were it not for the fact that the author managed to get one crucial detail quite wrong. Berger writes:

Although the school says it is part of the Presbyterian tradition, it is not affiliated with the mainstream denomination, the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., which has 1.8 million members and represents over 10,000 congregations.

Instead, Olivet is affiliated with the Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches of America, a smaller, more conservative group that broke off from the mainstream Presbyterians in the mid-1980s because of differences over issues like women’s ordination. Olivet leaders said the denomination had 70 congregations, though some have only a small number of members.

Berger is (perhaps understandably) confused here. The history that he ascribes to Jang’s denomination, the Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches of America, of breaking with the PC(USA) over the ordination of women, is in fact the history of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. Jang’s denomination was founded by Jang, back in 1992, and was never in any way affiliated with any other mainstream US Presbyterian denomination. At no time did they ever split away from the PC(USA), since they never had anything to do with them in the first place. That’s all a part of the history of the EPC, a real and honorable denomination whose Christian credentials are unquestioned, not the EAPCA, whose reality, honor and credentials are, well, somewhat less unquestioned.

That’s all. I just wanted to make sure that folks researching Jang don’t get confused by that bit of misinformation from the Grey Lady.

P. S. On a side note, I have no more issue with Olivet purchasing the campus of a defunct psychiatric hospital than I would have had with them purchasing the campus of Bethany University, my alma mater. This is a free country; they are quite welcome to do as they please. My issue with their purchase of Bethany was always their misleading (if not downright dishonest) assumption of Bethany’s identity, not with their attempt to purchase the physical grounds of the school. If they wish to purchase the grounds of a mental hospital instead of a Christian university, and if the good citizens of the area are well informed and wish to sell it to them, Olivet has my blessings; and I will do my best to refrain from any unwarranted comments on the appropriateness of the change in venue.

[Update 10/5/2013] – It looks as if the Times has update the article. The paragraphs in question now read:

Although the school says it is part of the Presbyterian tradition, it is not affiliated with the mainstream denomination, the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., which has 1.8 million members and represents over 10,000 congregations.

Instead, Olivet is affiliated with the Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches of America, a smaller, more conservative group. Olivet leaders said the denomination had 70 congregations, though some have only a small number of members.

Although I’m still not entirely sure how applicable the word “conservative” is to the EAPC (or the word “Presbyterian” for that matter), at least the confusion with the EPC has been removed.

Five myths about Jesus

Reza Aslan, the controversial New Testament scholar, err, Professor of Creative Writing, has been doing some fairly effective promotion of his recent book Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. One of the more effective promotion pieces has been an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, whose title and content seems purposely designed to increase the buzz: “Five Myths about Jesus”. With a title like that, I pretty much knew what to expect before I read it, and I wasn’t disappointed. I made a snarky post about it on Facebook, and one of my atheist/agnostic friends challenged me to write up a more extended interaction with his claims. This blog post is the result.

I ought to start by acknowledging that Aslan isn’t entirely off-base. As others have pointed out, Aslan isn’t really a New Testament scholar (nor am I), but there’s no doubt that he’s a better historian than certain other popularizers, like Dan Brown – meaning that most of what he has to say, even the most controversial bits, has in fact been defended by reputable scholars. (That’s not really the case with Brown, in case you were wondering; and trust me, you can find the strangest opinions defended by scholars whose reputation has somehow survived.) Beyond that, at least some of what he has to say in this brief op-ed is self-evidently true. But some of it was strange enough that it really called for rebuttal.

This is my take on his five points, ordered from self-evident to highly unlikely.

“Jesus had more than 12 disciples”

Umm, yeah. That’s pretty clear to any reader of the New Testament and is completely uncontroversial. I’m pretty sure I remember being taught this in my second grade Sunday School class. The Greek word for disciple is simply mathetes (μαθητης), which means “learner” or “student”. And lots of folks followed Jesus to learn from him, many in an official or semi-official capacity. Aslan correctly notes that “disciple” is normally distinguished from the term “apostle” (αποστολος), which means something more like “official ambassador”, and denotes a somewhat closer relationship. On a side note, it’s worth pointing out that the term seems to be used somewhat differently in different parts of the New Testament. In the Gospels and in Acts, “apostle” seems to refer strictly to a member of The Twelve. Paul, however, uses the term more broadly, apparently referring to anyone who had received a personal commission from Jesus, including himself in that category, of course, but also folks you’ve never heard of, like Andronicus and Junia.

“Jesus was not an only child”

My Catholic friends might disagree with me here, but this does in fact seem to be the natural reading of the New Testament, which repeatedly refers to Jesus’ siblings. That said, I can’t quite dismiss out of hand the Catholic belief that Mary had no other children. It’s at least possible that James, Joseph, Simon and Judas were step-brothers or cousins – the semantic range of the Greek word adelphos (αδελφος) is not identical with that of the English word “brother”.  And as more than one Catholic scholar has pointed out, it would be a little odd to have the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary become so quickly prominent (it was apparently taught by the middle of the 2nd century, and widely accepted by the fourth) if it was generally acknowledged in the first century that Jesus did in fact have biological brothers. Still, I remain suspicious, and I think the most natural reading of the evidence is that the marriage of Mary and Joseph was fruitful in every expected way.

