The Psalms are the word of Christ [Archive] - Page 4

Drake

09-26-2018, 08:10 AM

Awareness,

You are going too far in the other direction. All Scripture is God breathed including the Psalms and profitable for correction, reproof, and instruction in righteousness. Every Psalm is there in the Holy Writ by design and for our benefit.

No one will correct you but I will ... because I care about you.

Drake

Awareness,

Elaboration on this might be instructive.

I do not believe a wholesale read back of the NT into the OT, such as the Psalms, is supported by the Bible itself for the reasons already stated. It is evident that human concepts, flawed human ideas, cultural influence, lies and deceptions and influences of spiritual forces , quotes of philosophers and works not accepted as part of the canon of Holy Writ, ideas derived from the period between the testaments, expressions of our physical world based on scientific knowledge of the time and not as we understand science today ....all are in the Bible. Yet, it is there without error. Can we now with the benefit of hindsight see in the OT Christ in places the Jews with the OT in their hands could not? Certainly. Is Christ portrayed in every verse of the OT or specially the Psalms as some have argued in this thread? Certainly not. Christ and Gods plan was hidden in the OT for a reason, so that the evil spiritual forces would not understand that crucifixion was the path of God’s plan for had they known they would not have participated in crucifying Him. In the OT Christ is revealed in a mosaic and that is one reason He was not recognized though they had the OT in their very hands. Even the disciples who were with Him, even those closest to Him, could not understand what He was about to accomplish even though they too were familiar with the OT. It was not until after His resurrection that He opened their eyes to what the OT said about Him ( Luke 24).

Nevertheless, the Bible inspires with the Spirit’s striking our spirit and a Christian may thereby see something of Christ in a verse from an instant speaking from the Lord. For example, if you go to Brother Steve’s (Miller) site you will see many such examples of this from the Psalms. Are these Hermeneutically correct read backs from the NT into the Psalms? Mostly not. Are they beneficial or edifying? I think so in this sense.... as you were strolling this morning enjoying the Lord, having a conversation with Him you may have seen a worm crawling across the path, and it may have struck you that Christ left His glorious estate to become a worm among men. The verse “I am a worm and no man” may come to mind and you might appreciate Him all the more because in so doing He saved you. Technically, Christ was not a worm and He was a man but nevertheless the inspiration leads you to some genuine spiritual experience and appreciation of Christ.

So when I say you go to far in one direction in rejecting the Psalms wholesale because they were penned by fallen men or over hundreds of years I mean you miss that all Scripture is profitable including the Psalms. So then, for you I would encourage you to go the Brother Millers site and read his explanations on the Psalms to appreciate them the way he does. Although to Brother Miller I would say that reading the NT back into the Psalms is not good hermeneutics, nevertheless, reading and listening to his enjoyment of Christ is enjoyable... like someone who saw Christ in the worm.

In my view Brother Lee struck, or attempted to, the right balance with the OT and the Psalms as Evangelical summarized a few posts back. Brother Lee didn’t do a wholesale read back of the NT into the OT and yet he and Brother Nee before him offered many spiritual insights about Christ, God’s plan and Gods purpose in the OT that were not obvious. Some may consider those insights as analogous to seeing Christ in worms, and some of it might be, but I personally have benefitted through them with what I believe to be the best balance between good solid interpretation of using the Bible to explain and interpret the Bible and becoming sensitive to the Spirit’s leading and instant speaking in the Word.

Thanks
Drake

Ohio

09-26-2018, 09:16 AM

None of the Psalms are human concept without God. All are God-breathed God's concept inspired into men.

Brother Lee trashed the Psalms terribly.

Peter quotes Psalm 34 extensively. When WL gave the training on Peter, WL gave a very good message on Peter's quotes of Ps 34. You can read it in the life studies.

Later, when WL gave his messages on Psalms, he trashed Ps 34 and even said that Peter was not spiritual because Peter should not have quoted that psalm. The Life Study is really ugly.

I think WL had lost a lot of his mind by the time he gave the Psalms messages, but we in the LC were still following him blindly.
Quite an ironic observation here by VoiceInWilderness. Here's a section from Lee's Life Study (Mesage 16) on Psalms 34:
The title of Psalm 34 says that this was a psalm of David "when he disguised his sanity before Abimelech, who drove him out, and he departed." We can see from this that the situation in which Psalm 34 was written was not an honorable one. David was not normal; he disguised himself as being insane because he was before a king who had the power to kill him. As a result of disguising himself, David was delivered from Abimelech (1 Sam. 21:10—22:1a). Afterward, he wrote Psalm 34. In this psalm he gave all the credit to God, but actually he delivered himself by disguising himself. To disguise oneself is a kind of falsehood.Here W. Lee criticized David saying he was "not normal, not honorable, in a kind of falsehood." But who was the one who was really losing his mind???

Reading David's story here I was reminded of the Lord Jesus, the King of Kings, standing in "disguise" before Pontius Pilate. The Lord Jesus could have rightly dressed Himself in glory, surrounded by the heavenly host, with the Father's glory, yet instead He appeared as a beggarly preacher, all alone abandoned by all, to Pilate a "fool's fool." Name me one person at that scene who thought Jesus was "normal, and in an honorable situation?"

W. Lee totally missed Christ here. Once again he exhibits his life-long practice of creating standards by which he can condemn others, and uplift his own ministry. In the previous paragraph he wrote:
In this message we want to continue our fellowship on the mixed expressions of the psalmist's sentiment in his enjoyment of God in God's house. If we do not have a deep hunger to seek after the Lord with His Word, these messages may disappoint us. This is because what we may like according to our natural concept is exposed. What we see in the Bible and what the Bible is to us depend upon what kind of person we are. Our understanding of the Bible is always according to what we are. This is why we need to be adjusted and brought into the divine concept.
Here Lee, while denigrating David in Psalm 34, says "What we see in the Bible and what the Bible is to us depend upon what kind of person we are." He is right about that. But oh so wrong about David and the Psalms.

awareness

09-26-2018, 09:44 AM

Elaboration on this might be instructive. I do not believe a wholesale read back of the NT into the OT, such as the Psalms, is supported by the Bible itself for the reasons already stated. It is evident that human concepts, flawed human ideas, cultural influence, lies and deceptions and influences of spiritual forces , quotes of philosophers and works not accepted as part of the canon of Holy Writ, ideas derived from the period between the testaments, expressions of our physical world based on scientific knowledge of the time and not as we understand science today ....all are in the Bible.
Thanks for that.

The title of this thread is The Psalms are the word of Christ. I disagree. But I understand that at least some Christians have romantic notions of Psalms, and the OT, even The Song of Songs, while discounting or ignoring the brutality in the OT, and the facts of how it was written, and selected as canon.

And you've done a suburb job of expressing it. Thanks.

I've always heard, 'The Bible is the word of "God,'" not "Christ" ... which means it's all Christ. That's a very high -- and I suspect fringe -- Christology.

Plus, I respect that Lee looked at Psalms realistically. Except I think he didn't go far enough. And I'm concerned that you haven't gone far enough. I care about you too bro Drake. Your salvation isn't threatened by realizing that the books of the Bible were written over centuries, and by fallen men. It's not a salvation matter.

VoiceInWilderness

09-28-2018, 01:09 AM

It was not until about 100 years after Luther and Calvin that other Reformers introduced the idea of biblical inerrancy in the text itself rather than Luther and Calvin's view that inerrancy came about because of the inspiration of the Spirit, and they allowed for the possibility of human errors. That is, even if there is an error in the bible the Holy Spirit will provide the correct inspiration and we do not need to pretend that the bible is perfect. Luther even believed that an apostle's words may be uninspired and non-apostolic and an unbelievers words may be inspired and apostolic - it was evaluated against whether or not it made Christ known or not, based upon the words of Paul (1 Cor 2:2).

That is very surprising to me that Calvin believed as you say.
Do you have supporting evidence?

I believe in Biblical inerrancy. The Orthodox Jews do also and always have, and so did Jesus as proved by the below among others:
John 10:34 ... and the Scripture cannot be broken.

When Luther got old he was mentally ill due to ear infections.
That is when he made his horrible anti-Semitic rants.
I don't know when in his life he made the terrible mistake of saying that the book of James was uninspired. He said the same about Hebrews, Jude and Revelation, because these books contradict his overemphasized teaching on salvation by faith alone without works.
He also did not believe Esther, Jeremiah, Jonah and Song of Songs.
Luther had been a great man of God.
This shows me that no minister of the age is inerrant and needs the checks and balances of others.
But the Bible is inerrant.

When you say the Bible is not inerrant, I understand you to mean that there are mistakes in the Bible as originally written. Is that what you mean?

VoiceInWilderness

09-28-2018, 02:10 AM

-1

“Likewise, when it records historical events, genealogies, etc., it does so using the idioms and cultural norms of the time--yet it is without error.”

Neither does the Bible express our physical world in accurate scientific terms ... and it quotes philosophers and non inspired writings. Yet, it is without error.
These are self-contradicting statements. If the Bible is inaccurate, then it has errors. But then you say the Bible is without error, which is true, and means it is inerrant, right? Maybe you meant to say "precise" instead of "accurate".

Do you believe in the theory of evolution? It contradicts the Bible. If the theory of evolution is right, then the Bible is wrong and vice-versa.

The error in Aron’s understanding can be traced back to his definition of the Scriptural term “God breathed” ... he and Miller offer explanations of “God breathed” as if the Bible emerged out of thin air or as if the human instruments who actually penned its pages went into a trance of some sort and started scribbling. .
I don't believe most of the Bible was dictated by God. God used the writer's humanity to write it. I said the Bible does not contain any erroneous human concepts. I understand "God breathed" to mean similar to what Peter said:
2Pet 1: 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.
21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps they never understood that we have no original letters and the closest copies to the original are at least a hundred years and most are closer to 700 to 800 years removed. Maybe they don’t understand that the copies from which current versions are derived come from different schools with scribes that may have omitted or added a word here or there in an MSS to fit their concepts.... yet even that is instructive where it appears.
This is a different matter. The Bible is inerrant in its original manuscripts.
The Masoretic Text of the OT matches the Dead Sea Scrolls almost word for word throughout, even though the manuscripts are about 1,000 years apart. There are some significant 1-letter differences which affect the interpretation of prophecy, but none that affects how we should live our life and faith.
There are 1000's of NT manuscripts. They all agree similarly to how the NT and DSS agree. God has preserved His Word, as He promised.
Also the earliest complete NT manuscripts are not 700-800 years older than the originals. More like 300 years.

Nevertheless, the Bible we possess is without error but not in the way they describe that every word in it is a portrayal of Christ or God or an accurate understanding of the things of God. The human concepts are there, the lies are there, the workings of evil minds are recorded there.... and still it is without error....it is accurate in what it records.
The workings of evil minds are recorded there as what accurately happened. We can understand from the context that these are examples of what not to do. What WL said is much different. For example WL said that when God Himself speaks at the end of Job, that God's speaking there is not wise.
Or when Peter quotes Psalm 34 saying to keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking guile, WL says that Peter was wrong to quote that verse. So WL is disagreeing with the divinely inspired Biblical authors.

There is a possibility they are really smart and know all this and more....but merely engaging in sophistry.... to attack the object of their discontent... Brother Lee.
I do not know what sophistry is. I don't use sarcasm. I think Bro Lee was a great man of God. I learned how to understand the Bible from him. Bro Lee also had some serious mistakes, and as I said, I think his worst one was to say that parts of the Bible are unprofitable. When he excommunicated most of the former pastors and missionaries in 1988, he lost his checks and balances, as well as the Lord's blessing.
I was saved in the LC 1975, and remained there until the church in Detroit was excommunicated by the blendeds for not agreeing to the 1-Publication doctrine in around 2007.

Drake

09-28-2018, 07:15 AM

WL said that when God Himself speaks at the end of Job, that God's speaking there is not wise.
Or when Peter quotes Psalm 34 saying to keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking guile, WL says that Peter was wrong to quote that verse. So WL is disagreeing with the divinely inspired Biblical authors..

Please provide the two quotes mentioned above. Let’s have a closer look.

Drake

Evangelical

09-28-2018, 09:12 AM

That is very surprising to me that Calvin believed as you say.
Do you have supporting evidence?

I believe in Biblical inerrancy. The Orthodox Jews do also and always have, and so did Jesus as proved by the below among others:
John 10:34 ... and the Scripture cannot be broken.

When Luther got old he was mentally ill due to ear infections.
That is when he made his horrible anti-Semitic rants.
I don't know when in his life he made the terrible mistake of saying that the book of James was uninspired. He said the same about Hebrews, Jude and Revelation, because these books contradict his overemphasized teaching on salvation by faith alone without works.
He also did not believe Esther, Jeremiah, Jonah and Song of Songs.
Luther had been a great man of God.
This shows me that no minister of the age is inerrant and needs the checks and balances of others.
But the Bible is inerrant.

When you say the Bible is not inerrant, I understand you to mean that there are mistakes in the Bible as originally written. Is that what you mean?

With Calvin, it's a matter of debate.

These two articles present it from both sides.

https://postbarthian.com/2014/05/26/john-calvin-believed-original-autographs-bible-errors/

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/25/25-4/25-4-pp425-442_JETS.pdf

I believe the original manuscripts are inerrant. I cannot say the same of the multitude of versions and translations, or our modern day understanding of the original manuscripts.

What was more interesting to me was how their view, especially Luther's, seemed to differ from modern Reformers. Tracing the origins and history of biblical inerrancy doctrine seems to lead me closer to American fundamentalism than the actual teachings of early Reformers.

Evangelical

09-28-2018, 09:24 AM

I don't believe most of the Bible was dictated by God. God used the writer's humanity to write it. I said the Bible does not contain any erroneous human concepts. I understand "God breathed" to mean similar to what Peter said:
2Pet 1: 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation.
21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

I don't think human concepts are necessarily erroneous...just human. I see David's human concepts as God accurately and without error, communicating the truth to us about human nature. David's human concepts show us the law and our inability to keep it. It points us to divine concepts found in Christ in the New Testament. Seeing David's human concepts is more practical to me than pretending everything he wrote is divine.

VoiceInWilderness

09-28-2018, 06:28 PM

Please provide the two quotes mentioned above. Let’s have a closer look.

