Monthly Archives: July 2017

The imperial toilet


In the final phase of the Weimar Republic the minister of foreign affairs had a fully equipped telegraph office installed in one of the toilets in the palace that at one time had been used by the German emperors as their residence. From this toilet the minister sent his messages to all important government leaders in Europe. However, nobody had told him that the cables had long ago been cut, and that, therefore, his messages did not go beyond the walls of the toilet.

I read this story in a beautiful book that I received as a Christmas gift a few years ago: Ett Annat Liv, written by the famous Swedish author Olov Enquist. Several of his books have also been translated into Dutch. But my knowledge of Swedish is good enough to read the original Swedish edition. Olov Enquist’s mention of the imperial toilet was just a side remark, but it was a striking comment on how useless communication attempts may be.

I have searched the Internet for more details of this story. There is plenty of information about the Weimar Republic and how it came to an end when Hitler ascended to power. But I was unable to find a more detailed version of this story about the imperial toilet. I assume it is historical, but even if it is not, it still is a marvelous illustration. We might even, with a biblical term, call it a ‘parable.’ For, unfortunately, a lot of communication finds its origin in a telegraph office in an imperial toilet, but, in spite of impressive technology, the message does not arrive anywhere.

Perhaps it is a bit risky to compare the church with an imperial toilet, but, I believe, in a parable that would be permissible. I cannot escape the impression that, in spite of impressive technology, a lot of our church communication does not reach the people for whom it is intended–even though the senders are firmly convinced that they are reaching the world around them very effectively.

Not long ago someone handed me a flyer (illustrated with colorful pictures of a few hideous monsters) in which a ‘SDA Bible Study Group’ announced a series of meetings about the judgment that is coming upon the world, about Babylon that is ‘fallen’, and the role of the USA in biblical prophecy. When I saw the flyer my thoughts went to the story of the telegraph office in the imperial toilet. Similar thoughts tend to emerge when I see all kinds of booklets and magazines that are published in the periphery of the church. The people behind these publications want to send a ‘clear’ message. Their products are often made and distributed with the best of intentions. But, I would like to tell them, dear people: the cables that carry this type of communication have long since been cut. You may be reaching a few people around you who have their ear to the door of the toilet, in an attempt to catch something of what you are saying–but that is it.

However, this does not mean that the official church is so much more succesful. Communication with the secular people of our time, who often no longer have any idea of a personal God and have no inkling of what the Bible says, presents an enormous dilemma. The solution is not just to arrange for a telegraph office with all the advanced technology money can buy. The most important thing is that we have something to say that touches upon the interests and emotions of the people we want to reach. And, then, it must be worded and packaged in such a way that it will ‘arrive’ and will be understood. We will not achieve anything when we use communication methods that, like the cables in the Weimar toilet, are no longer functional. We will constantly have to search for new ways to ensure that the message actually reaches our target audience.

It seems a hopeless situation that is doomed to fail.  True enough, as long it remains just our human endeavor.

Human endeavors remain a condition for success. God wants to inspire people to translate and transmit his message as best as they can. In every age. But the miracle that the message does actually reach its destination will only happen when our hard work and God-given creativity receives wings through the power of the Spirit.

(This blog was published earlier on Janury 4, 2009).


Church and state


A few days ago some interesting pictures emerged of a group of evangelical leaders in the White House, who prayed with and for President Trump, with their hands laid upon him. I find it strange that this would take place in the official work environment of the US president, and I find it even stranger that, apparently, lots of evangelicals are positive about this. Although the president’s over-all approval rating has sunk to ever-lower depths, many evangelicals still see him as a leader who shows great moral strength. I read on Facebook (I have forgotten who posted it originally) that the same people who a few years ago called Obama a Muslim now think that Trump is a Christian! It is clear that many Americans, on the other hand, are highly critical about the cozy relationship between som evangelical leaders and the Trump administration, and worry that the American tradition of separation between church and state is in serious jeopardy.

I have never believed in a total separation of church and state. Once upon a time the Dutch Reformed Church was the ‘established’ church in my country and had significant privileges. That is no longer the case, and even the ties between the royal family and this church are not what they have been for centuries. There was hardly any criticism when Maxima (the present queen) decided to remain Roman Catholic when she married Willem Alexander, who is now the Dutch king. And in a multicultural and multi-religious country like the Netherlands it is no longer deemed appropriate that the king would ask for God’s blessings in his speech at the beginning of the parliamentary year.