“Jesus was not born in Bethlehem”

Just looking at it from a purely historical perspective, this one is a little tougher to decide, though I still end up on the other side of the issue from Aslan. He is entirely correct that the early church widely connected Jesus with Nazareth and to a much lesser degree with Bethlehem; he’s also correct that the earliest writers (such as Paul and Mark) don’t in fact connect Jesus with Bethlehem, while the two that do are somewhat later; and he’s equally correct that Micah 5:2 certainly played a role in the desire of Luke and Matthew to tell the story of Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem. (On a side note, I also think that the most likely explanation of the census described in Luke 2 is that Luke got mixed up. Jesus was born some 10 years earlier than the only census in Palestine around that time we know about. It’s not impossible that Luke is describing an otherwise unknown global census, using methods otherwise unknown, but I think the simpler explanation is that this is neither the first nor the last time an ancient historian got his dates wrong.) That said, there’s absolutely no extant tradition that places Jesus’ birth in Nazareth, and there are two (notoriously independent) accounts which place his birth in Bethlehem. It’s certainly plausible that Luke and Matthew independently made up (or relied upon fictional) stories which inaccurately placed Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem. But there are a lot more moving parts and hypotheses in an answer like that, and the simplest explanation of the available evidence seems to me that Jesus was in fact born in the City of David.

“Jesus was not buried in a tomb”

Aslan’s position on this seems highly doubtful to me. It may very well be true, as he claims, that the Romans usually left their crucified victims to rot on their crosses (though I’m not sure of the evidence for this). But it turns out that we actually don’t know know very much about Roman crucifixion practices, largely because the educated and enlightened historians who have told us most about Rome seemed to find the very mention of crucifixion distasteful, and have thus largely left it out of their accounts. But from the few mentions we have, and from the limited archaeological evidence, it’s clear that there were huge variations in how Romans dealt with crucified victims, and the one skeleton of a crucified Jew that archaeologists have found was indeed given a normal burial.

Beyond that, the Gospels indicate (what is already a historical probability) that in ordering the Roman soldiers to break the legs of the condemned, Pilate was doing his best to avoid giving undue offense to the Jews, who believed that allowing someone to remain hanging on a tree on a Sabbath and a holy day was offensive to God. This lends credibility to the idea that Pilate would not have insisted on Jesus’ hanging  on the cross until he rotted.

In addition, the story of the empty tomb goes back to the very earliest layers of oral and literary tradition, being found in all four gospel accounts, most notably Mark. There are, of course, enough variations in these accounts that it’s quite difficult to trace back exactly what happened that Sunday morning. (For instance, who precisely were the women that found the tomb empty?) Nevertheless, it’s difficult to claim that the empty tomb story is fictional through-and-through, as it’s not at all the sort of story that the early church would have invented. Among other things, the various gospel accounts, for all their differences, are each premised on the acknowledgement that nobody actually saw the Resurrection happen; and second, each of them admits that women – who generally weren’t allowed to give testimony in court – were the ones who found the empty tomb. This is not the story you’d make up out of whole cloth, but it’s exactly the sort of story you’d tell if you had no alternative, because everybody knew that’s what had happened.

“Jesus never had a trial before Pontius Pilate”

There’s no doubt that this is the weakest of Aslan’s five points.  In fact, I’ll confess that I neither understand his reasoning on this one, nor am I aware of any evidence for his purely historical claims, and consequently I hardly know where to begin. But I’ll start with the obvious. We have four largely independent accounts of a trial of Jesus before Pilate from the 1st century (five if you count 1 Timothy 6:13, eight if you add in the various passages from Acts, and even more if you want to move past the existing gospels and back to Q, L and M). Even Josephus’ description of Jesus’ death implies a significant degree of personal attention by Pilate to this matter. In fact, we have precisely zero literary or epigraphical evidence for any other scenario. This agreement of numerous independent sources raises the bar quite high for any claim that Jesus did not in fact have a trial before Pilate.

But even if the bar were much lower, Aslan’s arguments would fail to make it over the top.  Aslan’s primary argument is that:

In his 10 years as governor of Jerusalem, Pilate eagerly, and without trial, sent thousands to the cross, and the Jews lodged a complaint against him with the Roman emperor. Jews generally did not receive Roman trials, let alone Jews accused of rebellion. So the notion that Pilate would spend a moment of his time pondering the fate of yet another Jewish rabble-rouser, let alone grant him a personal audience, beggars the imagination.

But I simply don’t know what the evidence is for Aslan’s claim that Pilate “eagerly, and without trial, sent thousands to the cross”. Certainly both Josephus and Philo record that Pilate could be angry, vindictive and unjust; both record Pilate undertaking actions that virtually brought the Jews to revolt; and Josephus specifically records Pilate ordering two different massacres (and staying his hand at another). However, neither author was writing without biases of their own; and beyond that, so far as I can tell, nowhere in any ancient author does it say that Pilate had thousands of Jews put to death, let alone crucified or put to death without a trial. I’m willing to be corrected on this, but my tentative conclusion is that Aslan is simply making shit up. (If it turns out that I’m wrong on this, let me know, and I’ll update this paragraph – but the only real sources for Pilate’s career that we have are Philo and Josephus, and I’ve checked both. If Aslan is using their accounts as his basis for this paragraph, let’s just say that he’s making claims against Pilate that go significantly beyond what Pilate’s two harshest Jewish critics have to say.)