Drake
Here is the quote about God's speaking in Job:
Much of the speaking in this book is ambiguous. This is
the case not only of the speaking of Job, of his friends, and
of Elihu, but to some extent it seems to be the case even of
the speaking of Jehovah in 40:10-14. (Msg 29, p 155).
I had remembered it as something worse. As it is in the Life Study, it is not heretical.

Here is the extended context of where WL said that Peter was wrong to quote Ps 34. It is Life-Study of the Psalms, msg 16, p. 203-4. I've highlighted the parts I think are beyond the realm of what a Christian should believe:
2. The Way to Fear God
In Psalm 34 David spoke of the way to fear God (vv. 11-16;
1 Pet. 3:10-12). Verses 12-16 say, ‘‘Who is the man who desires
life, / Who loves having days in order to see good? / Guard
your tongue from evil, / And your lips from speaking deceit. /
Turn away from evil and do good; / Seek peace and pursue
it. / The eyes of Jehovah are set toward the righteous, / And
His ears, toward their cry. / The face of Jehovah is against
those who do evil, / To cut off the memory of them from the
earth.’’ These verses were quoted by Peter in 1 Peter 3:10-12,
but Paul did not quote such a word. Paul’s vision of the New
Testament economy was clearer than that of all the other
apostles.
When David asked, ‘‘Who is the man who desires life, /
Who loves having days in order to see good?’’ he was not
talking about the eternal life but about the physical life.
David was a great saint in the Old Testament, and Peter was
one of the great apostles in the New Testament, but I do not
believe that what David said here is spiritual. Even among
us, who dares ask the Lord to give him long days that he
may enjoy many good things?
MESSAGE SIXTEEN 203
David said that if we love having days in order to see
good, we should guard our tongue from evil and our lips from
speaking deceit. But who has ever succeeded in guarding his
tongue from evil? What David spoke here was according to
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Verse 15 says, ‘‘The eyes of Jehovah are set toward the
righteous, / And His ears, toward their cry.’’ But who is
righteous on this earth? Paul said that not one is righteous
(Rom. 3:10), and Isaiah said that our righteousnesses are like
filthy rags (Isa. 64:6). If we depend upon our righteousness
to enjoy God’s eyes and ears being set toward us, we will
enjoy nothing, because we have no righteousness of our own.
Concerning the righteous man, David said, ‘‘He keeps all
his bones; / Not one of them is broken’’ (v. 20). This is a verse
concerning Christ because David was a type of the suffering
Christ. When Christ was on the cross, the soldiers did not
break His legs when they saw that He had already died (John
19:33). John said, ‘‘These things happened that the Scripture
might be fulfilled: ‘No bone of His shall be broken’’’ (v. 36).
There were times in describing his sufferings that David
typified Christ.
When we look at Psalm 34, we can see the mixed
expressions of David’s sentiment. Verse 20 refers to Christ,
but most of this psalm is not according to the tree of life.
Our concept needs to be changed to the divine concept
according to the tree of life. As we grow in Christ, our concept
will be changed.

VoiceInWilderness

09-28-2018, 06:58 PM

I don't think human concepts are necessarily erroneous...just human. I see David's human concepts as God accurately and without error, communicating the truth to us about human nature. David's human concepts show us the law and our inability to keep it. It points us to divine concepts found in Christ in the New Testament. Seeing David's human concepts is more practical to me than pretending everything he wrote is divine.

Something can be a human concept and also be truth and profitable. Like math or verifiable science. Some concepts can be both human and divine, such as things that are witnessed to by our conscience.

Here is an example of what I mean by a statement that is both human and divinely inspired:
I posted the life study of WL on Ps 34. He said that David and Peter were not spiritual to say "Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking guile". WL wrote that this divinely inspired human utterance in both Testaments is not spiritual. If it is not spiritual, how was it that David and Peter were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it? WL says that Paul would never say such a thing, but Paul did many times. i.e. Eph 5:29.
Memorizing and singing this psalm helps me to keep my tongue from evil and my lips from speaking guile. It is not an unprofitable human concept as WL said. Neither is it a word about Christ. It is part of God's truth, and we need to live by every word of it. There is no such thing in the Bible as high truth and low truth. There is just "truth" and "the truth". It is a package deal. We need it all.

Can you give me an example of what you mean by something in the Psalms that helped you in the way you describe?

Drake

09-28-2018, 07:29 PM

VoiceInWilderness> “Here is the quote about God's speaking in Job:
Much of the speaking in this book is ambiguous. This is the case not only of the speaking of Job, of his friends, and of Elihu, but to some extent it seems to be the case even of the speaking of Jehovah in 40:10-14. (Msg 29, p 155). I had remembered it as something worse. As it is in the Life Study, it is not heretical. “

Let’s deal with Job first.

Those verses are ambiguous.

So what?

Drake

VoiceInWilderness

09-28-2018, 07:57 PM

Evangelical

09-28-2018, 08:06 PM

Something can be a human concept and also be truth and profitable. Like math or verifiable science. Some concepts can be both human and divine, such as things that are witnessed to by our conscience.

Here is an example of what I mean by a statement that is both human and divinely inspired:
I posted the life study of WL on Ps 34. He said that David and Peter were not spiritual to say "Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking guile". WL wrote that this divinely inspired human utterance in both Testaments is not spiritual. If it is not spiritual, how was it that David and Peter were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it? WL says that Paul would never say such a thing, but Paul did many times. i.e. Eph 5:29.
Memorizing and singing this psalm helps me to keep my tongue from evil and my lips from speaking guile. It is not an unprofitable human concept as WL said. Neither is it a word about Christ. It is part of God's truth, and we need to live by every word of it. There is no such thing in the Bible as high truth and low truth. There is just "truth" and "the truth". It is a package deal. We need it all.

Can you give me an example of what you mean by something in the Psalms that helped you in the way you describe?

1 Peter 3:10 does not match God's economy I think that's why.

Ohio

09-28-2018, 09:18 PM

So nothing. It's not a problem. I had remembered it as something worse from the live training.

Lee's more objectionable comments are continually edited out by his editorial staff.

Drake

09-29-2018, 07:53 AM

I posted the life study of WL on Ps 34. He said that David and Peter were not spiritual to say "Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking guile". WL wrote that this divinely inspired human utterance in both Testaments is not spiritual. If it is not spiritual, how was it that David and Peter were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it?

Ok Steve,

Here is where I think the disconnect lies. Someone being inspired by the Spirit to write something (now in the Bible) does not automatically make the thing written spiritual nor does it make it a spiritual truth.

Drake

zeek

09-29-2018, 11:57 AM

Ok Steve,

Here is where I think the disconnect lies. Someone being inspired by the Spirit to write something (now in the Bible) does not automatically make the thing written spiritual nor does it make it a spiritual truth.

Drake

Okay Drake, do you agree with Evangelical that:

1) any believer could write a book of the Bible if they wanted to and that many do and that they call them books and sell them in bookstores?

2) the Bible alone is insufficient?

3) only the Recovery knows about being one spirit with the Lord and what that means?

4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?

VoiceInWilderness

09-29-2018, 06:25 PM

1 Peter 3:10 does not match God's economy I think that's why.

God's real economy is what is defined in the whole NT, not parts that a man picks.

VoiceInWilderness

09-29-2018, 06:29 PM

Ok Steve,

Here is where I think the disconnect lies. Someone being inspired by the Spirit to write something (now in the Bible) does not automatically make the thing written spiritual nor does it make it a spiritual truth.

Drake

There is no such thing in the Bible as spiritual truth or non-spiritual truth.
If you can find that in the Bible, then I'll stand corrected.
There is just truth. One package deal.

VoiceInWilderness

09-29-2018, 06:34 PM

Lee's more objectionable comments are continually edited out by his editorial staff.

Yes, it was cleaned up. I remember that the elders in Detroit strongly disagreed with the Job training because WL said that God's speaking there was not the word of God.

VoiceInWilderness

09-29-2018, 06:45 PM

With Calvin, it's a matter of debate.

These two articles present it from both sides.

https://postbarthian.com/2014/05/26/john-calvin-believed-original-autographs-bible-errors/

https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/25/25-4/25-4-pp425-442_JETS.pdf

I believe the original manuscripts are inerrant. I cannot say the same of the multitude of versions and translations, or our modern day understanding of the original manuscripts.

What was more interesting to me was how their view, especially Luther's, seemed to differ from modern Reformers. Tracing the origins and history of biblical inerrancy doctrine seems to lead me closer to American fundamentalism than the actual teachings of early Reformers.

Thanks for those links for both views. Both were spot on for what I had asked.
Based on both articles, Calvin believed strongly in the inerrancy of God's word. The article that argues against that is defining inerrancy in an extremely narrow way, and also plays a little semantics.
I don't think Calvin is very skilled with the OT.

ZNPaaneah

09-29-2018, 07:05 PM

Ok Steve,

Here is where I think the disconnect lies. Someone being inspired by the Spirit to write something (now in the Bible) does not automatically make the thing written spiritual nor does it make it a spiritual truth.

Drake

But there are other verses which say "thy word is truth" and that Jesus is the "incarnated word". Timothy says "the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword dividing soul from spirit", so rather than a "spiritual truth" I'd say it is a truth that is a two edged sword which divides soul from spirit.

awareness

09-29-2018, 07:55 PM

I believe the original manuscripts are inerrant. I cannot say the same of the multitude of versions and translations, or our modern day understanding of the original manuscripts.
Unfortunately we don't have any autograph copies of any of the NT books. So we can't correct the more variants in the over 5500 pieces of NT manuscripts than there are words in the NT.

Don't trust any scholar(s) that claim they know something about the NT autographs.

To believe they are inerrant is a matter of faith.

Ohio

09-29-2018, 09:57 PM

Yes, it was cleaned up. I remember that the elders in Detroit strongly disagreed with the Job training because WL said that God's speaking there was not the word of God.

I am now studying the book of Job, and I am finding the hidden things of God everywhere. Just the other day I realized that Job was a righteous man who could not understand why God had forsaken him. The Father allowed him to taste this bitter agony in type -- the exact heart feeling of His Son when He cried out on the cross, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?" The word of God does not just speak to us in the obvious. Just as David tasted the agonizing pain of the crucified Christ, so did Job.

Drake

09-30-2018, 07:14 AM

There is no such thing in the Bible as spiritual truth or non-spiritual truth.
If you can find that in the Bible, then I'll stand corrected.
There is just truth. One package deal.

Steve,

Let’s start this part of the conversation with Peter since you used him in your second example and his use of Psalm 34.

Peter was a divinely inspired author.

Did Peter express any erroneous human concepts?

Thanks
Drake

awareness

09-30-2018, 07:48 AM

I am now studying the book of Job, and I am finding the hidden things of God everywhere. Just the other day I realized that Job was a righteous man who could not understand why God had forsaken him. The Father allowed him to taste this bitter agony in type -- the exact heart feeling of His Son when He cried out on the cross, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?" The word of God does not just speak to us in the obvious. Just as David tasted the agonizing pain of the crucified Christ, so did Job.
Maybe the Jesus story is everybody's story ....

Ohio

09-30-2018, 07:53 AM

Steve,

Let’s start this part of the conversation with Peter since you used him in your second example and his use of Psalm 34.

Peter was a divinely inspired author.

Did Peter express any erroneous human concepts?

Thanks
Drake
Does expressing supposed "erroneous human concepts" undermine the truth? And how do we define "erroneous human concepts?"

Does the expression of "erroneous human concepts" disqualify an author or his writings in scripture?

I think this takes us down a very slippery slope indeed. The Apostle Paul apparently expressed a few "erroneous human concepts" himself both before and after his salvation. He was complicit to the stoning of Stephen. A little erroneous? He later celebrated the Passover and then took a vow in Jerusalem, which the Lord did not approve of.

It is WL once again sowing seeds of doubt concerning the word of God. If I remember correctly, it was the serpent in the garden who first started this trend. Once we open up this Pandora's Box of doubt, we will now have inbred suspicions cast on every verse. Does this then reduce us to the safety of "red letter" verses?

Drake

09-30-2018, 08:02 AM

But there are other verses which say "thy word is truth" and that Jesus is the "incarnated word". Timothy says "the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword dividing soul from spirit", so rather than a "spiritual truth" I'd say it is a truth that is a two edged sword which divides soul from spirit.

I agree ZNP that one of the primary functions of Gods speaking is to operate within us. All Scripture is profitable in that way also.

Jesus in His divine eternal status as coequal in the Godhead is with and was God as the Word and this Word was incarnated, became flesh, and tabernacled among us. Some who beheld His glory, the glory of an Only Begotten Son, wrote down what they saw and that is included in the record in the Bible, Gods written and documented word to us. When we read the Bible or hear a message from the Bible with the Spirit then the written word becomes the instant word, a sword in function, the rhema, to operate in us, to divide the soul from the spirit.

Christ is the eternal Word, the Bible is the written word, and the Spiriit operates in us as the instant speaking word. These three uses of the “the word” are not interchangeable but all are Gods speaking to us in different formats, means, and ways.

That how i see the broader definition of the word.

Drake

Drake

09-30-2018, 08:19 AM

Okay Drake, do you agree with Evangelical that:

1) any believer could write a book of the Bible if they wanted to and that many do and that they call them books and sell them in bookstores?

2) the Bible alone is insufficient?

3) only the Recovery knows about being one spirit with the Lord and what that means?

4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?

Sorry zeek. I missed your entry until now.

Rather than have me review and critique what Evangelical said, do you disagree with what I said?

Drake

Drake

09-30-2018, 08:28 AM

Unfortunately we don't have any autograph copies of any of the NT books. So we can't correct the more variants in the over 5500 pieces of NT manuscripts than there are words in the NT.

Don't trust any scholar(s) that claim they know something about the NT autographs.

To believe they are inerrant is a matter of faith.

Nevertheless awareness, we can trust that God delivers to us His speaking in the canon of Holy Writ we call the Bible. Out of the thousands of MSS’s there is no substantive difference between them.

Drake

ZNPaaneah

09-30-2018, 12:51 PM

I agree ZNP that one of the primary functions of Gods speaking is to operate within us. All Scripture is profitable in that way also.

