WATER: Community: Love is the context for all mission: Love permeates everything.
WOOD: Connection: Structure must always submit to spirit: Passion fuels action.
FIRE: Communion: Relevance to culture is not optional: Relevance communicates truth.
EARTH: Character: Creativity is a natural result of spirituality. Character creates change.
Also known as AIR, AETHER (ether) has to do with the mental plane or atmosphere, energy. A spiritual mind is said to be a “higher mind.” WIND is said to be “the Divine power” that “energises the mental vehicle of the soul” (p. 815-816).
McManus says that WATER is “community.” This definition of water is not found in the Bible, but it can be found in cross-cultural ancient and modern pagan writings and, significantly, in occult-inspired symbolic renderings of traditional Bible passages (p. 803-806). WATER is defined as “unity, absence of parts, comprehensiveness….” Jesus’ act of turning water into wine is, for example, misrepresented as a “transmutation of the lower mental plane into the higher spiritual condition of the soul;” i.e., a transformation from human to divine. This is one of the chief ideas conveyed by the Yin/Yang principle. The Dictionary explains (p. 831):
This element is said to be, “A symbol of the astral plane in its aspect of growth, in which the Self begins to manifest.” The Dictionary notes (p. 824-25) that:
Fire, in the occult, is said to be a “spiritual energy” or a “love-energy,” a “passion,” or a “transforming power” for man’s “purification” (pp. 274-277). For example:
According to the Dictionary, “The ‘earth’…signifies the buddhic principle in consciousness” which assists the “growth” of the “lower Self” which awakens the “Higher-mind” of man (pp. 237-238):
A symbol of the productive buddhic nature as the Divine expression upon the astral and physical planes. Buddhi acting as the moulder of forms and guide of the separated Self to enable it to manifest its true nature in the soul.”
1. Erwin McManus wants to appeal to the hip, young, artsy culture with logos, lingo, terms and symbols that will appeal to their world.
BUT there are testimonies from ex-New Agers such as Warren Smith who warn evangelicals that by mixing occult symbols and terminologies with Christianity they are seriously misleading and possibly outright deceiving spiritual seekers.
2. McManus wants to create a new church language that appeals to the unchurched, to transform the marketing image of a boring old-fashioned Christianity.
BUT these logos with their accompanying definitions appear to have much more in common with the occult, and very little of the Scripture, thus so distorting the intended message that it could be easily confused with the occult.
3. McManus is so “into” fabulous graphic arts that he lost the perspective of communicating the Gospel message.
BUT can we excuse the blatant occult representations on this artwork? Is it possible to justify mingling clearly pagan symbols with biblical Christianity? Isn't this extreme? Or, is "extreme" the hip new marketing model? If so, why use the occult to market the Gospel?