But even if Aslan has evidence for this that I’m not aware of – let’s say that there’s some other account of Pilate executing thousands of Jews after an insurrection that didn’t make it into the Antiquities – that’s entirely beside the point for how Pilate would act when confronted with one particular teacher whom the Jewish leadership desperately wanted dead. Remember, these are precisely the Jewish authorities with whom Pilate has had extremely frosty relations. I can’t imagine Pilate – during a crowded and emotional Passover in Jerusalem, of all things – simply allowing a popular Jewish rabbi to be put to death without asking that rabbi a few pointed questions. What if he could hold him hostage, and use his release as a stick (or his execution as a carrot) in some tricky upcoming negotiations with the high priest? What if this rabbi had brought a few thousand armed followers down from Galilee for the festival? Putting the wrong Jew to death at the wrong time, as Pilate discovered quite early in his career, could have sparked an all-out conflagration. Pilate would have to have been radically more shortsighted and foolish than the scheming politician painted by either the Gospels, Josephus or Philo not to simply want to know what the hell was going on in his province.

Other than my friend on Facebook, I can’t imagine anyone who would actually be interested in my opinion on Reza Aslan’s opinions about the historicity of the Gospel accounts of Jesus' life and death – but there you have it.

What Did David Jang Know?

As most readers of my blog know, over the last several months, I’ve been working with Ted Olsen from Christianity Today on a couple of articles about David Jang’s community, and more specifically, about the allegation that at least some members of that community have believed and taught that David Jang was a unique eschatological figure whom they called the “Second Coming Christ”.  (The Tennessean reported today that precisely these concerns have led the Southern Baptists to decline to sell their Glorieta Conference Center to Olivet University.)

As I and others have investigated this claim, I’ve come to the conclusion that the allegation that many of Jang’s followers taught this, in and of itself, is really beyond any serious dispute. To summarize the evidence for this: I’ve personally been in communication now with eight people who have told me that they themselves at one point believed that David Jang was a second Christ and confessed it to others; I’ve talked to one more who told me that she had been taught it, though she never believed it; and I’m in possession of one quite astonishing written statement of confession, from someone who seems to be a current member, which repeatedly and unambiguously identifies David Jang as “Christ”. And that’s not counting the numerous other accounts available on the Internet from other folks, nor the various notes from teaching sessions which don’t specifically identify David Jang as a second Christ, but do in fact say that such a figure was expected, and describe him in such a way that, really, it’s hard to imagine them intending to refer to anybody else besides David Jang.

As I’ve said elsewhere, the group does seem to have stopped teaching this to new members around 2006. At least, there are no public accounts of this from after 2006; nobody I’ve talked to who joined after 2006 was directly exposed to this teaching; and many of the folks who used to believe this themselves have told me that David Jang personally put a stop to its being taught around that time. Two sources have even told me that David Jang once told a group of committed members, “Those who say that I am Christ are insane.”

But there’s one big question which remains to be answered. Granted that David Jang put a stop to this, did he know about it in the first place? Was this something he knew or should have known was happening? Or was it just the result of a small number of well-intentioned but unauthorized followers, half a world away, whose youthful enthusiasm and theological naivete combined to create a heresy that David Jang put a stop to as soon as he became aware of it? (If it’s the latter, I think it would still be an issue that they haven’t been straightforward about what happened, but wanting to sweep old problems under the rug is not as worrisome as claiming to be the Second Coming Christ.)

Until recently, there hasn’t been a lot of evidence one way or the other. The strongest evidence that David Jang knew about it is that three sources have told me that it was common to send a written confession to him. But it’s possible that he never received these confessions (perhaps his inner circle intercepted them), or perhaps they were written in such a way that they didn’t necessarily make clear what it was that the writer was confessing. And I honestly don’t know how common this practice of sending your confession to David Jang actually was: my sources might be a very unrepresentative sample set.

But some new evidence has recently been made available. I’ve recently received a large set of documents from a source that I can’t identify but whose general reliability I have no reason to doubt. These documents contain the transcripts or notes from many hundreds of sermons and lessons delivered by David Jang and senior members of his community from 2002-2005. Because there are thousands of pages of material (and maybe a third of it seems to be in Chinese), I’ll confess that I haven’t read through all of it, and furthermore, that I’m unlikely to do so. It’s just too much. But by searching on specific keywords, I’ve been able to locate a subset of documents which seem interesting. I’ve placed that subset of documents here, if anybody wants to review them independently. And these are my initial observations.

First, I need to say that most of what’s in the sermons or lessons is pretty orthodox. It’s clear that they were delivered to a community of intensely dedicated members, dedicated enough that it would probably put them a couple standard deviations out on any reasonable scale of intensity. But most of them talk about soteriology in a reasonably orthodox way, and none of them so far as I’ve been able to find talk about the cross as a “failure” (one of the accusations from China). On the contrary, you repeatedly find David Jang making statements like this (from a sermon on Romans on April 23, 2003):

In this love of the cross, the holy love of God was revealed. By that grace, we were justified. Even in the era of Abraham is was like that and even for David. Look at this exchange, there is no exchange like this. This is so foolish. This is something that cannot be imagined about this kind of exchange. The Lord took all our sins and clothed us with the clothes of righteousness. The Lord took the debt. He took the debt and he overcame the death.

Or this sermon, from February 22, 2004:

What is it that apostle Paul tried to testify? What is it that he tried to witness? It is that the cross of Christ was not a failure. It was the sacrifice for us. This is what he tried to emphasize. He is trying to emphasize that the cross was true love for us.

Second, these documents don’t have what I would call a “smoking gun”. So far as I’ve been able to find, these documents never say anywhere, “David Jang is the Christ”. (I have seen one document from this same time period which does make exactly that claim, and repeatedly, but I’m not at liberty to quote from it directly.) Nor does David Jang ever make an unambiguous claim along those lines. But these new documents do establish a theological context in which such a claim would be plausible - more on that later.