I appreciate these developments. It is proper that religion and affairs of state are separate, but on the other hand I see no problem in, for instance, accepting government money for denominational schools if certain conditions are met. Why should parents of children in public schools benefit from the taxes we all pay, and should parents of children in private schools not be able to benefit in the same way?  And why should churches and religion-based NGO’s–again under clear conditions–not be able to receive government grants for social activities, just like other organization with similar projects?  And why should churches not be able to accept tax-exempt donations, just like other charities and cultural institutions. If there are clear rules, it seems to me (and most European Christians, Adventists included) that church and state may legitimately interact in certain domains.

But then, I look at the United States. . .  I have never understood what separation of church and state actually means in the US.  For Europeans like myself it is hard to understand why the national flag is prominently displayed in American churches. And why virtually every major address by an American politician ends with the words: God bless America! And why would in past decades Billy Graham show up in the Oval Office when the president had to make a decision whether or not to take his country to war? And what to make of presidential prayer breakfasts? All this is difficult enough to understand, but Trump’s unashamed courting of evangelical support makes it even more complex.

I am reading in blogs and Facebook posts that some of my Adventist co-religionists see the intermingling of religion and politics as a clear sign of the end. They expect that religious leaders will so influence politics that eventually the ‘true believers’ will feel the negative consequences. They point in particular to recent statements by pope Frances regarding the need to take global measures and erect global structures to defend basic human values. Well, we must certainly remain alert, but we have seen time and again that it is unwise to make hasty predictions, as trends often come and go. However, for the time being, I am more afraid of the evangelicals who support Trump than of the pope.  I do not subscribe to many of the pope’s ideas, but his moral compass seems to be in much better shape than that of many of the religious leaders who hail the American president as a ‘born again’ Christian.


Difficult Conversations

Below is a sample of the conversations I had (or listened to) in very recent times and which I experienced, in various ways, as ‘difficult’.

(1) I met someone I had not seen or talked with for a very long time. He is a regular reader of this blog and has reacted a number of times to some of the posts. He contacted me and we agreed to meet and to take a long walk together. It was an enjoyable day. My visitor reminded me that I had actually baptized him almost fifty years ago. But he had lost his faith and now referred to himself as an atheist. He had given this careful thought and had very solid arguments why he could no longer believe in God.  He was adamant that a God, who does not do a better job of caring for what he allegedly made, is not worthy of our adoration.

(2) A few days ago I was at a birthday party and spent most of the evening talking to two men. One was very open about his faith. The other listened politely, but left us in no doubt that he wanted to have nothing to do with faith and church. And why was this? he was asked. He told us about his experiences, growing up in an extremely conservative home, and about his father who had forced him and his siblings to go to church. He attended church twice every Sunday, until he was able to free himself from this kind of negative religion that was very judgmental and even violent.

(3) Last Sunday I listened to a conversation during an early Sunday morning television program. The host of the program interviewed the father of a teenage child with multiple physical and mental handicaps. The word ‘ faith’ was not used, but many a believer, no doubt, watched it with the same kind of questions that I had. Why do people have to go through such misery?

(4) A few days ago I visited a friend who suffers from Altzheimer. I could not help thinking that this might also, some day, happen to me. My friend has difficulty coming to terms with his situation, but he does not point an accusing finger to God. I could have understood if he argued with God about his fate.

(5) A week or so ago someone, who we have met a few years ago in the USA, visited the Netherlands and stayed with us for a few days. Besides the touristic activities we had some very intense conversations. Her husband had died a few years ago at age 60 in a car accident. She had found a new partner, but he died last year from a massive heart attack. One theme dominated our discussions: Is there really something after death? She has her faith and is a loyal church member, but she keeps wrestling with the question whether it is really true that death is not the end.

(6) This week I visited someone who suffers from ALS. He lives is a care home. Many of my Dutch blog readers will recognize whom I am referring to.  He is able to deal in an amazingly positive way with this disease that relentlessly follows its treacherous and destructive course. The bottom line is that he must live between often dementing elderly people, separated most of the time from his wife and family–with virtually no hope of recovery.