Jesus in His divine eternal status as coequal in the Godhead is with and was God as the Word and this Word was incarnated, became flesh, and tabernacled among us. Some who beheld His glory, the glory of an Only Begotten Son, wrote down what they saw and that is included in the record in the Bible, Gods written and documented word to us. When we read the Bible or hear a message from the Bible with the Spirit then the written word becomes the instant word, a sword in function, the rhema, to operate in us, to divide the soul from the spirit.

Christ is the eternal Word, the Bible is the written word, and the Spiriit operates in us as the instant speaking word. These three uses of the “the word” are not interchangeable but all are Gods speaking to us in different formats, means, and ways.

That how i see the broader definition of the word.

Drake

Well then I feel this is true of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, and James.

Evangelical

09-30-2018, 10:34 PM

Thanks for those links for both views. Both were spot on for what I had asked.
Based on both articles, Calvin believed strongly in the inerrancy of God's word. The article that argues against that is defining inerrancy in an extremely narrow way, and also plays a little semantics.
I don't think Calvin is very skilled with the OT.

Yes, I know Calvin is not a strong example, but Luther is. I still referred to Calvin because it is a matter of debate.

zeek

09-30-2018, 10:41 PM

Sorry zeek. I missed your entry until now.

Rather than have me review and critique what Evangelical said, do you disagree with what I said?

Drake

I'll be happy to answer your question once you have answered mine. I didn't ask you to critique what Evangelical said. I just asked if you agreed with him. You freely express agreement and disagreement on this forum. Here are the questions again:

1) any believer could write a book of the Bible if they wanted to and that many do and that they call them books and sell them in bookstores?

2) the Bible alone is insufficient?

3) only the Recovery knows about being one spirit with the Lord and what that means?

4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?

I think Witness Lee would have disagreed with Evangelical's statement on questions 1 and 2. I'm less certain what he would have thought about 3. I think he may have recognized that Christians outside the Recovery could be one with the Lord in some matters. Number 4 is a troubling theological paradox that may be inescapable for the believer. So, I ask you again: what do you think?

Evangelical

09-30-2018, 11:48 PM

I'll be happy to answer your question once you have answered mine. I didn't ask you to critique what Evangelical said. I just asked if you agreed with him. You freely express agreement and disagreement on this forum. Here are the questions again:

1) any believer could write a book of the Bible if they wanted to and that many do and that they call them books and sell them in bookstores?

2) the Bible alone is insufficient?

3) only the Recovery knows about being one spirit with the Lord and what that means?

4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?

I think Witness Lee would have disagreed with Evangelical's statement on questions 1 and 2. I'm less certain what he would have thought about 3. I think he may have recognized that Christians outside the Recovery could be one with the Lord in some matters. Number 4 is a troubling theological paradox that may be inescapable for the believer. So, I ask you again: what do you think?

Zeek,

this was for discussion in Alternative Views, not on the Open Forum. If this can be further discussed there, would be better. You have the wrong context about number 3) :)

The first and second point was also taken out of context. You are missing the "Perhaps because.. " on point 2, which is offered as an open possibility for discussion and not an absolute statement of belief.

Points 1 and 2 are based on the following observations:

No one writes books about other books or topics which are finalized and completed. It implies that the Bible alone is insufficient.

Trapped

10-01-2018, 12:07 AM

Okay Drake, do you agree with Evangelical that:

4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?

This throws me off because I would not call Judas's betrayal of Christ an "error in the Bible". I would call it an "error recorded and portrayed in the Bible". These are two vastly different things. There are records and stories in the Bible of the errors people have made, but that isn't what most would describe as "an error in the Bible".

Unless you mean it is an error that it is recorded in the Bible at all.

Evangelical

10-01-2018, 05:24 AM

zeek

10-01-2018, 06:04 AM

Zeek,

this was for discussion in Alternative Views, not on the Open Forum. If this can be further discussed there, would be better. You have the wrong context about number 3) :)

The first and second point was also taken out of context. You are missing the "Perhaps because.. " on point 2, which is offered as an open possibility for discussion and not an absolute statement of belief.

Points 1 and 2 are based on the following observations:

No one writes books about other books or topics which are finalized and completed. It implies that the Bible alone is insufficient.

Okay thank you for the clarification. You weren't stating that the Bible is insufficient. My mistake. But your statement is still untrue. People write books about completed books all the time.

zeek

10-01-2018, 06:16 AM

Zeek misquoted me. That is not what I wrote at all.

Here's an exact quote of what you stated cut and pasted:

"Even the errors are divinely inspired. Just like Judas's betrayal of Christ. God can inspire human mistakes for His purpose."

Here's my paraphrase of what you said in the form of a question:

"4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?"

I added "in the Bible" to supply context without quoting your entire post and "because" to make a causal connection that think you were implying. You do admit you were talking about the Bible, don't you?

10-01-2018, 06:30 AM

The problem with WL's treatment of Psalms (and Proverbs, Job, James and Peter) is not that he missed places that were about Christ.

The problem is that WL taught, especially later in his life, that if the Bible does not emphasize what WL emphasizes, then that part of the Bible is erroneous human concept.

There are many parts of the Bible, including Psalms that are not about Christ or the church. Most of Psalms show by experience how to live a godly, humble, down-to-earth, honest life. This is part of a balanced diet of the truth. WL said that such verses or whole Psalms or whole books were not the word of God, but are human concepts contrary to God's truth. I think this was WL's greatest error.

This whole thread took an interesting tangent with a great discussion about the inerrancy of scripture. But, I was struck and helped by the above post because when I reread some of “the go to verses” in the New Testament (including those cited in this thread) they support this thought. First here are links to the verses I checked:

https://biblehub.com/blb/luke/24.htm

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/3-16.htm

https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/10-11.htm

I was struck with this. In Luke 24 Jesus was able to point out during part of a 7 mile walk (say 6 hours?) the parts of scripture (Old Testament of course) that were about himself. Then what exactly do the other verses say scripture is for?
“profitable for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” and “these things happened to them as types and were written for our admonition..”, they don’t say “are all about Christ” nor “are all about Christ and the church”, nor “are all about God’s economy”.

I don’t know about you, but I find that liberating. Thanks VoiceInWilderness!
No more hunting every scripture to see how it is about Christ (what I’ve been burdened with).

aron

10-01-2018, 07:05 AM

I don’t know about you, but I find that liberating.

No more hunting every scripture to see how it is about Christ (what I’ve been burdened with).

I never said "every scripture is about Christ", or if I did I mis-spoke. What I said in the first couple of posts on this thread was that there is probably "more Christ" in the first 21 Psalms than merely Psalm 2,8, and 16.

I pointed out Psalm 3 and Psalm 6 and Psalm 18 as examples.

Drake and Evangelical will point out Job's companions speaking "naturally" &c; I likewise pointed out Manoah and his wife. But that was never the issue of this thread: it was rather, are 18 of the first 21 Psalms likewise "natural human concept"? That was my inquiry.

The NT reception gives us ample latitude to "see Jesus" a la Hebrews 2:9, in the types and figures of the OT. The pious Jew who loves God's word, who obeys, and is rewarded - "He rescued me (Christ) because He delighted in me" is an obvious example (from Psalm 18).

But I never insinuated that every word of Psalms, or Scripture, must be "Christ". The Psalmist writing in Psalm 51, "In sin I was conceived" doesn't sound like Christ to me.

To re-iterated my theme, WL departed from the apostolic precedent set in Acts 2 by Peter and Acts 13 by Paul in finding "Christ" in the Psalms. This pattern of reception and usage was similarly followed in Hebrews, Peter's epistle, and the four Gospels. The sinner David, in his struggle to find God, was a picture of the coming "Seed of David". And Asaph, Lemuel, etc. These "godly sentiments" were fulfilled by Jesus the Nazarene.

But no, not every single word has to be "Christ". I don't think that I ever suggested that. What I am saying is that there is a pattern of reception and usage in the NT, and we shouldn't be so quick, as WL was, to dismiss the pattern given us by the apostles and writers of the NT.

Ohio

10-01-2018, 07:45 AM

This throws me off because I would not call Judas's betrayal of Christ an "error in the Bible". I would call it an "error recorded and portrayed in the Bible". These are two vastly different things. There are records and stories in the Bible of the errors people have made, but that isn't what most would describe as "an error in the Bible".

Unless you mean it is an error that it is recorded in the Bible at all.
Great points, Trapped.

Failures, even by great men of God, are recorded in the Bible for our admonition and encouragement, and that's why Paul tells us that "all scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." (II Tim 3.16)

Even the betrayal by Judas, formerly Jesus' "familiar friend," (Psalm 41.9; 55.12-14) a trusted companion, warns us that it is never wise while following the Lord to compromise the truth, accept short term gains, condemn an innocent man, bear false witness, succumbing to filthy lucre, saving one's own skin -- all of which I saw when LSM's Blendeds held their Kangaroo Court at Whistler Resort to condemn and quarantine Titus Chu of Cleveland.

The Blendeds would be wise to learn all the lessons of Judas.

Drake

10-01-2018, 08:06 AM

I never said "every scripture is about Christ", or if I did I mis-spoke. What I said in the first couple of posts on this thread was that there is probably "more Christ" in the first 21 Psalms than merely Psalm 2,8, and 16.

Actually, what you said is that all a Psalms portray Christ. I responded to this in post #717.

Aron, you reserve the right to change your mind or admit you misspoke but it’s not accurate to say you never said it. Why is that important? Well, you staked out a position and we all met you there to discuss it. Thinking you had mistakenly and inadvertently driven a peg in the wrong place, I asked you at one point if your disagreement with Brother Lee was that you saw Christ in the Psalms in more places than he did because I intimated that if that was the case then, “so what?”. That was your out..... I was facilitating a path for you to a more reasonable and moderate position. I’m glad you have reconsidered and backed off that ardent and unreasonable stake in the ground.

So then, if your objection is that you see Christ in more Psalms than Brother Lee did then I ask again......so what?

Drake

aron

10-01-2018, 02:33 PM

Well, you staked out a position and we all met you there to discuss it.The position I staked out was that the ministry of Witness Lee deviated strongly from apostolic precedents in its reception of the Psalms, calling 18 of the first 21 psalms "natural human concepts"; I asked where was the NT precedent for this kind of wholesale dismissal of scripture? No answer. Instead I get a "Who cares".

Every fall, the LSM-captive assemblies send out tens of thousands of flyers to college freshmen, hoping to lure them into the thrall of WL's ministry. Perhaps some of these students will find the non-answer from the LSM apologist on this site as telling as I do.

awareness

10-01-2018, 04:14 PM

I asked where was the NT precedent for this kind of wholesale dismissal of scripture? No answer. Instead I get a "Who cares".
Yeah, he's willing to dismiss Lee's attack on the authenticity of Scripture, but when I mention the differences in the manuscripts, he accuses me of attacking the authenticity of scripture. And mine don't even question the authenticity of scripture, just the manuscripts.

And then Untohim deletes my posts, or moves them to Tartarus.

Evangelical

10-01-2018, 05:38 PM

Here's an exact quote of what you stated cut and pasted:

"Even the errors are divinely inspired. Just like Judas's betrayal of Christ. God can inspire human mistakes for His purpose."

Here's my paraphrase of what you said in the form of a question:

"4) even the errors in the Bible are divinely inspired just like Judas's betrayal of Christ because God can inspire human mistakes for his purpose?"

I added "in the Bible" to supply context without quoting your entire post and "because" to make a causal connection that think you were implying. You do admit you were talking about the Bible, don't you?

Yes it is about the Bible but you joined the sentences together and it sounds as if Judas's betrayal of Christ is a biblical error. I used two sentences to try and avoid that confusion.

awareness

10-01-2018, 08:24 PM

Evangelical

10-01-2018, 08:25 PM

Did God inspire the devil during the 40 day trial in the wilderness, when speaking to Jesus?

That's the kind of question I was hoping to avoid and sounds like a great topic on degenerate views.

awareness

10-01-2018, 08:46 PM

That's the kind of question I was hoping to avoid and sounds like a great topic on degenerate views.
lol ... Now, now. Be good.

Drake

10-01-2018, 09:41 PM

The position I staked out was that the ministry of Witness Lee deviated strongly from apostolic precedents in its reception of the Psalms, calling 18 of the first 21 psalms "natural human concepts"; I asked where was the NT precedent for this kind of wholesale dismissal of scripture? No answer. Instead I get a "Who cares".

“dismissal”? That is a synonym for your accusation that Brother Lee “lopped off” Scripture which you already recanted.

“...the human concept of the holy writers was produced out of their good nature created by God, formed with the traditions of their holy race, constituted with the teachings of the Holy Scriptures, promoted by their practice of a holy life, and uttered out of their holy sentiments and impressions.”

You may disagree with Brother Lee’s POV but he never wholesale dismissed scripture. The explanation he provides above (Psalm 1: Footnote 1) attests to his careful consideration of cutting straight the word of God, the book of Psalms, not dismissing it.

Drake

Ohio

10-02-2018, 03:09 AM

“dismissal”? That is a synonym for your accusation that Brother Lee “lopped off” Scripture which you already recanted.

“...the human concept of the holy writers was produced out of their good nature created by God, formed with the traditions of their holy race, constituted with the teachings of the Holy Scriptures, promoted by their practice of a holy life, and uttered out of their holy sentiments and impressions.”

You may disagree with Brother Lee’s POV but he never wholesale dismissed scripture. The explanation he provides above (Psalm 1: Footnote 1) attests to his careful consideration of cutting straight the word of God, the book of Psalms, not dismissing it.

Drake

You must be the only LC member who actually reads all the fine print.

Most LC members only remember not to read the book of James, and numerous Psalms, Proverbs, etc.

Why even read the Bible when those HWfMR's occupy all their time? And all those "glorious green books" on their shelves collecting dust

zeek

10-02-2018, 04:43 AM

Yes it is about the Bible but you joined the sentences together and it sounds as if Judas's betrayal of Christ is a biblical error. I used two sentences to try and avoid that confusion.

I see. Well once again, here's your statement verbatim:

"Even the errors are divinely inspired. Just like Judas's betrayal of Christ. God can inspire human mistakes for His purpose."

So, to try to paraphrase, once again, first you're saying that mistakes in the Biblical text were God-breathed. Is that right? Second, you're saying that Judas's betrayal of Christ, not merely the account of it in the Bible, was God-breathed. Correct? Third, you're saying that the God-breathed errors in the Bible are the same as the God-breathed crime of Judas. Do I have that right?

awareness

10-02-2018, 09:12 AM

Lopped off just hit my funny bone. Thomas Jefferson lopped off scripture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible), by literally cutting and pasting.