Third, these documents provide substantial confirmation of the notes and accounts that CT had received from other sources. Ma Li, for instance, made public three sets of notes that she had written down while she was being given the eschatology lessons. The content of the first lesson, entitled “New Israel”, bears strong similarities to the content of a sermon delivered by Borah Lin on July 20, 2002 at Sophia Church in Berkeley also entitled “New Israel”. The content of the second lesson from Ma Li, “Time and Era”, bears strong similarities to another sermon delivered by Borah Lin on July 14, 2002 at Pilgrim Church in LA, and again a week later at Sophia Church in Berkeley, entitled “Time and Date”. The content of the third lesson, entitled simply “Eschatology”, is quite similar to another lesson ascribed to Borah Lin, entitled “Theory of the End”, also delivered on July 14, 2002.

For instance, this is a quote from the “Time and Era” notes from Ma Li:

For example: if we want to make the cap of pen, the first thing we will do is to make a mold and a template.Later, we can pour the plastic into the mold to produce the cap of the pen. Once the mold is made, The time consumed for the production will be very short. The key point is that making the mold need a long time.These are the most valuable time. We could make this mold and lives by loving each other, to establish initial society that belong to the Kingdom of the heaven. Once we succeed, other society follow it will be easy. Satan wants to prevent us to make this Mold.Once it succeed we could say The kingdom of the Heaven achieved. Restore his kingdom of heaven on earth, we don’t need a lot of people to establish the mold of the Kingdom, only need 144000 people.

And this is a quote from the “Time and Date” sermon by Borah Lin:

It is like this. There is this mold that we must make. Making that makes the longest time. It is the most expensive. After the mold has been made, then you just pour the plastic in. It doesn’t even take a second and it comes out cheap. Making the first one comes out and is the most difficult.

That is why making the first sample of heaven takes the longest time and is the most difficult. When this is made, others just see and follow. Other communities just see and follow. Then it is just a matter of time. That is why making this is the most important thing.

What happens to the ones who make this? It is not wrong to say that these people created heaven on earth. When you say this, it is correct. That is how important it is to make something so important. This is paving the first path. This is possible only by faith...
Sometimes you ask, “Pastor, how can you change the whole world? When will the Kingdom of Heaven come? There are 6 billion, when can you change everyone?” What you need to do is make the 144,000. Don’t worry about the whole thing, but just the sample. When we make this, the history has gained victory. When we make this, then God can truly judge Satan.

(And for what it’s worth, another source, in attempting to explain to me how the community understood itself, fell back on the same image: “The 144,000 recorded in Revelations are the firstfruits (Rev 14:4). They form the mold of the body of Christ - meaning that they are the first ones to really come together as his body... Now, where is David Jang supposed to fit in? According to what's implied in the teachings, he is - in short - the head of this body.”)

There’s obviously a dependence of some sort between the passages - but at the same time, neither one is simply a translation of the other.

Without going into the same detail, suffice to say that there are similar detailed correspondences between various sermons from Borah Lin and the so-called “K-Notes” taken down by Munenori Kitamura between 2002 and 2004.

The most plausible explanation of these correspondences is that they represent a common teaching in the group. Numerous sources have said that they were expected to listen to sermons by Borah Lin and David Jang, and then use that same content in their own Bible studies with newer members. It seems highly likely to me that the notes from both Ma Li and Munenori Kitamura come from those regurgitated lessons: these are probably the originals from which the other notes were derived.

Fourth, these new lessons provide significant confirmation that Borah Lin, one of the key leaders in Jang’s community, taught a doctrine of a second Christ, a new and distinct eschatological figure who is expected to emerge from their community. For instance, the “New Israel” lesson has this header:

July 20, 2002 - Word of God Delivered at Sophia Church in Berkeley
* Delivered by: Pastor Borah
* Translated by: Ji Sun Chang
* Mini-Retreat Lecture

In this lesson, Borah says,

The stone tablets symbolize Christ. The first Christ, God sent. How about the second Christ? We must make him. On earth, he has to be made. Then God will write on him. God will then acknowledge him. Make one and make the Kingdom of God. The one who makes this is the second coming of Christ. The ones who makes the Kingdom of God has to make it and go to God. The great body of Christ needs to be made.

Another lesson from the same day, entitled “Time and Date”, has the following header:

July 20, 2002 - Word of God Delivered at Sophia Church in Berkeley
* Delivered by: Pastor Borah
* Translated by: Ji Sun Chang
* Mini Retreat Lecture

In this lesson, Borah makes a repeated distinction between the “Gospel of Parables” brought by Jesus and an “Eternal Gospel” to be brought by some other figure identified only as the “Second Coming”.

That is why the gospel of the New Testament is the gospel of parables. The Eternal Gospel is where the gospel is interpreted (解析). There is no longer any need to use parables …

If you look here, who brings the gospel? It is Jesus right? Jesus came and gave us the gospel. He opened the era of the gospel. That era opened up and it has been 2000 years since then. For 2000 years, the gospel was proclaimed. He opened this.

Who brings the Eternal Gospel? The one who proclaims the Eternal Gospel is the second coming. He comes and opens up the Word. The Lord comes and what does he have? He has the Word. The Word is needed for the new world to open up. The Word of the fruit is needed for the era of fruit to open up.

The important time that we are waiting for is this time. It is not that the Lord comes way at the end. However, he comes at that turning point and opens up a new era. When he proclaims the Word that Word expands.

Similarly, another document entitled “Two Stone Tablets”, with a file date of June 22, 2004, has the following header:

Two Stone Tablets
*Delivered by: Pastor Borah
*Translated by: Ji Sun Chang
*Tape

In this message, Borah repeatedly distinguishes between the first set of stone tablets in Exodus, which God carved, and the second set, which was carved by Moses. She then goes on to apply this same pattern to the Christ:

The history of the second coming goes with the same pattern. The first Messiah God sends. God sent him. That is Jesus. He has come. But his own people did not receive him. They rejected him.

