this issue CHANGE… THE ONLY CONSTANT - … Road 201… · DR LEONARD SMITH MOSES AND MONOTHEISM...

JANUARY 2017

CHANGE…THE ONLYCONSTANTDR LEONARD SMITH

MOSES AND MONOTHEISMROWENA REYNOLDS

WE’RE MOVING!DR LEONARD SMITH

WHY THEOLOGY IS UNWELLDR XAVIER LAKSHMANAN

BACHELOR OF SOCIAL SCIENCEPS BYUNG KIM

this issue

EmmausRoad-12pp-0117.qxp_Layout 1 17/01/2017 3:04 pm

2 emmausroad | January 2017

CHANGE…THE 3ONLY CONSTANTDR LEONARD SMITH

MOSES AND 4MONOTHEISMROWENA REYNOLDS

FROM THE 7PRINCIPALDR LEONARD SMITH

WHY THEOLOGY IS UNWELL 8DR XAVIER LAKSHMANAN

BACHELOR OF 9SOCIAL SCIENCEPS BYUNG KIM

ALUMNI 10MERILYN SMITH (2014)

Published by Emmaus Bible College

82 Waterloo Road,Macquarie Park NSW 2113

PO Box 1949Macquarie Centre NSW 2113

Phone (02) 9876 4370

www.emmaus.edu.au

CONTENTS


CHANGE…THE ONLY CONSTANT

emmausroad | January 2017 3

DR LEONARD SMITHPRINCIPAL

“Heraclitus attestsconstant change hasbeen around for sometime, and this perhapshighlights the need forall of us to be aware orthe possibilities of andbe ready for change inevery aspect of ourlives.”

The quote roughly translated as, "theonly constant is change," is accreditedto Heraclitus, a Greek philosopherwho lived around 500BC. We often

speak as if constant change is a new phenom-enon, and one due to the increasing rate ofsocial demands for innovation and invention,or new horizons now evident due to techno-logical advances. Change is often ascribed towhat we now know and can do. Yet, Heracli-tus attests constant change has been aroundfor some time, and this perhaps highlightsthe need for all of us to be aware or the pos-sibilities of and be ready for change in everyaspect of our lives.

The constancy of change can be daunting forsome. Here at the college, we are presentlyconfronted by a necessary change, and thetask could most definitely be described asdaunting. We are changing location again, asthe building in which we are presentlylocated is being demolished and the arearezoned for residential use. And, while theneed to move will cause considerable work,and has the potential for some anxiety, we aremindful of our source of constancy and ofwhat some New Testament greats say regard-ing our appropriate response to anxiousness.In Phil 4:6-8 we are told, “to be anxious fornothing”; in 2 Cor 4:14 “do not lose heart”;in Ps 18:2 we are reminded that “the Lord isour rock”; Josh 1:9 “be strong and coura-geous”, and the list goes on.

There is no doubt there can be a great deal ofsecurity in staying the same, doing things the

same way. However, often if we do, we loseopportunities or relevance to the peoplewithin the various ever-changing communi-ties around us. As followers of the teachingsof the Bible we are assured our security isfrom a different and far more constant andstable source than routine or present opera-tions. We as individual followers of Christ areconstantly secure because of who God is andour relationship with Him. We are in factencouraged to see each day as His and to beprepared to go where He leads.

In addition to the new location and the newdelivery modes implemented of late we arealso in the process of a change of name toAustralian College of Christian Studies(ACCS) in response to the union of EmmausBible College and Australian College ofChristian Studies, two colleges we have beenoperating for the past five years. It has beenquite an onerous task operating the separateentities, each with different operational andlegislative requirements. The change to a sin-gle entity will reduce much of the multiplicityof operations and offer a more streamlinedapproach to our teaching program.

We are endeavouring to regard the comingchanges in the next few months as a newdirection rather than an imposition or break-ing with traditions, as exciting rather thandaunting.

We are in the process of finalising the newoperations with some classes being taught atSCD at Macquarie Park, some at Strathfieldas well as continuing with some classes at

Miranda. The spread across Sydney might beseen as an opportunity to be local to a num-ber of communities rather than one.