Did Lee do that? Did he cut the human verses out of the RcV?

I remember the first time Lee shocked me. At a conference he got so worked up about it "not being about the Bible" that, he tore one up on stage and stopped on it.

Now that's some pretty serious lopping off of scripture.

And a good point ... even if Bibliolatrist (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bibliolatry)'s don't like it.

Evangelical

10-02-2018, 04:57 PM

I see. Well once again, here's your statement verbatim:

"Even the errors are divinely inspired. Just like Judas's betrayal of Christ. God can inspire human mistakes for His purpose."

So, to try to paraphrase, once again, first you're saying that mistakes in the Biblical text were God-breathed. Is that right? Second, you're saying that Judas's betrayal of Christ, not merely the account of it in the Bible, was God-breathed. Correct? Third, you're saying that the God-breathed errors in the Bible are the same as the God-breathed crime of Judas. Do I have that right?

I'm confused by your analysis. I will write again what I meant:

We can trust the original text is without error because...

If there are any errors in the original text, they were there by God's sovereign will.

Just because a human makes a mistake (like Judas), does not mean that mistake is outside of God's will. Mistakes do not mean we cannot trust the original manuscripts.

Now at this point someone might wonder - did God cause Judas to betray Christ and Judas was "doing God's will". Well no, I don't subscribe to that gnostic idea.

What I believe is that Judas made a mistake (and God knew he would make a mistake) and God used that mistake for His purpose. Similarly, God knew if the apostle Paul would make a mistake in the original text, and God would use that for His purpose, somehow.

So any mistakes by the apostle Paul or Moses, God will use for His purpose.

An example of mistakes I can give is about science. It has mistakes about science, for example, such as the Egyptian cosmology, but that's okay because God used Moses's Egyptian view of science for His purpose - to explain to Job how He created the Earth, for example. For us today, it makes nice poetry, God hammering out the bronze dome of the Earth and putting pillars underneath it so it cannot be moved. The reality is the Earth moves and wobbles all over the place. Moses would fail a science test at school today.

Egyptian cosmology in the bible is an example of an "inspired error" but because of confusion around that terminology ("does God inspire errors?"), I prefer to say - "errors by a fallible human who was inspired".

Moses was inspired, He communicated the truths that God wanted Him to communicate accurately and without error, but he also communicated errors about science, to him they were not mistakes but the best of his knowledge at the time, to us they are errors.

zeek

10-02-2018, 07:14 PM

Evangelical

10-02-2018, 09:38 PM

Now you've changed your position. God using a mistake as you are claiming now is different from God inspiring a mistake as you were claiming before. You went from radical to conservative in one post. I don't think the moderately conservatives here are going to have a problem with your position on this issue now. Those that maintain that the Bible is scientifically accurate will take issue with your statement about Moses and the Egyptian cosmology though.

Not quite "changed" - I said one thing from two different perspectives. But I was only saying one thing - mistakes in the Bible (radically inspired or moderately conservatively used by God) are there because they are supposed to be (or allowed to be). It's another topic about God's sovereignty.

zeek

10-03-2018, 06:35 AM

Not quite "changed" - I said one thing from two different perspectives. But I was only saying one thing - mistakes in the Bible (radically inspired or moderately conservatively used by God) are there because they are supposed to be (or allowed to be). It's another topic about God's sovereignty.

To say that God inspired a mistake as opposed to that He used a mistake that was inspired by Satan or sin or human fallibility is not to say one thing from two different perspectives. A child could see the difference.I'm surprised you can't. In one case it's being asserted that God is the source of the error. In the other, God is using evil as an occasion for good as Jesus instructed us all to do following God's example.

Evangelical

10-03-2018, 05:12 PM

To say that God inspired a mistake as opposed to that He used a mistake that was inspired by Satan or sin or human fallibility is not to say one thing from two different perspectives. A child could see the difference.I'm surprised you can't. In one case it's being asserted that God is the source of the error. In the other, God is using evil as an occasion for good as Jesus instructed us all to do following God's example.

Allow me to explain:

God caused/inspired a mistake - this is the Calvinist perspective
God used a mistake or "allowed it to happen" - this is the Arminian perspective

These are two different perspectives about God's sovereignty. How do you see it? You might not see the two different perspectives if you are already decided on a position.

zeek

10-04-2018, 06:35 AM

Allow me to explain:

God caused/inspired a mistake - this is the Calvinist perspective
God used a mistake or "allowed it to happen" - this is the Arminian perspective

These are two different perspectives about God's sovereignty. How do you see it? You might not see the two different perspectives if you are already decided on a position.

How did they know?

Kevin

10-04-2018, 04:09 PM

Evangelical

10-04-2018, 05:15 PM

Wwutt? You got it wrong there pal.

Constructive criticism would be helpful. You're the Reformed expert here :D Your chance to shine bro.

VoiceInWilderness

10-04-2018, 05:51 PM

VoiceInWilderness

10-04-2018, 06:06 PM

Steve,

Let’s start this part of the conversation with Peter since you used him in your second example and his use of Psalm 34.

Peter was a divinely inspired author.

Did Peter express any erroneous human concepts?

Thanks
Drake

Peter did not write any erroneous human concepts into his epistles which are part of the Bible, nor in his messages in Acts.

Of course Peter as a Christian human being said things that were wrong, but not as a writer of the Bible.

Did Bro Lee say any erroneous human concepts?

VoiceInWilderness

10-04-2018, 07:07 PM

This whole thread took an interesting tangent with a great discussion about the inerrancy of scripture. But, I was struck and helped by the above post because when I reread some of “the go to verses” in the New Testament (including those cited in this thread) they support this thought. First here are links to the verses I checked:

https://biblehub.com/blb/luke/24.htm

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/3-16.htm

https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/10-11.htm

I was struck with this. In Luke 24 Jesus was able to point out during part of a 7 mile walk (say 6 hours?) the parts of scripture (Old Testament of course) that were about himself. Then what exactly do the other verses say scripture is for?
“profitable for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” and “these things happened to them as types and were written for our admonition..”, they don’t say “are all about Christ” nor “are all about Christ and the church”, nor “are all about God’s economy”.

I don’t know about you, but I find that liberating. Thanks VoiceInWilderness!
No more hunting every scripture to see how it is about Christ (what I’ve been burdened with).

You're very welcome bro. Thank you for you comments.
I actually found that truth liberating also.
You might like the song I made out of Psalm 26 about the working together of faith and works.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_26.htm

awareness

10-04-2018, 07:50 PM

When was that?
1970-1971 ... some where then. It was a big conference. Maybe The Kingdom Conference. It's been a long time. I remember it because it blew my mind. I loved it.

10-04-2018, 08:35 PM

You're very welcome bro. Thank you for you comments.
I actually found that truth liberating also.
You might like the song I made out of Psalm 26 about the working together of faith and works.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_26.htm

Wow! Thanks for sending the link to your web site. I’m blown away. Looks like an amazing resource.

Peace and grace to you in Christ.

JJ

aron

10-05-2018, 08:12 AM

I remember the first time Lee shocked me. At a conference he got so worked up about it "not being about the Bible" that, he tore one up on stage and stopped on it.

Now that's some pretty serious lopping off of scripture.

I saw, and heard of, similar expressions by WL, even if not so blatant and shocking as what you saw. How to characterize this? Perhaps "dismissed" would be better. Or "disregarded", or "minimized". How about "rendered to no effect"? Or Lee's favorite word, "nullified"? How about, "Lee's teachings nullified, on a wholesale basis, the divine basis of OT scripture in his exposition of the Psalms?

One word often used is "reception", as in "the reception of Psalms in the Book of Hebrews". There's a pretty good book on that, by Gert Steyn.

https://www.amazon.com/Psalms-Hebrews-Studies-Reception-Testament/dp/0567198847

My point has been this: When you look at the pattern of reception of the Psalms in the NT, where's a precedent to call 18 of the first 21 Psalms "natural human concepts", "mixed sentiments", "fallen" and so forth? Where's the invitation to do this based on the pattern of NT reception of these texts?

Apparently, WL took it upon himself; the chief basis seems to be Luther having called James "an epistle of straw", a point that Luther later reversed. Other than that, it was his own (fallen human) logic that led him there. We've shown numerous examples where this is self-contradictory. Talk about natural concepts!

Where's the NT basis to reject 18 of the first 21 Psalms as "natural", i.e. not divinely inspired revelation, a trend that WL kept up through the whole 150 chapters? And don't use Luther as your source - use some apostolic basis for your interpretation. Paul wrote that the Psalms were "words of Christ" and said you'd be "filled in Spirit" singing them - where does he or any other NT writer or speaker say that they are "natural" and "fallen"? We see plenty of examples in the NT of using Psalms for inspiration; where does the NT writer or speaker tell us to avoid it for its natural concepts?

VoiceInWilderness

10-05-2018, 08:18 PM

1970-1971 ... some where then. It was a big conference. Maybe The Kingdom Conference. It's been a long time. I remember it because it blew my mind. I loved it.

Awareness, From what I know of WL this could not have happened.

I think what maybe happened to Christine Ford's memory has happened to your memory of this incident. Maybe someone else did this. Or maybe WL tore up something else.

I was not saved until 1975, in the church in Cleveland, so that was before my time.

There are a couple bros here in Detroit who were in the LC before 1971. I will ask them.

awareness

10-05-2018, 09:38 PM

Awareness, From what I know of WL this could not have happened.
Well if you've ever tried to tear a Whitepages up, you'll know that you just can't tear books up willy-nilly (unless you're superman). And Lee may have been many things, but he wasn't that.

Did he tear some pages out of what everyone saw to be a Bible, and throw it on the floor, and jump on it? Yes he did. And there's no way to confuse bro Lee with any others. It happened. I saw it.

I was impressed. I grew up Bible! Bible! Bible! and more Bible! I knew there was more. And Lee was pointing to that. My being was filled with AMENS!

I remember it well. It was exciting.

I think what maybe happened to Christine Ford's memory has happened to your memory of this incident.
Haha ... good one brother.

Maybe someone else did this. Or maybe WL tore up something else.
And ... no insult meant ... but maybe what you think you know about Lee is wrong.

I was not saved until 1975, in the church in Cleveland, so that was before my time.
And I didn't know Lee before he came to America. Face it, we don't know, and can't know, the entire Lee. We only know what little we saw of him ... at most the last two decades of his life. I would have never thought Lee would compromise his own ministry, to cover for his bad boys, but he did. And I could go on.

There are a couple bros here in Detroit who were in the LC before 1971. I will ask them.
Check with Aron. I think he mentioned seeing something like it.

leastofthese

10-05-2018, 09:48 PM

Evangelical

10-06-2018, 12:29 AM

HERn

10-06-2018, 01:29 AM

If Lee did do that, there's nothing wrong with it - Moses smashed clay tablets chiseled by God Himself.

Whatever Evangelical this is I love your honesty. "If Lee did it there is nothing wrong with it". Does your opinion extend to everything Lee has done?

Evangelical

10-06-2018, 01:42 AM

Whatever Evangelical this is I love your honesty. "If Lee did it there is nothing wrong with it". Does your opinion extend to everything Lee has done?

I evaluate everything on its merits. If Lee did that and if it was wrong, He more than made up for it by writing a new bible version and hundreds of books.

HERn

10-06-2018, 01:46 AM

I evaluate everything on its merits. If Lee did that and if it was wrong, He more than made up for it by writing a new bible version and hundreds of books.

Keep it coming brother! So Lee paid for his sins by writing a new version of the Bible? Actually it was Kerry and associates who wrote your Recovery version. Actually God wrote the Bible.

Evangelical

10-06-2018, 01:47 AM

Keep it coming brother! So Lee paid for his sins by writing a new version of the Bible? Actually it was Kerry and associates who wrote your Recovery version. Actually God wrote the Bible.

Just like Moses receiving a new set of stone tablets to replace the ones he broke.

HERn

10-06-2018, 01:52 AM

Just like Moses receiving a new set of stone tablets to replace the ones he broke.

Yeah, just like it. Tomorrow you're going to get schooled by the smarter Evangelical.

awareness

10-06-2018, 08:10 AM

I evaluate everything on its merits. If Lee did that and if it was wrong,
I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. I thought his point was valid and right on.

Now, those that have idolized the Bible won't agree.

VoiceInWilderness

10-06-2018, 06:44 PM

Well if you've ever tried to tear a Whitepages up, you'll know that you just can't tear books up willy-nilly (unless you're superman). And Lee may have been many things, but he wasn't that.

Did he tear some pages out of what everyone saw to be a Bible, and throw it on the floor, and jump on it? Yes he did. And there's no way to confuse bro Lee with any others. It happened. I saw it.

I was impressed. I grew up Bible! Bible! Bible! and more Bible! I knew there was more. And Lee was pointing to that. My being was filled with AMENS!

I remember it well. It was exciting.

Haha ... good one brother.

And ... no insult meant ... but maybe what you think you know about Lee is wrong.

And I didn't know Lee before he came to America. Face it, we don't know, and can't know, the entire Lee. We only know what little we saw of him ... at most the last two decades of his life. I would have never thought Lee would compromise his own ministry, to cover for his bad boys, but he did. And I could go on.

Check with Aron. I think he mentioned seeing something like it.

I checked with a brother that was at the Kingdom Training. He said that did not happen. He also said WL would never have done that.

Your testimony is completely uncorroborated.

awareness

10-06-2018, 06:59 PM

I checked with a brother that was at the Kingdom Training. He said that did not happen. He also said WL would never have done that.

Your testimony is completely uncorroborated.
Did I mention that some wouldn't like it?

VoiceInWilderness

10-06-2018, 07:26 PM

Did I mention that some wouldn't like it?

Like Christine Ford's testimony, that doesn't make it true or false.
It needs some corroboration.
Who was in the meeting with you? How did you get there? How did you get home? What city was it in?

awareness

10-06-2018, 07:34 PM

Like Christine Ford's testimony, that doesn't make it true or false.
It needs some corroboration.
Who was in the meeting with you? How did you get there? How did you get home? What city was it in?
Goodness brother. There is no YouTube of it. Why is this troubling you so?