He will come again. Messiah will come again. This is prophesized. How will the second Messiah come? We need to carve it out like the first one. The second Messiah needs to be made on this earth.

What does this mean? Make what? We need to make the Kingdom of God and go. The Kingdom of God has to be made and then He will accept and say he is Messiah. Messiah doesn’t come first. First, the Kingdom of God has to be made. The one who establishes this is Messiah …

The Kingdom of God and the great body of Christ needs to be established and from their Christ will come out.

Let us say that the body of Christ was established and made like this. What is this? This is the second coming of Christ. How does the second coming happen? As the Kingdom of God is established like this, the second coming will be established.

But then you could ask that Jesus said he would come. Who is that one Christ? The one who started this body of Christ, the one who becomes the center of that body of Christ, becomes the Christ...

Do you understand? We are making the Kingdom of God. We are going on dreaming for that day. We are going on dreaming for the day for Christ to be revealed on this earth. This is the second coming. This is the history of the second coming. We are able to see here that with these two stone tablets, with this secret, how the second coming will be revealed. The one who establishes and makes the Kingdom of God becomes Christ.

Another lesson has the following header:

July 20, 2002 - Between Already and Not Yet
* Delivered by: Pastor Borah
* Translated by: Ji Sun Chang
* Mini Retreat Lecture

In this message, Borah repeats her assertion that it is up to the community to establish the Kingdom of God:

We need to establish the kingdom of God. That is the hope of God. Who is going to make that? Can Messiah make it alone? That is not how it goes. If he could make it all by Himself, then He would have already made if by Himself. He would have made it long ago. But isn’t the problem us? Aren’t we the problem?

In an interpretation of Rev. 12:5, Borah says,

The woman has a son. They go together. If our church is the church of the son, then our church will give birth to the son. If our church is the church of Christ, then we will give birth to Christ.

She then goes on to describe in an ambiguous manner what the appearance of this Christ might be like. An individual community might recognize that Christ, she says, even though the nations have not yet recognized him.

Peter has already met him, but it is not like the whole community recognizes Jesus as Christ. For some people, he is a prophet. For others, they think he is like Elijah. However, for the individual, Christ has already come. Christ for the whole community has not come yet. The Christ of the community is not revealed yet.

Let us say that this whole, great community recognizes that he is Christ. They realize it. That means the Christ of the community has come. Already, they recognize that he has come.

But the Christ of the nation has not come yet. For the whole nation of the Jews, Christ has not come yet. They are waiting for that Christ. He has not come yet. We are supposed to sing the praise of hope and waiting. Nothing has come for the nation and the Christ of the world has not come yet. We are supposed to praise for this together.

To the extent that this second passage refers only to Jesus of Nazareth, if it’s actually and only using the “historical present”, and if “the community” refers to all Christians, then this could be nothing more than basic orthodoxy. It could merely be saying that Christians recognize Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, though others do not. But in context, especially given everything else Borah Lin has said on the topic, it seems quite plausible that it is also intended to refer to a different Christ as well, one who has so far been recognized only by “the community”, but who will eventually be recognized by the whole world.

Fifth, there’s some evidence in the documents that David Jang knew and approved of these teachings, though it’s not unambiguous.

For instance, one message bears this header:

Title: Love covers over a multitude of sins
Scripture: 1 Peter 4:7-8
Date: August 20, 2003
Location: Antioch Church, Seoul
Occasion: Wednesday Service
Preacher: Rev. David
Translator: Ji Sun Chang gsn
Typist: Walker Tzeng

(I should note that I have been told that Walker Tzeng denies having been the author or source of this document, or any other document I refer to that bears his name – more on that below.)

In this document, David Jang says that he specifically prepared messages on eschatology for the community:

When we teach eschatology, we have to teach time and date. We must know what kind of history we are in and what process the history goes through.

Actually, I am going to tell you this. I prepared eschatology one by one so that I could teach you during the summer vacation. During the winter vacation, I was going to study the last prophecies of the Bible as well.

It seems likely that the messages David Jang prepared in 2003 weren’t the same messages that Borah Lin delivered (since Borah had delivered her the previous summer, in 2002), but the fact that he references the specific phrase “time and date” (one of the titles of Borah’s lessons) would suggest some sort of connection.

Another message bears this header:

Title: At the present time, there is a remnant chosen by grace
Scripture: Romans 9:6, 11:4
Date: August 24, 2003
Location: Antioch Church, Seoul
Occasion: Sunday Service
Preacher: Rev. David Jang
Translator: Ji Sun Chang gsn
Typist: Walker Tzeng

In this sermon, David Jang appears to refer to the titles of two of the eschatology lessons delivered by Borah Lin:

What is the letter and the spirit? It is you who will open up the new world of history. Don’t be confined in the letters. It is like the words of Socrates. Don’t focus on water and fire. Focus on what is going on in the spirit of mankind. We have studied these things - Time and Date, New Israel. It is the conclusion of New Israel.

In other words, he seems to indicate that he was aware not just of the existence of the lessons “Time and Date” and “New Israel”, but of their actual content.

At another point in this same sermon, David Jang says,

What is essence of the theory of representatives? It is that there is fear. First of all, I am the one representing the history of mankind. I am the one representing this era. The others are all sleeping because they don’t know the time. But there is someone who wakes up.