Whatever the changes might bring we havemuch to give thanks to our Lord and Saviour,for all that He has done for us in the life ofthe College. It is well understood that overtime, even best practice at a particular timemay lose its usefulness. Jesus certainly under-stood the role of change and rebuked thosewho stood in the way of advancement. Weread in Mark 2:18-19 how Jesus answered thequestion to the Pharisees about fasting andinformed them that he had not come to adda few new rules and regulations to Judaism.He had something entirely new to impart.Change and innovation are integral compo-nents of both biological and spiritual growth.Scriptures focus more on process as allbelievers are in a process of becoming thepeople God meant us to be. Without change,growth is impossible.

There is no doubt that we at Emmaus (soonto Australian Christian College) have seenconsiderable change in recent years, however,as established by those who went before us.We aim to serve God and we aim to do thisin the context of teaching and learning con-cerning the Christ who as Hebrews states isthe same yesterday, today and forever.

We, as always, appreciate the prayers of thosewho support the College.

DR LEONARD SMITH IS PRINCIPAL OF

EMMAUS BIBLE COLLEGE


ROWENA REYNOLDS

Sigmund Freud is oftenconsidered the father ofPsychology. Along with CharlesDarwin and Karl Marx he isheralded as being one of the great men of the Enlightenment(Rushdoony, 1979). Between1895 and 1935 Freud publishednumerous works on therapeutictechniques, psychoanalytic theoryand his philosophical conclusionsregarding life and God (Freud,1952). Moses and Monotheism ishis last work, completed in 1939,six months before his death. It isdecidedly his most controversialpiece, not only because of itscontent but also because it waspublished on the eve of theHolocaust.

T his arduous, fanciful work has fewmerits and although it is purportedlya historical piece it is far more akinto a fairy tale. Added to the difficulty

of the content is the obvious lack of fluidityfound in most of his other work, leaving thisreader to grind their way through the prepos-terous hypotheses. Moreover the reader wasassaulted by Freud’s total abhorrence of Godand all things pertaining to Judaism.Although Freud was renowned for voicinghis concerns and apprehension about free-dom of expression (Freud, 1964) he throwsall caution to the wind in this final piece ofwork. His attempt to debunk Judaism andundermine the religious heritage of his fore-fathers is tangibly vindictive, verging on ven-omous, leaving this reader less thanfavourably disposed, perhaps even retaliatory.

Moses and Monotheism is a compilation ofthree essays. The first two were originallypublished in the psychoanalytic journalImago whilst the third was withheld untilFreud had relocated from Vienna to Britain(Bernstein, 1998). Essay one is a short dis-course about the supposed true birth andheritage of the man Moses. Freud begins bydialoguing about the name of the man,promptly discounting the Biblical narrativeon two counts; firstly he considers it incon-ceivable that an Egyptian princess would

have any knowledge regarding Hebrew ety-mology and therefore would be ill-equippedto appropriately name the child according tohis ‘place of origin.’ Secondly he dissects themeaning of the name, refuting its validitybecause of a derivation in meaning. Themeaning espoused by the Biblical text is ‘Hewas drawn out of water’, whilst the Hebrewactive form is ‘the drawer out’; Freud consid-ers this irreconcilable. Having expedientlydisposed of the Biblical stance Freudlaunches into a supposition regarding thepossibility that the name was perhaps derivedfrom the Egyptian vocabulary, stating that“many different people” have voiced the sameopinion. However he only cites one, Breasted(1933). Having decided that it is somehowclearly evident that the name is Egyptian,Freud takes a quantum leap and declares that

Moses therefore was not a Hebrew but, as hisname indicates, an Egyptian (Rushdoony,1979, p. 38). In less than a thousand wordsand without evidence or support Freudsnatches Moses out of the Biblical frameworkand entirely reworks his heritage and identity.Then, as if beyond reproach, he spends theremainder of the essay discussing and decon-structing the structure of ‘classical exposuremythology’ in an effort to further convoluteand re-conceptualise the Biblical rendition ofthe story of Moses. Freud proposes that notonly is Moses an Egyptian, the entire story issimply mythology, Moses’ family is not real:

And here the new point of view may per-haps bring some illumination. It is thatthe first family, the one from which thebabe is exposed to danger, is in all com-parable cases the fictitious one; the sec-ond family, however, by which the herois adopted and in which he grows up ishis real one. (Freud, 1939, p.13)

Freud then has the audacity to ask the readerto simply accept this supposition:

If we have the courage to accept thisstatement as a general truth to which theMoses legend is also subject, then wesuddenly see our way clear. (Freud, 1939,p.13)


MOSES AND MONOTHEISMBOOK REVIEW: Freud, S. (1939). Moses and monotheism. New York: A.A. Knopf.


