Talk:Kwasizabantu

Where have the criticisms disappeared to?
The last time I visited this article years ago it included descriptions of both positive missionary activities as well as some controversial practices carried out at Kwasizabantu. For such a controversial topic as Kwasizabantu, the article was admirably neutral. It appears the article has now been purged of every single criticism or even alleged criticism of Kwasizabantu. Why would that be? There have been some grave allegations from ex-members documented in mainstream news media. As a result of recent scandals, thousands of members have left the movement over the last year. Ex-members allege that Kwasizabantu has a zero tolerance policy towards criticism/dissent. Could it be that Kwasizabantu has somehow managed to enforce its totalitarianist zero-tolerance policy even here on their Wikipedia article? TruthFearsNoQuestion (talk) 08:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * This article has been hijacked by members of Kwasizabantu (censored - to find the uncensored version go to the history of the talk page, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kwasizabantu&diff=971194405&oldid=970376763) who remove every critical information. It is Kwasizabantu propaganda. This proves that Wikipedia is unreliable and dangerous.2003:DE:6F07:1300:B05A:C92C:62E2:4ED9 (talk) 22:49, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * It has become clear that a smear campaign against the Mission weaponized the Media, as highlighted by A Journey to the Truth: The Case of KwaSizabantu Mission by Gerda Potgieter (available on Amazon and in Kindle format). It has also become clear that some witnesses against the Mission have been paid to render untruths. There is evidence to support this, which has also been well documented in Potgieter's publication with reference notes. These rumours probably caused the dissent of some who believed it accurate. In addition, an independent panel did not find KwaSizabantu to be engrossed in illegal activities as suggested by the Media, nor did the Cultural Religious and Linguistic (CRL) committee, the HAWKS, SAPS, or numerous government departments. This brings to question the motives of the accusers in this case study. Probably a future case study for the CRL, HAWKS, SAPS and various gov departments, as much taxpayers' money and working hours have been wasted through time-consuming investigations. In addition, many people and businesses associated with the Mission have suffered unduly through this smear campaign. - Dr E Fleischmann Dr Elfrieda Fleischmann (talk) 07:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Bad Faith
It would seem as though one person who has bad blood between him and the mission, has been the main contributor to this article the last 6 months. Much of it is libelous. I was unable to sift the good edits from the bad edits. The only way to correct this was to do a whole scale revert. This has drastically reduced the length of the article but I believe that "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information". Mariuspretorius (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well Mariuspretorius, to my knowledge there are hundreds of people with bad blood between them and "the mission". Some of them had their families torn apart because they dared to disagree with some of the practices carried out there. A number of them were rape victims who say they were threatened into silence "to protect God's work". Of course there would be "bad blood". TruthFearsNoQuestion (talk) 09:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, that's what they say. AFAIK there is still an investigation on this. So controversy should be mentioned, but not made the main issue. --105.12.5.237 (talk) 08:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I was talking to someone who had purged the article of all mentions of controversies (which span decades), if you were following along.--TruthFearsNoQuestion (talk) 19:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Libel
The dictionary defines the word libel as "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation". There may be statements which a person may feel is the truth but are damaging to a person's (or organization's) reputation. Unless these have been proven - they remain gossip and libelous. A mission, such as KwaSizabantu Mission, is bound to create polarization or controversy. Jesus was also a very controversial person, so was Paul. Just look at how many riots we read of in Acts (of the Apostles) after Paul's preaching. There are many who have been blessed by the Mission and then there are some who claim to have been harmed by the Mission. I believe that those who have been blessed far outnumber those who feel that they have been harmed. Those who feel they have been harmed, should use the normal channels to address their issues - such as going to a court of law - and not inject their anger into the main Wikipedia page for KwaSizabantu mission. It is therefore important to stick to proven facts. For example - accusing KwaSizabantu of being a cult is not a fact. Some people may say that, some people may believe that - but unless they can prove it, according to the definition of a cult - it remains their opinion. According to Websters Dictionary (1828), there are numerous meanings attributed to the word cult, including: “A religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society.” Traditionally, Christians have identified as cults those who have a false Christology, denying either the Deity or humanity of Christ, a false Soteriology, denying Salvation by the grace of God alone, based upon the Atonement of Christ on the Cross of Calvary, received by Faith. Cults traditionally forbid their adherents from receiving teaching from any outside source. By all these standards and definitions, KwaSizabantu, under the leadership of Rev. Erlo Stegen, has emphatically not been a cult. Many people use the Wikipedia as their first source of reference when they want to find information. To therefore introduce KwaSizabantu as being a cult in the introductory paragraph would be libelous.--Potolozi (talk) 10:06, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are an involved party, you should declare your interest, per Wikipedia policy. The article does not accuse anyone of being a cult - it says that media reports (which are cited) have done so. More broadly, truth and public interest are valid defences against accusations of libel, and the recourse against libel is to take it to the courts, where the issues are aired and judged. The argument that "more people benefited than were harmed" is a pretty low standard. Zaian (talk) 11:57, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "The article does not accuse anyone of being a cult" - that was after it was after it was edited to bring the article to a more NPOV. "the recourse against libel is to take it to the courts" - true. "The argument that "more people benefited than were harmed" is a pretty low standard." - I agree, but that is not what I said.Potolozi (talk) 17:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "Potolozi" is a known nickname of Marius Pretorius at Kwasizabantu. I see messages posted on this talk page under both usernames: Potolozi and Mariuspretorius. Have you been engaging in sock puppetry? (Also, if you are the Marius Pretorius of Kwasizabantu, I think you should declare a conflict of interest.) TruthFearsNoQuestion (talk) 09:48, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Unsigned
There are problems... people are being hurt, separated, shunned — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.93.218 (talk) 14:47, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Attention: Wikipedia
[]