VoiceInWilderness

10-06-2018, 07:41 PM

Goodness brother. There is no YouTube of it. Why is this troubling you so?

Because it appears to me that you have lost your faith.

awareness

10-06-2018, 07:55 PM

Because it appears to me that you have lost your faith.
I don't follow brother. How does that have anything to do with my faith?

VoiceInWilderness

10-06-2018, 08:30 PM

I don't follow brother. How does that have anything to do with my faith?

To be saved we need to be assured of the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. If you don't know that the Bible is true, how can you keep that assurance?

When the Bible warns us not to commit certain sins, how can you stand firm, when you may think, those warnings were just Peter's wrong human concepts?

awareness

10-06-2018, 08:56 PM

To be saved we need to be assured of the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. If you don't know that the Bible is true, how can you keep that assurance?

When the Bible warns us not to commit certain sins, how can you stand firm, when you may think, those warnings were just Peter's wrong human concepts?
I don't think I have a dog in the fight concerning the wrong human concepts claim. You must be confusing me with some other Lee supporter out here.

VoiceInWilderness

10-07-2018, 04:55 AM

I don't think I have a dog in the fight concerning the wrong human concepts claim. You must be confusing me with some other Lee supporter out here.

What I understood is that you went way beyond those guys in saying that the Bible has errors.

Ohio

10-07-2018, 05:07 AM

Like Christine Ford's testimony, that doesn't make it true or false.
It needs some corroboration.
Who was in the meeting with you? How did you get there? How did you get home? What city was it in?

But he doesn't fly in airplanes any more and can't figure out which front door to use.

awareness

10-07-2018, 06:34 AM

What I understood is that you went way beyond those guys in saying that the Bible has errors.
I think it's possible that you are confusing the Bible with the manuscripts. And you are right. I have lost my faith ... in man ... cuz he tampered with the manuscripts of the NT, or was a clumsy scribe with the Word of God.

VoiceInWilderness

10-07-2018, 03:33 PM

I think it's possible that you are confusing the Bible with the manuscripts. And you are right. I have lost my faith ... in man ... cuz he tampered with the manuscripts of the NT, or was a clumsy scribe with the Word of God.

It sounds like you are saying that God was unable to preserve His own word, which He promised to preserve.
Ps 12:6 Pure words are the words of the LORD,
tried as silver is tried,
tested in a furnace of earth,
seven times purified.
7 Thou shalt keep them and preserve them,
from this generation forever.

awareness

10-08-2018, 08:24 AM

It sounds like you are saying that God was unable to preserve His own word, which He promised to preserve.
Ps 12:6 Pure words are the words of the LORD,
tried as silver is tried,
tested in a furnace of earth,
seven times purified.
7 Thou shalt keep them and preserve them,
from this generation forever.
Right on topic. Interesting verses. Aron started this thread concerning Lee's claim that, some of the Psalms aren't the word of the Lord.

And that's possible because, according to the Christian view of the Bible, God gave man a free will. That means scribes have free will and can, if so inclined, change what's being copied, or transcribed. The overwhelming evidence is, over the years, after copies after copies, we find, that has happened. And we don't have any original - autograph - copies of the books of the Bible, to be able to get at the pure - untampered with - word of God.

The Bible tells us to put our faith in God, and to not put our trust in man. And, sorry, but the Bible has been man-handled, by men of free will.

Thanks for the great verses brother. Does Lee consider them of the Lord, or of man?

Ohio

10-08-2018, 08:48 AM

awareness

10-08-2018, 11:57 AM

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has forever proven God's promise to preserve His word as an indelible witness to all mankind.
Well He didn't preserve that much in the Dead Sea Scrolls ; 25% of the OT, and none of the New Testament was preserved. And if we're talking God preserving "His Word," then we have to honor His preservation of the Nag Hammadi finds ; the so called Gnostic writings. God preserved them.

VoiceInWilderness

10-08-2018, 06:41 PM

Well He didn't preserve that much in the Dead Sea Scrolls ; 25% of the OT, and none of the New Testament was preserved. And if we're talking God preserving "His Word," then we have to honor His preservation of the Nag Hammadi finds ; the so called Gnostic writings. God preserved them.

The 25% of OT preserved in the DSS, 1,000 years older than the oldest Masoretic text, agrees basically word for word with the Masoretic text. It is proof how God has preserved His word.

Awareness, you say you have faith in God, not man, but the God we have faith in is defined by the Bible.

Do you know for sure that the Son of God became a man, died for our sins, and rose bodily from the dead? If you know that for sure, then how do you know it for sure? If you don't know that, then you have lost your faith.

awareness

10-08-2018, 09:09 PM

The 25% of OT preserved in the DSS, 1,000 years older than the oldest Masoretic text, agrees basically word for word with the Masoretic text. It is proof how God has preserved His word.

Awareness, you say you have faith in God, not man, but the God we have faith in is defined by the Bible.

Do you know for sure that the Son of God became a man, died for our sins, and rose bodily from the dead? If you know that for sure, then how do you know it for sure? If you don't know that, then you have lost your faith.
You are right. We wouldn't know about Jesus without the Bible. There's no other outside evidence of him ... except a few references like in Josephus, and even that has been meddled with ... and man-handled.

Drake

10-08-2018, 09:35 PM

I checked with a brother that was at the Kingdom Training. He said that did not happen. He also said WL would never have done that. Your testimony is completely uncorroborated.

Yep. I never saw Brother Lee do that or anything like it. That would be way out of character.

Drake

Ohio

10-09-2018, 03:32 AM

Yep. I never saw Brother Lee do that or anything like it. That would be way out of character.

Except for those who attended the Rosemead Conference referenced in John Ingalls' book Speaking The Truth in Love.

aron

10-09-2018, 08:03 AM

Psalm 42:7 Deep calls to deep in the roar of your waterfalls; all your waves and breakers have swept over me.

Jonah 2:3 You hurled me into the depths, into the very heart of the seas, and the currents swirled about me; all your waves and breakers swept over me.

It seems either Jonah saw himself living out the psalmist's vision, or vice versa. And the image of being buried in deep waters appears fairly often in the Psalms for some reason.

Thus we can see two textual witnesses of Jesus' experience within the earth. "Just as Jonah was 3 days and nights in the belly of the whale, so shall be the Son of Man three days and nights in the heart of the earth."

Arguably those are the three most important days in history. So to have a kind of corroborated record, even if it's in impressionistic poetry, should be of some interest.

Now, should we reject the poetic "water burial" images in Psalm 42 (and Psalm 18) as "natural" because the psalmist was a sinner, or because he expressed contempt for his enemies instead of blessing them? Because the NT receives similar verses as indicative of Christ. See e.g. Psalm 45 "your arrows are sharp in the heart of your enemies". And David's failure (to resurrect in Psalm 16) being explained by Peter in Acts 2 as overcome by his vision of the promised Seed. David's failure does not preclude Christ's victory.

So if we insist on rejection, does our rejection follow the pattern of reception in the NT, both in gospel, even at Jesus' mouth, and later in Acts and epistles? If we are "adding to God's word" as Evangelical says, then isn't calling the two living birds of Leviticus 14 "Christ" because they are clean and fly above the earth also "adding to God's word"?

WL did stuff selectively.. when he did it, it was okay, but when someone else did it they were "departing from the pattern of the NT" or some such.

awareness

10-09-2018, 08:14 AM

Yep. I never saw Brother Lee do that or anything like it. That would be way out of character.
That settles it. His not seeing trumps my seeing. And Drake must be Ron Kangas, or someone that's spent more time with Lee than Kangas, to really know what's out of character for Lee --- which means we're in the presence of a blended brother.

Ohio

10-09-2018, 09:36 AM

The Life Study is really ugly. I think WL had lost a lot of his mind by the time he gave the Psalms messages, but we in the LC were still following him blindly.

I would be far more lenient on W. Lee (and all elderly in general) if the decline we witnessed were simply mental in nature.

Lee protected his profligate son Philip, who regularly molested the LSM staff, by libelously attacking the credibility of life-long colleagues and co-workers. Then he claimed his ministry reached the "high peak" by purporting that his loyal followers were "becoming God."

I would suggest that this was not a failure of the mind, but of the conscience. Paul warned us to "hold faith and a good conscience" lest we become "shipwrecked." (I Tim 1.19)

aron

10-09-2018, 11:33 AM

That settles it. His not seeing trumps my seeing. ...I saw WL mock singing the psalms, "His mercy endureth forever" from the podium. He said it was "low". Then he said, "why not sing something from Ephesians?" (No, I don't remember what year. But I saw it and it's been corroborated on this forum).

News flash, the so - called "high peak epistles" of Ephesians and Corinthians advise the saints to sing the Psalms. So why sing Ephesians if you don't follow it?

And didn't someone see WL spit on Lang's book on the podium? Remember that the man was a 'charismatic' - a showman - who loved tossing red meat to his audience, which would then be toned down, sorry 'polished', by his editors before being printed, making him seem the picture of rectitude and decorum. Nigel Tomes had a thread on this.

So I wouldn't put it past him.

And yes, he mocked the psalm-singers. He didn't just say, "Don't sing the Psalms", he imitated them in a shaming way. Then he said, "Better to sing from Ephesians".

I know Drake may say, "So what" to my points. But maybe God will say "so what" to WL's points - he'll say, "Didn't I give 2,486 messages? Didn't I set up 425 churches, (only 85 of which 'rebelled')? Didn't my completed works fill 130 volumes and 3,296 pages?"

God will say, "so what"

Ohio

10-09-2018, 12:13 PM

I saw WL mock singing the psalms, "His mercy endureth forever" from the podium. He said it was "low". Then he said, "why not sing something from Ephesians?" (No, I don't remember what year. But I saw it and it's been corroborated on this forum).
I remember hearing that too. Lee used that to mock all Christianity for supposedly only knowing God's O.T. "mercy."

News flash, the so - called "high peak epistles" of Ephesians and Corinthians advise the saints to sing the Psalms. So why sing Ephesians if you don't follow it? And yes, he mocked the psalm-singers. He didn't just say, "Don't sing the Psalms", he imitated them in a shaming way. Then he said, "Better to sing from Ephesians".
Lee called Gal-Eph-Phil-Col the "Heart of the divine revelation," and even put these four books together in a pamphlet. I am perfectly fine with that, but for him to constantly promote "being filled in spirit," and dodge this serious N.T. exhortation about the Psalms (Eph 5.18-19) was a little crazy.

In 1978 Lee taught, "Whatever is in the Bible ... is the Word of God."

In 1995 Lee taught, "Not every word in the Bible is the word of God."

And didn't someone see WL spit on Lang's book on the podium? Remember that the man was a 'charismatic' - a showman - who loved tossing red meat to his audience, which would then be toned down, sorry 'polished', by his editors before being printed, making him seem the picture of rectitude and decorum. Nigel Tomes had a thread on this.

Hundreds saw Lee spit at that Rosemead Conference. It was a defining moment for many, as noted in Ingalls' account. Prior to that Lee was a vocal supporter of G.H. Lang as Tomes wrote. This becomes strong evidence to refute LSM's contention that the "New Way" was only Lee's burden to evangelize the whole earth. Actually, no, his goal was the takeover of every LC. Lang's book The Churches of God exposes those intentions, based on Exclusive Brethren actions of the 19th Century.

10-09-2018, 01:24 PM

aron

10-09-2018, 02:20 PM

Thanks guys for your good counsel to awareness. A hearty amen to it!

Also, I was at the “training” that Witness Lee mocked some of the saints for singing “His mercy endures forever” from the Psalms. So I am a witness of that. He wanted them to sing from Ephesians and other epistles of Paul and his footnotes on them instead. So, the next training (on Corinthians) saints had prepared some songs that used verses from Corinthians and others from his footnotes. I never heard “His mercy endures forever” sung again.

JJ

JJ thanks for speaking up. The more the LSM apologists try to assert something never happened, the more people need to say, "No, something did happen here".

Lee called Gal-Eph-Phil-Col the "Heart of the divine revelation," and even put these four books together in a pamphlet. I am perfectly fine with that, but for him to constantly promote "being filled in spirit," and dodge this serious N.T. exhortation about the Psalms (Eph 5.18-19) was a little crazy.Not only that but the exhortation was repeated with slightly different language in Colossians 3:16. So Ephesians 5 wasn't a slip of the pen. Paul repeated the exhortation to another congregation. In one of WL's "high peak" epistles, no less.
In 1978 Lee taught, "Whatever is in the Bible ... is the Word of God."

In 1995 Lee taught, "Not every word in the Bible is the word of God."

Even if you take his second statement as provable, in that Manoah said something dumb to his wife, and Job and his friends argued over arcane theology, and Peter said, "Not so Lord! This will never happen to you!", and Satan speaks in Genesis 3 (etc), notice that my first point in this thread was not "every word in Psalm 1,3,4,5,6,7,9,11,12,13,14,15,17,18,19,20,21 is a word of God or a word of Christ."

No, my point was, "Perhaps there's more Christ in the first 21 Psalms than just Psalms 2,8, and 16". That was all I was trying to say.

And Drake tried to change it, to saying that I was implying that "every word of the Psalms must reveal Christ". No, that's a false choice set. I was just saying perhaps there's more. That's all I was saying, by starting this thread.I think there is some Christ to be found in more than 3 of the first 21 Psalms. .I will mention why I think Christ possibly found in Psalms 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 in the next post. Maybe, just maybe, Lee fit the Palms into a "Procrustean bed" and cut off some of the Christ waiting to be seen there.Those are quotes from my first 2 posts on this thread. I didn't say that every word in those 18 Psalms had to be "Christ" or "of Christ" or "a word of God" (the last one meaning revelation of God v/v WL's 'man's fallen concept').

What WL seems to be saying, by contrast, is that every word of 18 of the first 21 Psalms is "of the tree of knowledge of good and evil" and not "of the tree of life". Because that's how he framed his introductory commentary in Psalm 1, a "natural" psalm (so-called), and this dismissive tone is continued in the ensuing footnotes. Again I covered this in detail the first 20 or so posts I submitted. In the RecV, a number of psalms get no comment, and those that do, the brief comment is not favorable, but is dismissive: "natural", "mixed sentiment" etc.