Although I had travailed to this juncture Imust admit that I was audibly exasperated bythis suggestion; it was as if Freud had askedthe reader to simply park their intellectualcapacities in the disabled zone. It is of partic-ular note that Freud almost recants as he con-cludes this first essay, admitting that it issimply conjecture and that proofs are nonexistent. However, recourse was unattainableand my sensibilities were offended.

The second essay begins where the first hadconcluded, with admissions regarding theimplausibility of his suppositions and the lackof supports offered:

At the end of my essay I said that impor-tant and far reaching conclusions couldbe drawn from the suggestion that Moseswas an Egyptian; but I was not preparedto uphold them publicly, since they werebased on psychological probabilities andlacked objective proof. (Freud, 1939,p.16)

These are perhaps the most genuine andcredible words penned in the entire manu-script. However the reprieve is short-lived asFreud unrepentantly uses this dialogue tospringboard directly into further unsubstan-tiated hypothetical deliberations. Havingconcluded that Moses was an Egyptian ofnoble birth Freud must now address themotivation for the Exodus as it seems absurdthat Moses should choose to leave home witha people who are ‘not his own.’ AlthoughFreud offers us a proliferation of well chosenwords in his attempt to grapple with thisconundrum the overall conclusion offered isthat Moses was an ardent follower of adethroned Egyptian monotheistic god calledIkhnaton. Moses’ fervor for this religion, cou-pled with narcissistic leanings, causes him toseek out a peoples who would acquiesce tohis pursuits;

“Moses’ active nature conceived the planof founding a new empire, of finding anew people, to whom he could give thereligion Egypt disdained .” (Freud, 1939,p.32)

Freud proposes that the ambitious, schemingMoses befriends this Semitic tribe, installshimself as their leader and convinces them toleave their homes and follow him into thedesert, where he forcefully imposes on themthe monotheistic Aton religion of Ikhnaton.However, according to the revised narrativeoffered by Freud, all does not go well for theambitious Moses as he endeavours to build anew nation. Freud alleges that the plan goesawry because of the ornery nature of their

leader, proposing that Moses was dictatorialin his leadership and enforced stricter ruleson the Israelites than their original religionhad avowed. He describes Moses as hot tem-pered and violent, stern, implacable andintolerant. In light of these grossly negativeleadership attributes and their inappropriateusage the people rebelled against Moses andthe religious ethos and doctrines espousedby him and ultimately murdered him. Clo-sure of the essay at this juncture would haveelicited rapturous applause from this reader,however Freud goes on; the people of Mosesrepress the memory of their terrible deed,link up with the Midianites, adopt ‘their’ vol-canic God Yahweh and find an alternateleader whose name is also Moses. Freud con-cludes this second essay with a poetic dia-tribe about duality of leaders, duality ofpeoples and duality of gods. Then, as if toexasperate me, he brings the essay to a closewith the declaration;

“There still remains much to discuss, toexplain, and to assert” (Freud, 1939,p.65).

The original sin, spokenof by Paul, is, accordingto Freud, the sin ofhaving killed Moses.In 1937 Freud penned a letter to his friendPfister mentioning a “sizable piece about sig-nificant matters” which could not be pub-lished because of “external considerations, orrather dangers” (Freud & Pfister, 1964, p.144). Said piece is the third essay. Unfortu-nately Freud eventually considered himselfduly protected and proceeded; the result is afrontal assault on the emotional and intellec-tual senses of Jew and Gentile alike. Freudreaffirms his preceding arguments and,according to the potency thereof, launchesthe reader into the psychoanalytic reasoningbehind the strength and resilience of the Jew-ish peoples and their monotheistic mosaicreligion.

There are oddly dualistic adjuncts during thispiece of his work as one almost feels Freudempathising with the Jews because of his owndifficulties in a world rife with anti-Semitism,yet concurrently one is struck by his bemuse-ment at the undying endurance of the Jewishpeople and their beliefs. Moreover it is obvi-ous, as the third essay unfolds, that Freud’smood is altered. Although he deals with morecontroversial issues in his attempt to demol-

ish monotheistic religion his overall tone andinflection are considerably different. Themost cynical and derogatory elements of hisargument are written with a new found soft-ness. It was at this juncture that this readerbecame intrigued.