Taken by itself, this sounds rather like a very strong claim: “I am the one representing the history of mankind.” It’s possible, though, that he’s speaking generically, using something like the “sports subjunctive”. If this is the case, then he would mean something like, “To be a representative, like all of you are, means to know that you are representing the history of mankind.” And given the various weirdnesses that can creep in during translation, we need to allow for that possibility, even though, to my ear, it doesn’t seem like the most natural reading of the text.

It’s possible that a similar construction may be at work in another sermon, with this heading:

Title: Lift up your eyes and look about you all assemble and come to you
Scripture: Isaiah 60:1-5
Date: October 26, 2003
Location: Sophia Church, Tokyo
Occasion: Sunday Service
Preacher: Rev. David Jang
Translator: Ji Sun Chang gsn
Typist: Walker Tzeng

In this sermon, David Jang proposes to switch subjects from “existence” to “history”:

Today, rather than the issue of our existence, we will meditate deeply on the history. Where are we heading towards? We must know this. I am the one in the history. We always learn about this. That is how we are different.

Again, it’s possible that what he means is not literally, “I am the one in history,” but rather something like, “Each of us realizes individually, ‘I am currently making history.’” Still, that doesn’t seem the most natural way to read it. (I would very much like to find and have someone explain the original Korean for me.)

[Edit 11/22/2012 – A source in a position to know tells me that in both of these instances, he feels that David Jang almost certainly was not making claims about himself, but in saying things like “I am the one in history” was simply putting himself in the position of his hearers. In this case, I’m willing to give David Jang the benefit of the doubt, so I’ve crossed out the two paragraphs above.]

That said, this sermon from David Jang echoes many of the themes of Borah’s sermons, especially the idea that Jang’s community was to play a key role in eschatology. At one point, he describes a gathering that happened in the year 2000, referencing 1992, the year his community was founded, and the year David Jang completed his 42nd year on earth:

At that gathering, we gathered 120 people. The ring of Apostolos I gave them out one by one. This is the story of 3 years ago. I said, “You are the workers that will establish the Kingdom of God.”

We are alive. Isn’t that amazing? In 1992, the time of history had come. The time had come. When everyone was asleep, the time of history came. It was a year the same as other years.

What is so great about it? It was very serious. The matter was very serious. Why? The new millennium is coming. The change and turning point of the 2000 is here. Is this meaningless? What kind of meaning does it have? For the people being buried in the common daily life, what kind of meaning does it have for them? They were just repeating.

But to the ones knowing history, we have come to this point of history where we are at the last of the 7 years of disorder. We were finishing up the 1000 years. We are going on the new 7th year.

A lesson called the “Genealogy of Christ”, which is found both in Munenori Kitamura’s notes and in these newly available documents, contains an idiosyncratic interpretation of Daniel 12. In brief, this interpretation says that 1260 days of Daniel’s prophecy had been fulfilled before Jesus’ life on earth. His 33 years on earth brought the prophecy up to 1293 days, leaving 42 years to be completed before the full 1335 years could be fulfilled. The “Genealogy of Christ” lesson as contained in these documents says specifically:

What was JS supposed to accomplished? He was supposed to accomplish 1260, 1290 and 1335. all this prophesies in numbers were supposed to be accomplished.

We must know about the second coming Jesus. The 2nd coming son in the continuation of Christ. it is like running a relay.

We first need to know how far the first runner went up to. The second one continues from the point and finishes the race. We need to know how far Jesus went.

If Jesus finished his running, the second son does not need to come. However, he will come to finish what Jesus did not accomplish...

Jesus completed 1293 days; the history of the second Christ is from 1293.

1335 – 1293 = 42 accomplishing 42 days.

History of Advent will not stand from beginning.

David Jang appears to allude to this lesson and interpretation in his sermon from October 26, 2003. He doesn’t specifically reference the bit about the “second Christ”, but it’s clear he knows the general schema into which that figure fits when he says,

In Daniel 12, it talks about the one who leads many to righteousness will shine like the stars. Then there is the time times and half a times. After that is the 1260 and 1290 days. Beyond the public life that the Lord fulfilled, we are continuing on with the rest of history. It is the 1335. This is very important in the history of God. History must go and be opened.

In addition, another set of notes bears this heading:

MATTHEW 21:33-43 "PARABLE OF THE TENANTS" - "THEORY OF ELECTION"

(Bible study - 28.12.2002 - Pastor David - Korea)

The sermon takes the 144,000 of Revelation as its departure, and it contains this text-based schematic breakdown of the community’s history, presumably taken from something that David Jang wrote down on a whiteboard:

lll

30.10.92-------93-------94-------95-------96-------97-------98-------99-------lll2000-------01-------02-------03-------04-------05-------<06>

Beginning l-----------l---------l----------l---------l----------l----------l lll l-----------l----------l----------l----------l----------l-----------l

l 7 years 7 years

l

July-mission to China

(after 3 1/2 year)

It’s a little difficult to make out some of the details in this ASCII-art style diagram, but it’s quite clear that he’s breaking down the community’s history so far into 7-year segments, beginning with his 43rd birthday, October 30, 1992. This sermon also makes it clear that David Jang is familiar with the highly idiosyncratic eschatological schemes that also make their appearances in Borah Lin’s sermons, including a strongly implied identification of the 144,000 with his community, and the same odd interpretation of the “full grain, the head and the stalk” from Mark 4:28 as referring to the 42 year history of his community. Indeed, since this sermon predates the sermons by Borah Lin that I quoted above, it’s not unrealistic to assume that David Jang was the source from which she derived her ideas.