Re: KwaSizabantu

The entry concerning KwaSizabantu is inaccurate and misleading. There is no way that this Christian mission can be described as a “sect.” KwaSizabantu Mission emphasizes the historic Protestant doctrines and welcomes speakers from a wide variety of Evangelical denominations to their pulpits and as guest speakers at their various conferences. A wide variety of mainstream Evangelical books are available at their conferences, and mainstream Protestant speakers such as Dr. James Dobson and James Kennedy are frequently broadcast on their Radio Kwezi.

It is also completely false to state that: “the movement emphasizes glossolalia…” as the movement is not in any way charismatic, nor are the speaking of tongues practiced at KwaSizabantu Mission.

As someone who has visited KwaSizabantu Mission frequently over the last 20 years, I do not know what the source is on these outrageous claims concerning KwaSizabantu, but I would recommend that enquirers visit www.kwasizabantu.com.

KwaSizabantu does not support any political party, and far from being legalistic, the mission upholds the Bible as the Word of God and that Salvation is only possible by the grace of God, received by repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone.

Written by Dr. Peter Hammond, Chairman of the Reformation Society (info@ReformationSA.org).

Peter Hammond is a man of Kwa Sizabantu,: The Board of Eiders has lost all confidence in Dr. Hammond`s ability to properly perform his missionary duties with integrity. His representing the cause of Christ and the Church of Christian Liberty is bringing irreparable harm to both. Therefore, the Church of Christian Liberty hereby rescinds its ordination and commission of Peter C. Hammond as a missionary to the people of Africa. Further, as we who are charged with caring for the souls of our members (Hebrews, 13.17, Revelation 21. 6-8) we direct Dr. Hammond to do the following: A.	Spend three days in fasting and prayer, seeking from the Lord a spirit of repentance. B.	Resign as a Director of Frontline Fellowship and any other Christian organization in which we holds a position of leadership. C.	Cease immediately from all mission and teaching or preaching endeavors. D.	Either face to face, or where that is not possible, by written communication, confess his sins against the numerous persons and organizations he has harmed or offended. After the Eiders`meeting of October 22, 2003, in which we ruled against Dr. Hammond and determined to revoke his ministry credentials, we received an e-mail from Dr. Hammond requesting that we accept his resignation of his affiliated membership with the Church of Christian Liberty. This request will be given due consideration in the near future, but our ecclesiastical ruling and disciplinary directive to him as a longstanding affiliate member of our church stands. We pray that God will have mercy on Peter Hammond and bring him to true repentance. Board Eiders Church of Christian Liberty