The overall hypothesis of this finale hingeson ‘some remarks made by Charles Darwin’who purportedly purported that humankindoriginally lived in small hordes that were gov-erned patriarchally. The patriarchs of thesehordes apparently ruled with unrelentingforce, keeping all the women to themselvesand treating all the sons venomously. Even-tually, time and again, the sons rebelledagainst ‘the great father’ and killed him, eat-ing him and thereby usurping his authority.For Freud the story, the myth, of Moses isthus explained; it was simply a matter of his-tory repeating itself. The reason therefore forthe endurance and resurgence of the MosaicLaw then is derived firstly from an ongoingcollective guilt over having killed god(Moses). To support his premise Freudengages in much elaborate psychoanalyticdiscourse regarding the unconscious, the col-lective unconscious and the religiousstrength of those collective unconscious rec-ollections, feelings and subsequent neuroses.For Freud this is at the heart of all religion. Itshould also be noted that at this junctureFreud is supporting his supposition with hisown psychoanalytic theory that was scientifi-cally without supports! Judaism, accordingto the author, is therefore a monotheistic reli-gion based on a murder and the subsequentguilt, shame and neuroses of the collectiveunconscious of the Jewish people. Midwaythrough the discourse, in the midst of theseprofound deliberations about inherent guilt,Freud further proposes an explanation for theperplexing religion called Christianity. Hecredits the Apostle Paul with founding thisderivative religion and infers that it was sim-ply a brilliant solution Paul had formulatedin an effort to deal with this collective conun-drum of ongoing guilt. The original sin, spo-ken of by Paul, is, according to Freud, the sinof having killed Moses. The death of an inter-mediary, Jesus, is apparently Paul’s way ofoffering expiation for the all the Jewish peo-ples who have throughout the centuries car-ried the burden of unconscious guilt. Freudthen notes that his hypothesis, Paul’s solu-tion, returns the power to the son, againreflecting back to the horde and the tyranni-cal patriarchal father; in the original dramathe son kills the father, in the ‘solution’ theson dies as retribution for the originaloffense. It is apparently a most adequate solu-




tion as it concurrently gives the Jews thechance to shake off the shackles of persecu-tion by opening the door to the rest of theworld to be part of God’s chosen peoples.

At this juncture Freud takes another quan-tum leap. The rejection of the Christ idea, thesolution formulated by Paul, lies, accordingto Freud, in the love of the exclusivity thathad empowered and propelled the Jewishpeoples since the time of Moses. And hereinlies Freud’s second solution to the extraordi-nary strength and longevity of the Jews; thismonotheistic idea coupled with the fact thatthey were the exclusive, chosen people of this‘one God’ gave the Jews an elevated selfesteem, a sense of worth that strengthened,empowered and propelled them regardless ofany adversity set before them. They thereforereject the solution to their collective guiltbecause they would rather protect theirexclusivity. Having decreed that their vanityand guilt are the glue that holds their religiontogether Freud then notes for the exhaustedand bedraggled reader that this love of exclu-sivity is what has caused the great persecu-tion suffered by the Jews throughout history;

“I venture to assert that the jealousywhich the Jews evoked in others peoples

by maintaining they were the first born,favourite child of God the Father has notyet been overcome…” (Freud, 1939,p.116).

Freud then further rebukes the Jewish peo-ples for not being sensible and accepting thesolution to their guilt, noting that this addi-tional error has caused them to shoulderanother tragic guilt that in turn has increasedtheir suffering. His final remarks, as heabruptly draws to a close, offer no resolutionto all that he has proposed. He simply notesthat he has thrown some light on the ques-tion of the character of the Jewish people butthat the ‘problem of their survival as anentity’ is not an easy one to solve; “One can-not, however, reasonably demand or expectexhaustive answers of such enigmas” (Freud,1939, p.??).