I merely said that perhaps there is "more Christ" in the Psalms than WL would let on. I didn't say every word had to be demonstrably "Christ".

You might wonder, well, why is my opinion superior to that of WL? He says "no Christ" and I say "perhaps more Christ". I prefer my option because 1) it's more in line with the NT pattern of reception of the Psalms, and 2) because Jesus said, "Seek and ye shall find". In the first 21 Psalms WL said, "No, don't seek. Nothing there." (Unless he was forced to by NT usage [i.e. Psalm 2,8,16]). No, I'd rather seek. I gave examples in Psalm 3, 6, and 18 where I found some profit. So I continue to dig.

"Oh the riches/Oh the riches/Christ my Saviour has for me" Again, from Post #2:

I have not covered Psalms 2 through 150 ... But I hope my point from Psalm 1 is made adequately, none the less, and is suggestive of further riches thus far ignored.

VoiceInWilderness

10-09-2018, 07:09 PM

You are right. We wouldn't know about Jesus without the Bible. There's no other outside evidence of him ... except a few references like in Josephus, and even that has been meddled with ... and man-handled.

Harold, you understand then, that you have lost your salvation.

Hebrews 3: 12 Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God.
13 But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.
15 As it is said, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion."

We prayed for you in the prayer meeting tonight to hear His voice and not harden your heart, and for the Lord to grant you repentance.

awareness

10-09-2018, 08:12 PM

Harold, you understand then, that you have lost your salvation.

Hebrews 3: 12 Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God.
13 But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.
15 As it is said, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion."

We prayed for you in the prayer meeting tonight to hear His voice and not harden your heart, and for the Lord to grant you repentance.
Oh my goodness, I'm gobsmacked. It's come full circle. My early days in the church was in the church in Detroit. And now the church in Detroit is praying for me.

Thank you, thank you, brother, for your prayers, and for the burden for me in your heart.

But I don't feel I have anything to repent for. I feel that I'm okay with God, and God is okay with me ... tho I don't deserve it.

Thanks again brother.

But back to brother Lee. Did Witness Lee ever do anything we would consider "out of character?" What about, saying that the saints that lost their money on Daystar "lost their virginity?" Was that in character?

I could list more. But just one is enough to prove that Lee did things that we would consider out of character. To be honest, Witness Lee's character was full of unpredictable cognitive dissonance producing contradictions and surprises.

VoiceInWilderness

10-11-2018, 08:10 AM

Oh my goodness, I'm gobsmacked. It's come full circle. My early days in the church was in the church in Detroit. And now the church in Detroit is praying for me.

Thank you, thank you, brother, for your prayers, and for the burden for me in your heart.

But I don't feel I have anything to repent for. I feel that I'm okay with God, and God is okay with me ... tho I don't deserve it.

Thanks again brother.
You are very welcome, bro.
One of the bros here, Rick Coleman, knows you.

I am thinking about the sad end of W. Nee's coworkers, Ruth Lee and Peace Wang. They were great servants of the Lord. They were not W. Nee rubber stamps. When it was found out that W. Nee had taken advantage of a sister coworker, both of them were righteously indignant and supported excommunicating WN.
When WL brought WN back, without any apology on WN's part, those 2 sisters went against what they knew was right, and from then on followed WN blindly.
When the communists exposed WN's sin above + against a 2nd sister coworker that no one had known about, the faith of Ruth Lee and Peace Wang was shattered. Apparently their faith was not in Christ or the Bible but in WN.
As you know, the 2 sisters were imprisoned by the communists and recanted their faith. Ruth Lee was taken to prison camps where she preached that Christianity was a lie. Peace Wang reported other Christians for praying, causing them to be beaten. It didn't help either one of them to get out of prison.
I wonder if your faith was in WL rather than in Christ and the Bible?
We also prayed for you at our Bible Study yesterday.

But back to brother Lee. Did Witness Lee ever do anything we would consider "out of character?" What about, saying that the saints that lost their money on Daystar "lost their virginity?" Was that in character?

I could list more. But just one is enough to prove that Lee did things that we would consider out of character. To be honest, Witness Lee's character was full of unpredictable cognitive dissonance producing contradictions and surprises.
I'll address this subject later. I want to give the Holy Spirit a little time to speak to you without me drowning it out.

awareness

10-11-2018, 09:04 AM

Hey Steve, thanks for your reply.

You are very welcome, bro.
One of the bros here, Rick Coleman, knows you.
How, when, where?

I am thinking about the sad end of W. Nee's coworkers, Ruth Lee and Peace Wang. They were great servants of the Lord. They were not W. Nee rubber stamps. When it was found out that W. Nee had taken advantage of a sister coworker, both of them were righteously indignant and supported excommunicating WN.
When WL brought WN back, without any apology on WN's part, those 2 sisters went against what they knew was right, and from then on followed WN blindly.
When the communists exposed WN's sin above + against a 2nd sister coworker that no one had known about, the faith of Ruth Lee and Peace Wang was shattered. Apparently their faith was not in Christ or the Bible but in WN.
As you know, the 2 sisters were imprisoned by the communists and recanted their faith. Ruth Lee was taken to prison camps where she preached that Christianity was a lie. Peace Wang reported other Christians for praying, causing them to be beaten. It didn't help either one of them to get out of prison.
I wonder if your faith was in WL rather than in Christ and the Bible?
It was lack of faith in Witness Lee that got me the boot. It was lack of faith in myself for joining Lee that put me on a track to learn about everything I took for granted, including Christ and the Bible.

We also prayed for you at our Bible Study yesterday.
Thanks so much. I can use 'em. Reminds me of Wednesday night Bible study.

I'll address this subject later. I want to give the Holy Spirit a little time to speak to you without me drowning it out.
The Spirit doesn't need time. There's plenty in this modern life that drowns it out. But the Spirit can speak in uploads at the speed of light ... or faster ... at the speed of thought.

Thanks brother. I'll let that happen.

aron

10-12-2018, 03:33 AM

awareness

10-12-2018, 07:26 AM

As you know, the 2 sisters were imprisoned by the communists and recanted their faith. Ruth Lee was taken to prison camps where she preached that Christianity was a lie. Peace Wang reported other Christians for praying, causing them to be beaten. It didn't help either one of them to get out of prison.
I didn't know this. How much of this history has been covered over! Amazing. I think the adage is appropriate, that if you don't learn the lessons of the past, you tend to relive them.
While the Spirit is still speaking, I too would like to know the source(s) of these details. Ruth Lee & Peace Wang were early founding sisters in the Nee movement. I might be wrong, but I don't remember these details in Lily Hsu's book, nor in Kinnear's Against the Tide.

Brother Voice must have different sources, or I missed it in my readings. Maybe he'll share them, or school me.

VoiceInWilderness

10-12-2018, 06:20 PM

While the Spirit is still speaking, I too would like to know the source(s) of these details. Ruth Lee & Peace Wang were early founding sisters in the Nee movement. I might be wrong, but I don't remember these details in Lily Hsu's book, nor in Kinnear's Against the Tide.

Brother Voice must have different sources, or I missed it in my readings. Maybe he'll share them, or school me.

It is in Lily Hsu's book, My Unforgettable Memories:Watchman Nee and Shanghai Local Church
which Awareness told me about.
https://www.amazon.com/My-Unforgettable-Memories-Watchman-Shanghai-ebook/dp/B00C6EHY1Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539389103&sr=8-1&keywords=lily+hsu+unforgettable+memories

The book is detailed and well corroborated.

At the end of the pdf version, there are links to appendices. Near the end of the list is "Li Yuanru and Wang Peizhen" (who are Ruth Lee and Peace Wang). That was the saddest part of the whole book.

aron

10-12-2018, 06:50 PM

At the end of the pdf version [of Lily Hsu's book] there are links to appendices. Near the end of the list is "Li Yuanru and Wang Peizhen" (who are Ruth Lee and Peace Wang). That was the saddest part of the whole book.

I remember reading about Ruth Lee from several sources, including a prominent spot in WL's "The Seer of the Divine Revelation". Don't remember that part. Thanks for bringing it up.For a variety of reasons, including the anti-Western movement of the 1920s, many Chinese Christian leaders were seeking ways to form indigenous churches that would be free from Western missionary control. Having moved to the International Settlement in Shanghai in 1926, Ni constituted in 1932 a group of “apostolic” co-workers that would lead what became the Little Flock Movement: Wang Peizhen (Peace Wang) and Li Yuanru (Ruth Lee), with Ni himself as supreme. They soon grew from a small household gathering to a network of local churches.

Amazing, to consider the toll of human lives that followed in the wake of WN & WL. From those who lost faith when Nee was exposed, to the "storms" of WL in Taiwan & U.S.A, the Krazy Kults that sprung up in the PRC, the "Great Rebellion" of TC & DYL, Daystar, Philip Lee, Max Rappoport, John Ingalls. . . add it up. It's a lot.

Then contrast to, say, Leland Wang, another Margaret Barber disciple, who co-founded the Church in Shanghai in his living room and was later called the "Chinese Billy Graham". How big was the human toll after him?

awareness

10-12-2018, 08:36 PM

It is in Lily Hsu's book, My Unforgettable Memories:Watchman Nee and Shanghai Local Church
which Awareness told me about.
https://www.amazon.com/My-Unforgettable-Memories-Watchman-Shanghai-ebook/dp/B00C6EHY1Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539389103&sr=8-1&keywords=lily+hsu+unforgettable+memories

The book is detailed and well corroborated.

At the end of the pdf version, there are links to appendices. Near the end of the list is "Li Yuanru and Wang Peizhen" (who are Ruth Lee and Peace Wang). That was the saddest part of the whole book.
Thanks Steve. Truth be told, if I hadn't already lost faith in Nee, Lily Hsu's book would have turned me into an atheist.

I'm still dumbfounded that, a man on the one side can be a powerful spiritual minister and leader, and then on the other side be, a man of the flesh. David does come to mind. Still, both had to pay for it.

I remember some time ago coming across Lee admitting that he did much of his ministry with the natural life. So if we follow them, just remember that : the system you are giving all your life to is very much of the natural man. We, and they today, made/make more of Nee and Lee than they deserve/deserved, or could live up to ... except as personality cult leaders ... that had to come from their natural man.

Maybe the reason Lee saw the natural man in scripture is cuz he was looking thru his own natural man glasses.

I don't know. But I agree. When I look at scripture thru my natural man, I see lots of natural man stuff in it.

VoiceInWilderness

10-13-2018, 07:29 PM

Thanks Steve. Truth be told, if I hadn't already lost faith in Nee, Lily Hsu's book would have turned me into an atheist.
Thank you for your honesty. That is apparently what happened to Ruth Lee, and she influenced Peace Wang.

WL said that there were only 3 people who were absolutely one with WN: himself, Ruth Lee and Peace Wang. Lily Hsu's book bears that out.
This shows how destructive it is to follow a man absolutely like that.

What would have been a healthy reaction on their part to the exposing of WN would have been to realize that they were wrong to follow a man to that extent. They could have recalled the past when they started the local church with WN and were able to fellowship honestly and to disagree with him.

WN could have escaped to Taiwan, but chose to stay and suffer immensely.

I'm still dumbfounded that, a man on the one side can be a powerful spiritual minister and leader, and then on the other side be, a man of the flesh. David does come to mind. Still, both had to pay for it.
I don't understand that either. I can only process what I saw with WL.
There was great blessing on the local church in the beginning, at least up to 1977, and I think up to 1988. Don Rutledge records it well. WL was not the center of the church before 1977, at least to us in Cleveland, and we felt we were one with all Christians, including those with different views than us.
When WL excommunicated all the ex-pastors and missionaries in the churches in 1988, the blessing had ended. We could not get any non-Chinese to join the church and stay. WL could still sometimes give a good message based on what the Lord had already given him, but the Lord didn't give him anything more. The new revelations WL saw after that were all destructive, as far as I know.

I remember some time ago coming across Lee admitting that he did much of his ministry with the natural life.
I don't remember that, but I commend him for that because it is honest.
That statement was probably pre 1977, or at least pre 1984.

So if we follow them, just remember that : the system you are giving all your life to is very much of the natural man.
Giving your life to a system is wrong, whether it is of the natural man or spiritual man.
I had done that until we had a church split in 2007 over the "one publication" edict. I had thought we were better than other Christians because I thought we were more dedicated to oneness, (at the expense of truth and honesty) and then we had a church spilt over something that other Christians would have fellowshipped about and handled maturely and been reconciled. We had an ex-pastor meeting with us then, and he said that he had seen many church splits, but never one that was so avoidable as this. And we had prided ourselves on Oneness. That told me that we were on the wrong road. The right road was what we had been on before WL became the center of the church - following Christ, the Spirit, the Bible and our spirit.

We, and they today, made/make more of Nee and Lee than they deserve/deserved, or could live up to ... except as personality cult leaders ... that had to come from their natural man.
That is a terrible place to be in.
KJV 1 Corinthians 4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

Maybe the reason Lee saw the natural man in scripture is cuz he was looking thru his own natural man glasses.

I don't know. But I agree. When I look at scripture thru my natural man, I see lots of natural man stuff in it.
We do project our faults onto others and also onto the Bible.
I think the "natural man" teaching by WL was off and even more off how it was distorted in testimonies.
"natural" is "soulish". Adam became a living soul when God breathed into his nostrils. So he had a soulish or "natural" body before the fall. That is Adam had a body, soul and spirit, but he was dominated by the soul.
We human beings need to live by both our soul and our spirit, and we are going to be dominated by our soul. If we reject our spirit and live only by the soul, we cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God. But until we receive spiritual bodies, we are still living souls in this age, and our dominant part is our soul. That is what it means that Adam became a living soul. To reject our soul as "natural" is to reject what it means to be a human being.

Weighingin

10-13-2018, 08:29 PM

Ohio

10-13-2018, 09:25 PM

It took me over 30 years to realize fully that following the ministry of LSM/Lee was not the same as following God. I thought my experiences of Christ, etc had to come from that ministry. The Lord is merciful and enlightening, but it seems He leaves it to us to seek how to be with Him.

MeToo, not to be trite.

After 30 years, I also was confronted with 2 choices, to be of Lee, or to be of Chu. Thus, something so idiotic and Romish as the One Publication Bull was used by the Lord to expose where we really were. We had become completely leavened, and needed a good purging.