(7) And, finally, a total different conversation. It took place after last week’s Sabbath morning divine service, in which I preached. After the service I sat with a group of church members in one of the rooms for our traditional coffee. Two young men came to me and forcefully reprimanded me for the fact that I was drinking coffee. How come I did not pay any attention to our health message? Did I not know what the “spirit of prophecy” says about drinking coffee? As a pastor I should know better and be an example . . . They kept at it for at least ten minutes.

This is just a brief selection of some of the talks I recently had with various persons. I do not in any way claim that having such discussions is unique and many others could make similar lists of the somewhat difficult conversations they were part of. But what can one say in situations as I described above? The standard-replies usually sound hollow and insensitive. “God must have his reasons why . . .” ‘Yes, we must suffer, but in the end all will be well . . .”  “In spite of everything, we must keep our trust in God.”  And so on. I must admit that I cannot get that kind of answers over my lips. Often, I am at a loss for words, as I try to say something that is more than a series of pious platitudes. Or, I simply remain quiet, since I do not have any good answer.

The only thing I can say is that I want to hold on to my faith in God, in spite of all my questions and uncertainties. I must, however, admit that my faith is something for which I have no solid rational basis. But I do not want to lose this existential certainty of faith. It does me a lot of good and it inspires me when I meet others who, in all their problems and sufferings, are able to hang on to their faith. On the other hand, I can also empathize with those who see their faith gruadually evaporate.

I find it especially difficult to respond in  situations such as I mentioned last (Number 7). In such discussions (or “attacks” might be a more suitable word), I tend to become literally speechless. This kind of religion, to me, has nothing to do with Christian faith. It really ruins my day when people want to confront me with this kind of thing. And I can only have sympathy with those who lose all interest in the church when this is the sort of thing that some people feel they must always talk about. It has nothing to do with the faith that we need to deal with the real questions of life.



A good week


The past week was a very good week indeed. A good friend–a lady from around Loma Linda in California–visited us and that meant a few nice touristic activities (as e.g. a visit to the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam), some good meals and, above all, some very inspiring discussions.

A few days ago I was able to send the English translation of my last devotional book (with portraits of 366 men and women in the Bible) to the Stanborough Press in England. I am delighted that they are interested in publishing it. The Dutch original came off the press about two years ago and was well received in the Netherlands. It was a major job to translate the 366 meditations into English and my wife also invested a good number of hours in checking my translation and spotting numerous typo’s and other impurities. She has a sharper eye for that kind of thing than I have.

Some months ago a Russian edition appeared of my book FACING DOUBT. This edition is distributed through Amazon and is primarily intended for the Russian-speaking Adventist ‘diapora’–i.e. those who live outside of Russia. People in Russia, and such countries as Ukraine and Belarus, find it difficult to get the book through Amazon, and it is also quite expensive for them. From this week there is now also a cheaper edition available through a Russian online bookseller.  (,0).

In addition there was some other good news. The work on a Spanish translation of FACING DOUBT has now started.

In between other activities during the past few weeks I have started work on a new book, after I had already done a substantial amount of reading and thinking about it in the past months. The first 24.000 words of a first draft have been written. I am writing this book first in English rather than in Dutch. The theme of the book is Last Generation Theology (LGT). Lately this theological trend has become quite prominent in the Adventist Church.  I (and many with me) believe that this theory has a very shaky foundation on a rather selective use of a number of Bible texts and Ellem G. White statements, and that it is, in fact, quite dangerous to a healthy faith.

The supporters of the LGT maintain that just before the end of history there will be a group of people who have overcome all sin. Moreover, Christ will not return until this is a reality. Another essential element of the LGT is that Christ took upon himself the kind of human nature that Adam had after the Fall. It is then argued that, if Jesus could be perfect while he had the same inclinations towards sin as we have, there is no excuse for us not to become perfect also. I will try to explain in reasonably simple language that this particular theology rests on a number of faulty premises and will also make clear why this is an important matter.

It will take a few more months before the manuscript is ready, as there are also other things in the coming months that demand my attention. Among other things I must prepare presentations for a number of speaking appointments in several European countries and the USA. And then, of course, there is also some vacation time.

Well, all in  all, it was a good week!