Freud’s legacy is ongoing; his work and influ-ence continue to colour the face of psychol-ogy and psychotherapeutic enterprisesworldwide. Although he is still heralded ashaving contributed by way of his innovativetheorising regarding humanity and the work-ings of the mind this reader cannot concurwith these assertions. His writings are litteredwith ideas and unsupported suppositions

and arguments that would best have servedhumankind if they had remained in hisunconscious. Moses and Monotheism is wor-thy of derision; it is a ludicrous attempt todebunk and discredit monotheistic religion,a flagrant last-ditch effort to divorce himselffrom Judaism, religion and God. He fails mis-erably; rather than publish this work on theeve of his death he should have taken hismusings with him to the grave.

REFERENCES

Bernstein, R. J. (1998). Freud and the legacy of Moses.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Breasted, J. H. (1933). The dawn of conscience. NewYork: C. Scribner’s Sons.

Freud, S. (1939). Moses and monotheism. New York:A.A. Knopf.

Freud, S. (1952). Freud: The Major Works of SigmundFreud: Great Books of the Western World. Chicago:Encyclopedia Britannica.

Freud, S. (1964). New introductory lectures on psycho-analysis: And other works. London: HogarthPress and the Institute of Psycho-analysis.

Freud, S. & Pfister, O. (1964). Psychoanalysis and faith:The letters of Sigmund Freud and Oskar Pfister.New York: Basic Books.

Rushdoony, R. J. (1979). Freud. Phillipsburg, N.J:Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co.

Online Bachelor of Social Science Counselling

ENROL NOW FOR [email protected] www.ccs.edu.au 1300 150 248


FROM THE PRINCIPAL

DR LEONARD SMITH

We’re moving!

Due to redevelopment of the Mac-quarie Park site, we will be movingout in November this year. Collegeadministration will be managed

from our Miranda Campus. 2017 will seeclasses taught at the SCD classrooms at Mac-quarie Park on Mondays and at CIS in Strath-field on Fridays. We will continue to teach atMiranda on Wednesdays. We will also beoffering an increase in online learning classesduring this period of time.

In 2018 there will be a further and hopefullyfinal change, as we plan to move permanentlyinto Burwood. A new property is being devel-oped where the Burwood church was,located near Burwood train station. The newcomplex will house a new church, our col-lege, the offices of Stewards and otherCCCAust services.

Some interesting factsUnderstanding human development fromthis semester’s Korean Counselling program.

Religion and Worldview for 18-25 year olds.

• Most emerging adults say that construct-ing a worldview, or a set of beliefs and val-ues to live by, is essential for attainingadult status.

• About one-fourth of U.S. 18- to 29-year-olds are unaffiliated with a particular faith,yet religion is more important in theirlives than it is for young people in otherdeveloped countries.

• Many young people begin to constructtheir own individualised faith, often weav-ing together beliefs and practices fromdiverse sources.

• Although some research suggests thatcompared to past generations, the Millen-nial generation reports greater narcissism,other research suggests that many emerg-ing adults are committed to improvingtheir communities, nation, and world.

Berk, L. E. (2014). Development through thelifespan. Boston: Pearson.

Between our culturesIt surprises me a little when I hear some ofthe comments in the media about the racismin Australia. I’m well aware of bigotry andintolerance and the devastating impact theycan have for individuals and communities,however, regarding Australians as racist isalmost racist in itself. I am not sure who theaccusation is levelled at. Is it me a Scot once

tied in with the so-called “whinging poms”that arrived in Australia with me some 40years ago. Or it is a colleague of my son’s whois Chinese, second generation Australian whoif you were listening to him has a true blueAussie accent, or is it my Greek neighbour orhis Irish partner or my Canadian daughter inlaw or some of our very own lecturers fromvarious parts of the world, not to mention thediverse cultural collage of our students. As aBible College our intent is not for tolerancebut for love. A rich love for our brothers andsisters, both those already in the family andthose we are hoping will be, throughout ourimmediate and broader communities withwhom we share a loving heavenly Father.

So in the spirit of true multicultural diversityI am sharing a verse or two with you fromThe New Testament in Scots:

Frae that tyme forrit Jesus set tae thepreachin: “Repent” he tauld men, for theKingdom o Heiven is naur haund.” Wandayhe wis traivlin aside the Loch O Galilee, whanhe saw twa brithers, Simon, caa’d Peet’r, anAndro his brither, castin a net intay the loch;for they war fishers tae tredd.