Weighingin

10-13-2018, 10:08 PM

awareness

10-14-2018, 09:19 PM

Thank you for your honesty. That is apparently what happened to Ruth Lee, and she influenced Peace Wang.
I've seen it happen for others too brother. One that comes immediately to mind is a sister I've known since before the LC. I brought her and her then boyfriend in. They stayed in 5 years after I left. The same thing happened to them that happened to me : over loyalty to Christ over Lee.

After they left, she dropped it all ; everything religious ; the Bible ; Jesus : God ; the whole shebang, if you will. Her husband became an alcoholic. My dearest friend today, going back to Kangas and Detroit, is now a Hindu. And a friend going back to 2nd grade, who once was an elder, is now a Native American Shaman. All of these are still fine people. They are caring, loving, giving, and honest, human beings. I love them. Not only am I not able to turn my love for them off, I don't want to.

WL said that there were only 3 people who were absolutely one with WN: himself, Ruth Lee and Peace Wang. Lily Hsu's book bears that out.
This shows how destructive it is to follow a man absolutely like that.
The need to follow a man is a need of the flesh.

What would have been a healthy reaction on their part to the exposing of WN would have been to realize that they were wrong to follow a man to that extent. They could have recalled the past when they started the local church with WN and were able to fellowship honestly and to disagree with him.
I never knew Lee to have a Q & A after his speakings.

WN could have escaped to Taiwan, but chose to stay and suffer immensely.
He probably felt he deserved it.

I don't understand that either. I can only process what I saw with WL.
Yet we didn't know Nee or Lee

I don't remember that, but I commend him for that because it is honest. That statement was probably pre 1977, or at least pre 1984.
1994

Giving your life to a system is wrong, whether it is of the natural man or spiritual man.
Up until around 1977 I didn't feel I was giving myself to a system, or to following a man. I had "The Vision." The vision was that the local church was the spearhead of God's present move on the earth. I was in God's eternal purpose ... not a system.

I had done that until we had a church split in 2007 over the "one publication" edict. I had thought we were better than other Christians because I thought we were more dedicated to oneness, (at the expense of truth and honesty) and then we had a church spilt over something that other Christians would have fellowshipped about and handled maturely and been reconciled. We had an ex-pastor meeting with us then, and he said that he had seen many church splits,
I grew up in the Southern Baptist church, and we moved a lot ; Detroit, Miami, Kentucky, and back to Detroit. With each move my mother carefully found just the right conservative Southern Baptist church. And in every case things were fine for awhile, and then some minor disagreement would crop up, then the love they shared turned to harsh disagreement, that led to a split with much animosity. I heard it told that that was why the Southern Baptist churches grew. It looked like a cancer to me.

but never one that was so avoidable as this. And we had prided ourselves on Oneness. That told me that we were on the wrong road. The right road was what we had been on before WL became the center of the church - following Christ, the Spirit, the Bible and our spirit.
I got pushed out for saying that.

That is a terrible place to be in.
KJV 1 Corinthians 4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
So 20 years after Pentecost Paul was already encountering division by following men. Now look at Christianity. I don't know, I don't have the stats, but it sure looks to me that Christianity is the most divided religion on the earth.

But Lee's solution was to become the center of oneness.

We do project our faults onto others and also onto the Bible.
I think the "natural man" teaching by WL was off and even more off how it was distorted in testimonies.
"natural" is "soulish". Adam became a living soul when God breathed into his nostrils. So he had a soulish or "natural" body before the fall. That is Adam had a body, soul and spirit, but he was dominated by the soul.
We human beings need to live by both our soul and our spirit, and we are going to be dominated by our soul. If we reject our spirit and live only by the soul, we cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God. But until we receive spiritual bodies, we are still living souls in this age, and our dominant part is our soul. That is what it means that Adam became a living soul. To reject our soul as "natural" is to reject what it means to be a human being.
At first I was mesmerized by the three circles. It told me in three's how I was made up ; a trinity.

But it's not true. We are not three separate compartments. The body is not separate from the soul and the spirit. The soul is not separate from the body and the spirit, and the spirit is not separate from the body and the soul. Why?

Because just like the trinity, the three are one. Our entire being is all body, soul (mind), and spirit ; one hundred percent each all in one. And they all inform my decision making (done in my soul methinks). The body is the clear winner. We tend to that the most every day. It speaks the loudest. In fact, we desperately need the soul and the spirit to pull back hard on its reins. Still, when ya gotta go ya gotta go ; no need for three confirmations from the spirit. When we're hungry we eat. When we need sleep we sleep. The needs of the body rule.

But I ramble. Thanks Steve for your great response.

I wasn't there for Ruth Lee and Peace Wang. I don't know what they went thru. I don't know why they became atheists. Maybe just to fit in with the atheist authorities ... I don't know. China is still 90% atheist. Many of them are so atheist that they don't even know that they are atheist's. They know nothing of religion of any sort ... even the atheist religion.

I don't know brother Voice. This hits close to home for me. You recently told me that I've lost my salvation. You don't know the half of it brother. Many years ago I once went around for a year or so saying that, God is deaf, dumb, and mute. Why? Because my conversations with Him were a monologue, as in, I did all the talking. If I had a life long friend, and I did all the talking, I would eventually conclude that he, or she, was deaf dumb and mute.

So I kind of understand Ruth Lee and Peace Wang.

I guess I've said enough for now.

Ohio

10-15-2018, 06:26 AM

The turmoil that resulted from who followed Lee more faithfully, BL Bros or Titus, with the "quarantine", just hurt and divided the saints. The history of the dreaded "Christianity" repeats itself. I only saw this recently. It actually has been over 40 years.
Weighingin, we probably should restrict our comments here to the thread topic about Psalms.

Would you consider opening your own thread on the Introductions sub-forum? You could introduce certain LC issues most disturbing to you.

Weighingin

10-15-2018, 08:14 AM

Sure, thanks for the direction on presentation.

VoiceInWilderness

10-16-2018, 07:59 PM

I don't know brother Voice. This hits close to home for me. You recently told me that I've lost my salvation. You don't know the half of it brother. Many years ago I once went around for a year or so saying that, God is deaf, dumb, and mute. Why? Because my conversations with Him were a monologue, as in, I did all the talking. If I had a life long friend, and I did all the talking, I would eventually conclude that he, or she, was deaf dumb and mute.

So I kind of understand Ruth Lee and Peace Wang.

I guess I've said enough for now.

Thanks Awareness, that was a good and thoughtful answer.

(My uncle just passed away peacefully yesterday, at 100 years old, so I'm in Baltimore for the funeral today.)

God's speaking to us is not like I am speaking to you and you to me.

When the Lord resurrected, He appeared to the disciples and told them that He was going before them to a certain mountain in Galilee.
Peter and the disciples go to that mountain, and guess what? - No Jesus. They waited probably for days, and no Jesus. So Peter, offended that Jesus did not keep His word, says, I'm going fishing. And you know the story of the Lord's appearing to them after they spent all night fishing and caught nothing.
The Lord had kept His word: He was there before them on the mountain in Galilee, but He was invisible, and seemingly not speaking. In this way, after His resurrection, the Lord spent 40 days with them, appearing and disappearing, training them to live by His invisible presence and still small voice. (This was one of the many great teachings of WL. I don't know if he got it from someone else, but that doesn't matter to me.)

Call to mind in your past when you had the Lord's speaking. Here are some examples that come to my mind of how the Lord spoke to me in various ways.

1. I could not tell if Jesus was God or not. I had just come to the church in Cleveland, and bros showed me verses showing that Jesus was God, esp. Isa 9:6, but I didn't feel they could explain other verses that implied that Jesus was not God. A bro invited me over for dinner, and after dinner we pray-read John 14. 2 bros were reading and shouting and rejoicing, and I felt, "This is not for me". Then a bro said to me, "Steve, your spirit's connected to your mouth." He was pointing for me to read v8 where Philip tells the Lord to show us the Father. For some reason I said, "Oh, since my spirit's connected to my mouth, I'll start with v1", not knowing what I was saying. When I spoke v1 "Let not your heart be troubled", I felt that the Lord was speaking the verse to me in my heart. My heart was very troubled because I felt that I could not be saved because I could not know if Jesus was God. Instantly my heart was not troubled, but a joy that I had never felt before rose up in my heart instead. Then I continued and the Lord kept speaking in my heart, "You believe in God, believe also in Me." I started laughing. It was so simple. I believe in God, believe also in Jesus. I understood, How could I believe in Him if He were not God. Then I continued, "In My Father's house are many abodes. If it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you." I jumped up and we all started dancing around the house. On my way driving home, I was rubbing my heart, it felt so good. I told one of my frat bros, "What I experienced today was worth a whole lifetime of suffering."

2. I had just been saved and baptized for about 1 month. 4 of us had a daily evening prayer meeting at the fraternity house that I lived at. One of the bros started to become worldly, I thought. I was in a quandary how to help him. While walking quickly between classes, I thought, Eureka! I'll pray about it! When I got home to my frat room, I shut the door and prayed how to help this bro. Nothing from the Lord. So I said, Lord, here are 3 ways: I could rebuke him, or I could not say anything but be an example to him, or I could rebuke him in love. No answer. So I said, Lord, I feel the best about rebuking him in love, so that's what I'll do. And I heard a sound like a lion's roar. I jumped off my bed, and got down on my knees, and said, "What did you say, Lord?" I heard, "You change My words." And then, "Trust in Me, I will give you life." That was the only time I heard the Lord's voice externally.

3. I was typing my computer program on a keypunch. The computer room proctor was a little Jewish boy like me. I was praying for him to be saved, while I was keypunching. A big unkempt motorcycle gangster walked into the computer room smoking a cigarette. As the motorcycle guy was organizing his punch cards, the little proctor walked over, grabbed his arm and crushed out the cigarette, saying, No smoking allowed!, and then sat back down at his desk.
The motorcycle guy was enraged. He turned red and started charging at the proctor yelling, I'll teach you! I said, "Lord! What should I do?" No answer. So I just jumped up and got in the motorcycle guy's face, having no idea what to say. Then when I looked at the guy's face I knew exactly what to say. I recognized that I had preached the gospel to this guy before and he had told me he was a Christian. I yelled, "You're a Christian! What are you doing!?" He was dumbfounded and didn't know what to say. We became good friends, and he became a solid Christian.

4. I was reviewing a pile of about 30 resumes to narrow down to 5 people to interview. I saw one was an Arab name, and tossed it to the reject pile. Then the verse came to me, "You shall not despise an Egyptian because you sojourned in his land." I said, Wow, and I picked up the resume, and looked, and the guy was an Egyptian. I read over the resume again, and it was as good as the others on the "keep" pile. We hired him. He saved one of my projects that was failing which became a very successful project. He was one of the first immigrants that my company sponsored for a green card.

awareness

10-17-2018, 08:25 AM

(My uncle just passed away peacefully yesterday, at 100 years old, so I'm in Baltimore for the funeral today.)
Sorry to hear that. Hope he lived a full life.

God's speaking to us is not like I am speaking to you and you to me.
I eventually learned that. But still. The Bible depicts God as audibly speaking ; like at Jesus' baptism. He's certainly couldn't be considered deaf, dumb, and mute, back then. He even spoke thru a burning bush ... and ... let's not forget, an ass. Don't I rate at least that? I feel like one at times.

Bro Voice, I really enjoyed your examples of the Lord speaking to you. And I noticed that God once spoke to you "externally." You obviously rate better than I. But didn't God have to speak audibly thru the ass because Balaam was so stubborn?

Maybe like Balaam, I'd hear God's voice if like Balaam I gave God push back. But I have. I've shaken my fist at God plenty of times. In fact, when my young son died I shook my fist and challenged Him to hurt me as much as he wanted, that I wasn't running from the devastating grief and pain of that loss, into some easy escape. It got me thru. There's way more story to it ... that's on going.

Thanks brother. It's always great to hear from you.

10-19-2018, 11:39 PM

I wouldn’t worry about not hearing the Lord speak to me personally because he already has through His Son, apostles, and Spirit. It is more a matter of how I respond to the words he has already spoken to all of us.

God spoke that He is well pleased in His Son, that we should hear Him, and that He spoke to us in His Son. His Son is the radiance of His glory and the express image of His substance.
Luke 3:22 https://biblehub.com/blb/luke/3.htm
Matthew 17:5 https://biblehub.com/blb/matthew/17.htm
Hebrews 1 https://biblehub.com/blb/hebrews/1.htm

God sent His Son as the Word - we just need to behold His glory and believe in Him to have eternal life
John 1:1-14 https://biblehub.com/blb/john/1.htm

When we turn our heart to the Lord, behold and reflect Him, He transforms us into the same image as He.
2 Cor 3:16-18 https://biblehub.com/blb/2_corinthians/3.htm

God also sent apostles to speak God’s word to us. Hearing, believing, and being obedient to their word is the same as God’s word and causes us to enter into God’s rest. Such a word is living and active, divides soul from spirit and joints from marrow, and lays everything bare to the eyes of God the judge. Therefore, since we have such a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to what we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who was tempted in every way that we are, yet was without sin. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

God wants us to be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and without blemish; and esteem the patience of our of our Lord as salvation, grow in grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity.

1 Thessalonians 2:13
https://biblehub.com/blb/1_thessalonians/2.htm
Hebrews 4:2:7-16 https://biblehub.com/bsb/hebrews/4.htm
2 Peter 3:15-18
https://biblehub.com/blb/2_peter/3.htm

Keep away from any brother who leads an undisciplined life, not in keeping with the word heard from the apostles.
2 Thess. 3:14 https://biblehub.com/bsb/2_thessalonians/3.htm

God wants us to receive in meekness the implanted word (spoken to us by the apostles) and be doers of the word and not hearers only.
James 1:25 https://biblehub.com/blb/james/1.htm

John exhorted us to hear what the Spirit has spoken to the churches in
Revelation 2 and 3 http://biblehub.net/search.php?q=Let+him+hear+what+the+Spirit+says

So, what me worry about God not speaking to me? No way. He has indeed.

I hope this is an encouragement when it seems that God is silent.