Another set of notes from the same folder bears this heading:

MATTHEW 24 THEORY OF THE END (Wednesday service - 1.1.2003 - Pastor David - Korea)

It contains many similarities to other sermons ascribed to Borah Lin, including the reiterated teaching that the “Second Coming” is largely or perhaps even entirely symbolic:

People thought that the Earth is flat.

heaven

----------------earth---------------

hell

According this people thought that Jesus can come from the sky riding on the clouds and everyone can see him because the earth is flat. So from anywhere can see him. But now we know that the earth is not flat, but round. So it is not possible for all people to see Jesus, if he is coming from the sky. Riding on the clouds has again symbolical meaning. Whole gospel is parables.

…

Clouds- symbolical meaning. If we are not sensitive to this, it is difficult to understand. So it is not riding on the clouds? So how? Even Elijah was riding on the chariot of the fire. Lord is among us, withing us.

"Why do you look at the sky?"

Lord is within you. He was resurrected and there is comission for us. As he was taken to heaven, he will come back in the same way. He was not confined, but resurrected by the love of God.

He is coming on the same way like going to heaven. Elijah - riding on the chariot of fire, but it doesn't happen really physically....

…

Why churches don't want to talk about the end times? We have to talk about it, because it is hope for the future. Jesus covered up this great prophecy. One who knows the history, this one wil lead. Someone can say, we are cult, because our interpretation is different from theirs. Than we have to ask them. I Jesus going to come again? Second coming - this word is not used in the Bible, we should not use this term.

In Matthew there is no word like second coming.

The doctrine of the community having a destiny which will last for “42 years” has been asserted by multiple sources. It also shows up repeatedly throughout sermons from both David Jang and Borah Lin - far too many to repeat here. But a couple examples will suffice. One message has the following heading:

Title: The holy temple
Scripture: Ephesians 2:20-22
Date: October 31, 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Occasion: Morning Service
Preacher: Pastor Borah
Translator: Ji Sun Chang gsn
Typist: Walker Tzeng

In the message, Borah says:

When we look at history in the big picture, it is time, times, and half a times. It is 42. We are going 14, 14, and 14. In that way, we are grateful he has called us in our youth. No matter how great the person is, if he can’t match the time and place, it is useless.

At this time we have been born and we have been called. Because He has called us, we are here at this place. He called us at this precious time and we are grateful for this. We are going the 42 years. If you break it apart it is 14, 14, 14 years. We have come 11 years.

Another message has the following header:

Title: The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed
Scripture: Romans 13:11-14
Date: October 8, 2003
Location: Sophia Church, Japan
Occasion: Wednesday Service
Preacher: Rev. David Jang
Translator: Ji Sun Chang gsn
Typist: Walker Tzeng

In this message, David Jang says,

Why is it 1992? On October 30, we are going to have a gathering here. We decided to gather in Japan. Why 1992? Just as I said before, the world keeps talking about it first. This is the tragic history where the surroundings wake up the center. The world talks about it first. The world talks about the sleeping souls first.

In 1992, Korea was like that. The world tried to wake up the people. They told everyone to wake up because they will rapture. People who didn’t live in that era don’t know. Really, this happened and that happened.

It is the historical fact of 42. Why is it 42? Pastor lived 21 and 21. When I went past 42, it was very serious. Now is a time for change and conversion. I lived being drunk. When I was 30, it was very serious. When I turned 42 and 43, the great newness has come to me. That is the time when it started. That was the time to start so we started.

Taken by itself, the idea that the community has a special commission which began when David Jang had finished 42 years on the earth, and which will last for another 42 years, is odd, but it’s not necessarily heterodox. The Church has traditionally and wisely refrained from defining specific eschatological schemes as either orthodox or heretical. However, if you read these constant references in light of the Daniel 12 interpretation - namely, that the 42 years are a specific fulfillment of Jesus’ unfulfilled mission - they appear to be making not just eschatological assertions, but also specific claims about Christology. And in that light, they become a little more worrisome.

Sixth, these documents provide additional evidence that Jang’s community responded affirmatively to the invitation to see themselves and their leader as key players in salvation history. One document, entitled “Darker than Wine and Whiter than Milk,” with a file date of February 3, 2004, was apparently intended as an internal news report for the community, perhaps to be published on the community’s internal website. It provides a summary of a sermon given by David Jang, and opens with these words:

God gave a very beautiful and precious present to Reverend David and our community today: Olivet, the central organization of all our ministries where Reverend David prays and guides the whole world just as Jesus did in his time.

I can’t quite imagine the BGEA describing Billy Graham this way.

Another document contains a transcript of a conversation that David Jang had with some members after he arrived at the LA airport on July 7, 2004. The transcript is given this introduction:

As exhausted as e must have been due to jet lag and the fierce spiritual battle he had faced in Korea, He still greeted all the members warmly with a bright smile on his face. We were able to see clearly the image of absolute devotion and commitment to the dream of God with absolute love. During His short stay, He poured His heart our without hindrance and gave the members of LA and SD much comfort, joy, and wisdom. We hope to bring him much comfort and joy during his stay in America also. Here in these notes, such precious moments may be re-lived in our hearts.

Read that paragraph again, and pay attention to the capitalized pronouns. Throughout the document, about 2/3 of the pronouns which refer to David Jang receive the honor of capitalization that is normally reserved for God; none of the pronouns which refer to anybody else are treated that way.