“Come efter me,” qo he til them, “an I’lls ’makye men-fishers”; and strecht they quat theirnets an fallowt him. (Matthew 4:18-20)

The New Testament in Scots, William Laughton Larimer (1185-1967)

His message remains the same. Let’s do it.




SHARON ALI

I came to study at Emmaus BibleCollege not knowing what toexcept and as I near the end ofmy course, I feel that I havegrown in my trust and faith inthe Lord, and I hope that I willcontinue to mature in myrelationship with Christ.

Outside of College, my sister and Ihad experienced great difficultieswith our accommodation duringsemester one and then this semes-

ter, God provided us with a place to stay untilthe end of the year.

Through it all and until now, I have felt thelove of Christ from the staff and students atCollege.

Each day has been an interesting one andinteracting with the staff has always been funand lively, and full of laughter.

I have received a foundational understandingof the Bible that I needed and I hope to con-tinue to study God’s Word each day as I goforward. The teachers at Emmaus offer suchvaried methods of teaching and assessment,and I have enjoyed the experience.

Studying at Emmaus Bible College has beenof great encouragement to me and I reallylook forward to where the Lord God will take

me from here. Thank you for giving your timeand effort to build my relationship with Jesus Christ.

MY EXPERIENCE AT EMMAUS

WHY THEOLOGY IS UNWELLDR XAVIER LAKSHMANAN

A lecture on contemporarytheology was commenced withthe question: “How many in theclass like theology?”

T he majority responded: “we don’tlike it but must study it.” “Why don’tyou like it?” asked the professor.Challenging comments pooled in.

One said, “Theology is too critical, suspiciousand negative.” Another, “Theology is unprac-tical and abstract.” Third, “Theology is bore-dom with words.” Still another, “Theology isnot worthy of its name.”

What is wrong with today’s theology? Evenexperts express such dissatisfaction with the-ology. One may argue that it is a mere protestof prejudice. To another, it is a problem ofhow one understands theology. To others, itis a matter of one’s worldview. Still others, itis an issue of one’s personal interest. Is thatall? Can there be reasons within the theolog-ical discipline? It seems that theology is par-

tially responsible for the blame though onecannot ignore its benefits. The class reflectedfour fundamental challenges to contempo-rary theology: a question of theological method,task, language, and subject-matter.

For instance, what is an appropriate theolog-ical method? It is almost impossible to pointout one as appropriate. A traditional methodconsisted of Word, faith, reason and experi-ence. Here reason was a helper to articulatefaith in meaningful terms. It was a servant tothe Word, regulated by faith. But Aquinas

introduced a way of doing theology by rea-son. He argued God’s existence apart fromScripture. Here theology is informed by rea-son, not by revelation. Descartes promotedsuspicion as the fundamental method of sci-entific inquiry. The enlightenment pushedsuspicious reason to its zenith. This purerationalism left nothing unturned. Marx,Nietzsche and Freud completed the course.Theological rationalism appropriated such amethod into theological discourse, which leftus dance on the ruins today.

Yes, theology is unwell in certain sense. We livethe consequences. Experts, students, and laybelievers alike deeply feel it. What must wedo? Can we do theology differently? Thanksto those experts who are already moving“beyond the desert of criticism” to fresh andinteresting ways. They want to hear again Godspeaking so that we can live again meaning-fully.

Can we make theology a meaningful way oflife? Certainly, we can. But how shall we dosuch a dynamic theology without archaizingthe holy text, neither modernizing Christ, norignoring the cultural context? Come onboard, we will discover it together at EmmausBible College.

Thomas Aquinas

Sharon and Rozenna Ali


PS BYUNG KIM

I am Ps Byung Kim, Coordinatorof the Korean language BSocScprogram at Emmaus. I have beena counselor to the KoreanChristian Community for over20 years as a clinical member ofPACFA (Psychotherapy andCounselling Federation ofAustralia). I attend AshfieldPresbyterian church.

In July this year we enrolled seven full-time students and commenced teachingthe BSocSc in Korean. It has been awonderful experience to be able to teach

in our heart language the intricacies of coun-seling without having to translate to English.

Recently Dr Len and I had a discussionregarding the possibility of commencing atEmmaus a counselling course in various languages, particularly Chinese.

We are aware that China continues to be acommunist country and we cannot preachthe gospel with freedom. However, weremain convinced we need to do so.