he didn`t come back, he went to KSB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.57.113.199 (talk) 15:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I have known Dr Peter Hammond for over 30 years as an honest and upright ambassador for Christ. Someone who reaches out to the persecuted Church worldwide and does not shy away from obstacles to do so. He tirelessly works to obey the last commandment by distributing Bibles and Gospel tracts throughout Africa. His work and love for Christ is a challenge to all Christians. No wonder he visited the KwaSizabantu Mission, which holds the same vision. If there are people who need repentance, it may be the comfort zone dwellers when the world is going lost. This comes as a challenge to us all. Dr Elfrieda Fleischmann (talk) 07:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

More feedback on this matter:
The previous article about Kwasizabantu is unfortunately poor on facts. For instance Kwasizabantu does not emphasize "glossolalia" and miraculous healings. Kwasizabantu mission is doctrinally Evanglical and not charismatic or have any special doctrine of a "fundamentalist Christian sect" nature. The confession of beliefs is on the mission's website: www.kwasizabantu.com (on the left-hand bar where it says "Confession". Being Evangelical the mission upholds the Bible as God's Word and that salvation is only possible through repentance of sins and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Kwasizabantu Mission does not have a list of rules called the "Standard". That type of legalism belongs to groups like the Amish in the USA who have something called the "Ordnung". The mission works on an interdenonimational basis and does not require Christians to leave their church and join Kwasizabantu. The mission feeds at least 1200 people at every meal and is running a number of projects to help finance the mission so that every it is free for everyone who visits the mission or seeks help and prayer. Kwasizabantu is also involved in caring for Aids orphans and the terminally ill. Written by Rev K. Olsen (a minister at Kwasizabantu for the past 30 years) Tel: +27 32 4815500 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.8.13.66 (talk • contribs)
 * (comment moved from article): the information is directly based on the relinfo.ch article linked. I've placed fact in accordance with your comment though until this is sourced more closely. dab (&#5839;) 12:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Glossolalia and miraculous healing allegations completely false
I would suggest that the Glossolalia (speaking in tongues) and miraculous healing allegations be either removed or placed under Criticisms (at the worst), because a look at the KwaSizabantu website and all articles by KwaSizabantu Mission make it clear that Glossolalia and miraculous healing are not emphasised. Looking at all the sermons preached for the past 30 years or more (a catalog is available on the website at KSB Cassette Ministry) there is barely any mention of speaking in tongues or miraculous healing. (By the way, because of the many nationalities during each sermon, the sermon is translated into languages such as, Zulu, Sotho, Portuguese, French, Afrikaans, German, and other languages, but speaking in tongues as the allegation goes is simply not practiced during services, neither is emphasized). The sermons that do mention speaking in tongues, places it on a very firm Biblical basis (i.e. that the Bible is the final authority).

The following is a quote from KSB's website, under the question, "Does KSB believe in extra-Biblical revelation?" (note: Glossolalia or speaking in tongues is not even discussed on the KSB website)

"Although we accept that God can work through miraculous means, if He so wishes, the Word of God stands supreme as the ONLY measurement of truth and the will of God. We do not identify ourselves with extra-Biblical revelation since the Scriptures are complete and nothing can be added to them. All dreams, visions etc, should be checked against the Word of God. No Christian should feel compelled to act upon "a message" which someone else claims is from the Holy Spirit. Every believer is accountable to God and must hear from Him alone regarding His will. Kwasizabantu is generally skeptical about the claims by extreme groups who receive "special revelations".