Seventh, and finally, I can’t come up with any reasonable explanation for these documents than that they are genuine. Although they were delivered to me from one former member, they came from several different archives, and were given to my source at different times and by different individuals. The file dates roughly correspond to the dates on the headers, but not in any mechanical way. There’s a lot of duplication of documents between the different archives. Sometimes there are different notes, clearly from two different sources, of the same sermon on the same date. Sometimes there are rough notes and edited notes of the same lesson. They are in different formats: some are straight .txt files, others are are in .rtf, most are in .doc. The document properties for the .doc files show a variety of different authors. And perhaps most tellingly, there are lots of them. I’ve counted up nearly 2000 separate files, and some over 1100 distinct file names; and the documents are typically between 3-10 pages each. If somebody faked this whole dump, they were not only very, very good - they spent years doing so. I could imagine a government engaging in this sort of disinformation campaign; I can’t imagine even a very motivated set of individuals would have the necessary resources and patience.

I should note that I forwarded an earlier draft of this blog post, along with the supporting documents, to representatives of Olivet University for comment. The most important part of their response was a claim that the key sermons, supposedly originating from Borah Lin, were probably fraudulent (though they acknowledged that the rest of the documents were quite possibly genuine). They brought forward three pieces of evidence for this:

1. Borah Lin was in NYC rather than Berkeley when the sermons were given.
2. Walker Tzeng (the supposed transcriber) was in Seattle when Borah Lin’s sermons were given, not in Berkeley or LA.
3. Walker Tzeng denied being the documents’ author.

My thoughts: (1) If it could be shown that Borah Lin was in NYC on the very dates of those sermons (not just “living in NYC around that time”), that would indeed be significant (though perhaps not conclusive) evidence against at least that particular version of those sermons. So far, other than a simple assertion, I haven’t seen that evidence; beyond that, quite similar sermons, also ascribed to Borah Lin, exist in other documents as well. (2) My understanding is that the documents were actually transcribed from recorded audio. So the simple fact of Walker Tzeng being in Seattle rather than Berkeley doesn’t prove much. (3) The fact that Walker Tzeng denies having anything to do with those documents should in fact count as evidence against their authenticity.

But we also need to weigh that evidence against other evidence – very strong, in my opinion – in favor of those documents’ authenticity. For starters, the documents were not delivered to me in a vacuum: they were part of much larger set of archives, and the documents in question were not differentiated in those archives in any interesting fashion from the hundreds of others. For instance, the document that is probably the most interesting, the "New Israel" sermon ascribed to Borah Lin, shows up in two different archives, with different file names and directory locations in both archives; and it shares this characteristic with many other documents, some interesting, most not. The “New Israel” sermon also repeats (with just the sort of differences that you would expect) much of what shows up elsewhere in the “New Israel” notes from both Ma Li and Munenori Kitamura. It also contains many similarities to another sermon ascribed to Borah Lin, also entitled “New Israel”, which I found in a different archive. Many of the controversial eschatology sermons ascribed to Borah Lin (such as the “Time and Date” and “Eschatology” lessons) also show up in Chinese versions. On top of this, several former members - not the source of these documents - had previously told me that Borah Lin gave lessons by those names, and their explanation of her sermons matches well with the content of the documents.

And finally, if some unknown conspirator was going to falsify these documents, to provide false evidence against Jang or his community, I can’t figure out why they would make the documents so allusive and slippery. If you’re going to fake documents, wouldn’t you make them far more pointed, and skip all the studied ambiguity? For instance, instead of having Borah Lin make these statements, just go ahead and put them in David Jang’s own mouth; instead of using specific phrases like “the second Christ” just two or three times, use them all over the place; and make it quite plain who “the second Christ” was supposed to be. But the documents don’t do that. In other words, their general ambiguity actually provides a strong argument for their genuineness.

Conclusion

In sum, I think the documents provide pretty convincing evidence that teachings which would make most mainstream Christians uncomfortable - for instance, that Jang’s community was intended to play a unique role in the establishment of the Kingdom of God - were taught at the highest levels. In addition, two documents directly tie Borah Lin to the teaching of a “second Christ” or “second Messiah”, and several more bearing her name point strongly to that doctrine. Beyond that, there’s some evidence that David Jang knew about these teachings, as he refers to the controversial lessons by name and talks about their content.

In other words, at this point, we have multiple documentary sources and multiple first-person testimonies for the assertion that highly questionable doctrines were taught in China, in Japan, in Singapore, in LA, in San Francisco, in Houston, in New York, and in Africa, and by multiple leaders of David Jang’s community. It appears beyond much question that these doctrines can be traced back to Borah Lin; and I think it’s getting more difficult to defend the thesis that David Jang knew nothing about them.

As David Jang said in another sermon, on October 8, 2003:

You understand the present time. This touched my heart. Reading Romans, this really touched my heart. You understand the present time.

In the back is someone saying, “Huh? I don’t understand. When did you tell us the time and date?” We don’t have that kind of atmosphere. We have the atmosphere where everybody knows. It is that kind of atmosphere.

When we speak of time and date, we all know. If there is anyone that says, “What?” then that is not a member.

[Edit 2012-11-07: I’ve added another couple paragraphs above that briefly analyze the notes from two sermons from David Jang, one from December 28, 2002, and another from January 1, 2003. These documents were included in the original dump, but I had not previously noticed them. They’re important, because they confirm David Jang’s detailed acquaintance with the rather unorthodox eschatological schemes contained in Borah Lin’s sermons, and indeed, strongly imply that he was their source. I’ve also added the documents to the “Interesting” folder I linked to above.]

[Edit 2012-11-22: I crossed out a couple of paragraphs after a source in a position to know told me that the quotes from David Jang that they analyzed were almost certainly innocent.]