I consider a counselling course as a way thatthe gospel may be preached indirectly. Thereis increasing evidence of problems withinChinese communities of mental health issuesand situations requiring family counselling.

I had direct experience last March while vis-iting China to conduct a couple’s seminar.While the government does not permitpreaching, it is in favour of assisting their peo-ple who are suffering due to a breakdown infamily relationships or psychological prob-lems. Commencing a counselling course inother countries has great potential in thespirit of mission to preach the gospel.

God has blessed Emmaus by the opening ofthe counselling course of the Bachelor ofSocial Science in Korean this semester.Everyone who is participating in this courseare very happy both for the benefits of them-selves and their means to help other people.

The counselling course contains both theoryand practice relevant to assist suffering withissues in the 21C. Emmaus has a great visionto preach the gospel through counselling.

This world urgently needs those who want toapply this verse to their life “rejoice withthose who rejoice: mourn with those whomourn.” (Romans 12:15)


BACHELOR OF SOCIAL SCIENCE 상담심리학사



ALUMNI: NEWS, EVENTS,OPPORTUNITIESMERILYN SMITH (2014)

I recently heard two “where arethey now” stories of couples whowere once Emmaus students andit occurred to me that their storiescould not be more different yetstill connected.

One couple came to Emmaus manyyears ago and the other as recentlyas last year. One with a backgroundof serving in outback Australia and

the other with people in the Western Suburbsof Sydney and now back in their home coun-try of Korea.

The ultimate connection of course is thatthey/we are all brothers and sisters in Christ’sfamily, joint beneficiaries of a magnificent lifeand future together.

We pray for our friends who have gone backto support family in Korea, we miss havingthem at College and greatly appreciate thatwe had such a wonderful time with themwhen they were here.

As to the other family we recently receivedthis note to pass on to you. We were in contact because of a mutual friend in the Tennant Creek church community. A community Eugen and Ruth served for anumber of years. I find their work inspira-tional and hope it is for you.

Early September found us back in Ten-nant Creek where Eugen was speakingthree messages on the Holy Spirit at theChurch Birthday Weekend.

It was a wonderful reunion with ourchurch family and an enjoyable 5 dayscatching up with everyone in town. Wealso enjoyed the warm weather.

Most of the people we had known previ-ously had grown in their faith and werebeing witnesses to others.

At Christmas, Eugen was diagnosed withstage 4 Lung Cancer. He is havingchemotherapy and although it knocks

him at the start of each cycle he is doingokay.

God has things in His control and we walkone day at a time and leave the future with

Him. Eugen will be 71 in October and hekeeps as busy as ever serving God daily.

Love to you all, Eugen and Ruth

Eugen and Ruth with Richard Driver and Michael Jones [Church Leaders] outside church in Tennant Creek September 2016



THE WORD ON THE WALLDR LEONARD SMITH

There are a number of things wewill miss about our location inMacquarie Park. For many asignificant aspect is the wall. Thewall is a daily reminder of what wewere there for, Jesus Christ. Oftenas you walked the length of the hallaspects of His character, titles andpositions He merited jumped outat you as you glanced at differenttimes along the wall. We give Himour praise and we rest in Hispromises for the future.


Published by Emmaus Bible CollegePhone (02) 9876 4370www.emmaus.edu.au

ONE YEARDIPLOMA COURSELEADING TO MINISTRY OPPORTUNITIESBOTH IN YOUR LOCAL CHURCH AND OVERSEAS

STUDY AND FURTHERDEVELOP YOURMINISTRY SKILLS

DEVELOP IN AN ENVIRONMENTWHERE PASSIONATE,DYNAMIC LECTURERSCHALLENGE YOU

LEARN LIFELONG SKILLSYOU CAN USE FOR GOD’S GLORY

REGISTER YOUR INTEREST TODAY AT WWW.EMMAUS.EDU.AUTO RECEIVE MORE INFORMATION WHEN AVAILABLE.


this issue CHANGE… THE ONLY CONSTANT - … Road 201… · DR LEONARD SMITH MOSES AND MONOTHEISM...

Documents

Transcript of this issue CHANGE… THE ONLY CONSTANT - … Road 201… · DR LEONARD SMITH MOSES AND MONOTHEISM...