This should make it clear that the allegation that KSB Mission emphasizes Glossolalia and miraculous healing is false and should be removed.
 * you are right. The point is based on the relinfo article,
 * Die im Rahmen der Erweckung in Kwasizabantu aufgetretenen Phänomene wie Zungenrede und Heilungen führten zu einigen Debatten um die Positionierung des Werkes zwischen Evangelikalismus und Charismatik. Erlo Stegen selbst ist kein Freund der Pfingstbewegung und vertritt deshalb die Lehre einer von der Bekehrung zeitlich getrennten Taufe im Heiligen Geist nicht. Die Zungenrede wird folglich nicht als jedem Christen zugänglich gesehen. Stattdessen wird eine Gabentheologie vertreten, die von je unterschiedlichen Gabenzuteilungen an die einzelnen Gläubigen ausgeht. So erhält sich Stegen eine gewisse Distanz zur Pfingstbewegung. Den traditionellen evangelischen Cessationismus, die Lehre, dass die Geistesgaben mit dem Ende der apostolischen Zeit aufgehört hätten, muss Stegen aber ebenfalls verwerfen. Zusammenfassend steht Stegens Lehre zu Geistwirkung und Geistesgaben den Gepflogenheiten in modernen charismatischen Gemeinden recht nahe.
 * viz, Stegen is taking a sort of hybrid position between charismatic groups and mainstream protestantism. The article also says that this has led to debates about the group's classification. Our article here should reflect this by stating that Stegen has been located (I assume, by critics) as way out among charismatic loonies, but that his position is actually more moderate. dab (&#5839;) 11:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed "According to reports by former members, Stegens claims to be directly guided by God, via channelling by his assistant, Hilda Dube", as it is simply slander as such claims are no-where recorded. See my input on "important points to consider". I would also like the page still to be changed as suggested in those points (for which proof was given), and the page placed under "Chistian evangelism" or "Evangelical Christianity" where it belongs.

I've also removed the "sect" statement, as it is biased, whereas it has been shown that KwaSizabantu holds to mainstream orthodox Protestant theology, and holds to no fringe sectarian doctrine. I've also changed the "Fundamentalist" statement to read correctly "Evangelical". If someone wants to brand it as fundamentalist, I think it's up to them to prove it according to the definition of what fundamentalism is, and not just throw statements around.

Sparkie 09:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the allegation that KwaSizabantu members must adhere to "The Standard", as the citation is still lacking, and it has been pointed out by current preachers at the mission (like Rev K Olsen in his discussion) that there is no such thing, but KwaSizabantu Mission is adhering to the Bible for its authority and not some "standard".

Sparkie 09:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC) I have removed the statement which slanders the mission of having worked together with the Apartheid Government, as the point has been standing to be proved since it was posted in Feb and no proof has been forthcoming. It is simply slander and inaccurate as the mission had never been involved in such activity; but simply to preach the Gospel to every creature - whether the old or the new government. Sparkie 19:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * these are allegations made by the critical articles linked. It isn't up to Wikipedia to decide whether they are "true", we just need to report who claimed what. dab (𒁳) 19:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Original Sin
The inclusion of "and original sin (total depravity)" clutters the lead with a detail that might only be interesting to a narrow class of readers. If its author agrees, please move it elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tennenrishin (talk • contribs) 13:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Needs neutral sources, external link cleanup
I tagged the article as needing more sources and a cleanup of the external links section to improve neutrality. I cannot check the external links at this time due to limited internet access. momo ricks  06:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Discussion about external link ksb-report.com on ELN
There is a discussion going on the the external link notice board concerning the inclusion of ksb-report.comksb-report.com in this article. Everyone's input is welcome. — motevets (talk) 21:33, 27 September 2020 (UTC)