10-20-2018, 10:48 AM

And, God has spoken to me many times and still does through the foolishness of men preaching concerning Christ and His Cross. However it is done I will respond by calling on His name and rejoicing :yep:

1 Cor 1:23 https://biblehub.com/blb/1_corinthians/1.htm
Romans 10:1-15 https://biblehub.com/blb/romans/10.htm
Philippians 1:15-18 https://biblehub.com/blb/philippians/1.htm

Even before and after that God spoke ands speaks night and day through His creation (even though I was initially ignorant to it for years!).
Romans 1:20 https://biblehub.com/blb/romans/1.htm

So, “God doesn’t speak to me” or “God sent me a text”. Lies from the enemy!

VoiceInWilderness

11-06-2018, 01:00 PM

I eventually learned that. But still. The Bible depicts God as audibly speaking ; like at Jesus' baptism. He's certainly couldn't be considered deaf, dumb, and mute, back then. He even spoke thru a burning bush ... and ... let's not forget, an ass. Don't I rate at least that? I feel like one at times.
We rate higher than Balaam. We don't want the Lord speaking to us through an ass. That would mean that we are lower than an ass. Balaam's end is not good.

Bro Voice, I really enjoyed your examples of the Lord speaking to you. And I noticed that God once spoke to you "externally." You obviously rate better than I. But didn't God have to speak audibly thru the ass because Balaam was so stubborn?
I think God spoke to Balaam through the ass for our benefit.
Balaam, though he was a famous servant of God, was beyond correction.
I think the reason God spoke to me that one time in an external voice was because I was a new believer and did not have a Christian background. I have heard testimonies from Muslims who got saved that are similar.

Maybe like Balaam, I'd hear God's voice if like Balaam I gave God push back. But I have. I've shaken my fist at God plenty of times. In fact, when my young son died I shook my fist and challenged Him to hurt me as much as he wanted, that I wasn't running from the devastating grief and pain of that loss, into some easy escape. It got me thru. There's way more story to it ... that's on going.
owee, ow, ow. I actually know how you feel. My beautiful son, Isaac, went to be with the Lord in Feb, 2016. It was a 7 year harrowing process. My wife would cry all night long. But the Lord was there. He was near me, and speaking through the word. What kept me going those 7 years was the Psalms. Down-to-earth, honest and holy templates for prayer.

Thanks brother. It's always great to hear from you.
thanks bro

aron

11-24-2018, 08:37 AM

How did Brother Lee treat the OT? He opened it up thoroughly. As ZNP observed verse by verse. But you mean Psalms... well, I took your advice and thumbed through the RcV and on almost every page in the book of Psalms there are footnotes.

Now, granted these footnotes in Psalms are not extensive as you would find Brother Lee wrote in Ephesians, Hebrews, Matthew, Revelation, Romans, because frankly, there is much more concerning the dispensation we now live in those NT books than in the Psalms.
The gospels presented Jesus as the Messiah foretold by the ancient inspired writers. The Acts and epistles further this: Jesus is the promised Seed of David, who brought in a new age of human living under God’s care and providence. Now, “we do not yet see all things subject to him” (Heb 2:8; cf Psa 8 & 1 Cor 15), but nonetheless all attention focused on Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promise to man.

So footnotes and/or teachings on the Christian Bible should focus first of all on the person of Jesus in the gospels as the fulfillment of God's expressed will; second on scriptures which the gospels cite (Psalms/Isaiah etc); third on the epistles as they're showing how the gospels and the prophetic word were harmonized in one person. Everything else in the Bible makes sense only as it points to and is derived from the great fact of "Jesus as Lord": the obedient Son of Man, crucified, resurrected and glorified. Our vision, our consciousness and living should be consumed by this. ~Luke 24:44 "He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." We never graduate from this: we only go deeper and deeper. He went through it- we go through it.

But in the RecV gospel of Matthew it's half footnotes and half text; Mark/Luke/John are less - 1/3 to 1/4 footnotes. The book of Isaiah is maybe 1/4 footnotes and the Psalms are maybe 1/8 footnotes; the rest text. Then if you look at the epistles, such as 2 Corinthians or Ephesians, you have anywhere from 2/3 to 3/4 of the page as footnotes. So clearly the focus is there.

In these lengthy epistolary footnotes there's a focus on abstract, impersonal concepts, such as "the dispensation we now live in" alluded to in the quote above; or the "NT believer enjoying grace"; or "mingled"; or "service" . . the actual person of Jesus is less important; who he was and what he did. And it’s even worse with the prophetic word: there, abstract concepts are levers used to denigrate swaths of scripture as “fallen human concepts”. Certainly not the verse-by-verse unveiling claimed by Drake. And, it cannot be over-emphasized, this is NOT what the NT writers and speakers did in regard to scripture. They never suggested this kind of treatment!

Now, the LSM apologist has a weak dodge here – “OK, smarty – why don’t you write some footnotes? Let’s see you do better” But we're not purporting to be God’s present oracle here; rather, showing why this particular claimant seems faulty. To whom much is given – ahem, ‘ministry of the age’ - much is required.

Then go from teaching to practice, to what's actually done in the LC, and there's even less connection with the Jesus of the gospels. For example, instead of a ministry of reconciliation, per 2 Corinthians, there are strong signs of a guanxi network. Run afoul of network hierarchy and there's no going back – no reconciliation. That's what we can see in the history of the LC. John Ingalls, John So, Bill Mallon, Max Rappaport, Titus Chu, Dong Yu Lan. . . a string of breaks and no mending. All were top lieutenants who ran afoul of the network culture. None came back. The culture won't allow it.

Or, where are the "good works" that Jesus did (Matt 4:23; 9:35; cf Acts 10:38)? "Oh, we're not a social service agency", says the LSM. What about Paul's focus on helping the poor (Gal 2:20)? "Well, we have a different emphasis". Indeed; and this different emphasis is also seen in the footnotes, or lack thereof.

I don't see the Bible being "opened up thoroughly" as Drake said; rather, a fallen human mind, building abstract sand-castles, and when the wind blows, any proverbial "rebellion" or "storm" or "turmoil", the edifice collapses: no reconciliation, tolerance, or forbearance. Just a holding onto abstractions - "God's economy" - but no love. How to be reconciled in such an environment? Only through abject servility; only by being subsumed to ministry ideals can one be reconciled with it. Even the Bible text itself is secondary to these ideals, not vice versa.

VoiceInWilderness

11-26-2018, 07:26 PM

Another example that comes to mind is "Deep calls to deep in the roar of your waterfalls; all your waves and breakers have swept over me." from Psalm 42:7. Compare this to Jonah 2:3 "You hurled me into the depths, into the very heart of the seas, and the currents swirled about me; all your waves and breakers swept over me." Somebody appears to be copying, here. How could David the landlubber psalmist seize upon a sea-faring narrative? Because the enemy coming against him like a "flood", like "waters", is a common poetic metaphor. And this is picked up on in the NT: "Just like Jonah was in the heart of the sea, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth". To go down into the depths of the sea is a metaphor, a spiritual picture, of the descent into Hades.

Thanks Aron! You gave me a new way to look at Ps 42. This psalm could be the Lord's experience praying under extreme pressure in Gethsemane. It could be the psalm that Jesus sang together with His disciples that night. I had never taken it like that before. I updated my comments on this psalm to include the link to the Lord.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_42.htm

countmeworthy

11-26-2018, 08:09 PM

Thanks Aron! You gave me a new way to look at Ps 42. This psalm could be the Lord's experience praying under extreme pressure in Gethsemane. It could be the psalm that Jesus sang together with His disciples that night. I had never taken it like that before. I updated my comments on this psalm to include the link to the Lord.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_42.htm

An interesting explanation of the meaning of Psalm 42 that grabbed my attention is that when a hart, deer is being chased by it's predator, it looks for water, be it a stream, river, lake. Because once it is in the water, the predator loses it's scent for the animal.

When we are being chased by the enemy, we pant for that Living Water so the enemy will lose us. When we hide in the Presence of the LORD, covered in the Blood of Jesus, covered under the shadow of God's wings, we are protected and no weapon formed against us will succeed in bringing us down.

As the deer pants for the water brooks,
So my soul pants for You, O God.
My soul thirsts for God, for the living God;

aron

10-20-2019, 01:40 PM

"I need nothing"

Psalm 23:1 says "The LORD is my Shepherd; I need nothing". Revelation 3:17 says, "You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked."

The difference between the two verses is that the first statement is a Word of Christ: the "I" of Psalm 23 is Christ. But the "I" of Revelation 3:17 is a "NT believer enjoying grace" per WL's verbiage.

WL made 2 exegetical errors in the Psalms: usually he said it was a NT believer enjoying grace in "God's NT economy", or it was David expressing his natural concepts. No; the NT reception of Psalms shows rather that it was Jesus Christ. Lee's chief error was to cause us to look a away from Christ and at our "experience" and "enjoyment".

VoiceInWilderness

10-20-2019, 06:01 PM

countmeworthy

10-21-2019, 12:04 PM

Aron,
"I shall not lack" in Ps 23:1 is a statement that all believers should be able to make.
It is trusting the Lord for our material and psychological needs as in 2Cor 8:15.
Laodicea is saying I don't need anything from anyone outside my denomination.

:thumbup:

The rest of the psalm describes how God comes through in every aspect of our lives.
Psalm 23 is a reality in my life and never ceases to be. I have experienced every verse come true at different times in my life. Surely God's Goodness and Mercy continuously follows me and hopefully all of you every day of my/your lives.

The more I learn about Witness Lee, the more I am appalled by him and his self righteous false teachings.

aron

10-22-2019, 07:47 AM

"I shall not lack" in Ps 23:1 is a statement that all believers should be able to make..

The rest of the psalm describes how God comes through in every aspect of our lives.

Psalm 23 is a reality in my life and never ceases to be. I have experienced every verse come true at different times in my life. Surely God's Goodness and Mercy continuously follows me and hopefully all of you every day of my/your lives.

Hi cmw & VIW,

Your posts probably reflect popular Christian reading of the Psalm, the "standard model" as it were. And in matters of interpretation there's not necessarily a wrong or a right. God is true and every man (and woman) a liar - and that includes me, foremost among them. So I'm not contending here, or I'm trying not to :)

But let's look for a minute at the idea of the "I" in Psalm 23 being the believer, not Jesus Christ. At first it seems obvious - Jesus is the LORD made flesh, per John 1. Jesus is the Good Shepherd, per John 10. Okay, then - Psalm 23:1 shows the Christian believer declaring by faith that Jesus is their Shepherd, and they (the believer) shall not lack anything. Pretty straight-forward.

But if one tries to carry this interpretive grid further, it falls apart, as Witness Lee showed in his Life-Study of Psalms. What happens when the "I" in the Psalms text declares unwavering obedience to God's law? The NT epistles tell us that we sinners can't do it. So WL taught that this word was therefore "fallen humanity, mistakenly trying to be good." Yet the NT citation instead refers to Jesus Christ: "I come to do Thy will, O God; behold in the scroll of the book is written concerning me" (Heb 10, cf Psa 40). Likewise, in Psalm 18, and Psalm 119, &c, when the text promises compliance to God's expressed will (the law), there's apparently a problem, which WL "solved" by saying the scripture is mistaken, and vain. He repeatedly used words like "mixed sentiments" and "human concepts". I don't want to go down that route. Jesus never intimated this - rather he repeatedly declared his fulfillment of scripture, and divine mandate.

Second, what of the Psalmist declaring "surely I was sinful at birth" (Psa 51) and "my iniquities have overwhelmed me; they are a burden too heavy to bear" (Psa 38) and "evils without number surround me; my sins have overtaken me, so that I cannot see. They are more than the hairs of my head, and my heart has failed within me" (Psa 40)? And there's more - the Psalmist repeatedly confesses his standing before God. How can this possibly be Christ? And how can this be the Christian believer, who "lacks nothing" per Psalm 23:1?

I believe that Christ became sin on our behalf, and could be touched with our weakness, so that he can intercede for us. He was without sin, but on the Cross he bore our sins. So when Jesus prayed, "Forgive us our sins" in Matt 6, the Father was able to take them away - Christ could speak such words on our behalf, even though he didn't have to. Yet because of his great love for us, he spoke them, as one of us! He walked through the valley of the shadow of death for us, so that we, today, might follow, with his Holy Spirit's leading. It's only his pioneering journey through Psalm 23 that makes ours possible. The "I" of Psalm 23 remains Christ. Any reality we find is solely in our identification with him. It's "imputed as our righteousness", as it were. Jesus as High Priest can speak these words to the Father, and the Father hears, and forgives. Only Jesus can speak these words. There's only One Mediator between humanity and God, the [sinless and perfected forever] man Christ Jesus.

Lastly, what of the so-called Psalms of imprecation? Here the Psalmist doesn't bless but curses, and rails against the foes. Again, Witness Lee said this didn't track well within NT context, and was also "fallen human concepts". Yet Christ is the Warrior, the Victorious King. Demons cried out with fear, when he walked in the room: "Oh! What do we have to do with you, Jesus, Nazarene! We know you - the Holy One of God! Have you come to destroy us before our time?!" Paul likewise said, "We don't fight against flesh and blood but against powerful, antagonistic spiritual forces". So the battle rages with light against darkness, and darkness can't withstand the light. Jesus is the Anointed King, the forever-enthroned Son of David per Psalm 18:50. We don't yet see everything under his feet, but the time is coming.

I've said this before: several times in the Psalms, the writer expresses hatred for the sinful ones, and contemptuously dismisses them. ~Psalm 6:8; 119:115; and 139:19. And at least four times Jesus uses nearly identical terminology of dismissal. ~Matt 7:23/Lu 13:27; Matt 25:41; Matt 16:22/Mark 8:33; and Matt 4:10. So one shouldn't say that some OT expression of antagonism, condemnation and rejection, doesn't match Jesus' command to bless in the NT, and to love those who hate us, and to turn the other cheek. Did David turn the other cheek to Goliath? Let's not create a make-believe Bible.

The "I" of scripture is Christ. Paul said, "No longer 'i' but 'Christ'" - he alone is the Self, or Person, of humanity in scripture. Because of sin, all others simply don't pass muster. And then we sinners see the King, and we live. He becomes our life, our living, our person. And then, we lack nothing. But only then. To insinuate our own persons into scripture is to commit grave error.

Here, I'm perhaps challenging a familiar Christian textual reading of Psalm 23, but at one point Luther took issue with the Standard Model, as later did Wesley (and others). So, occasionally it must be done. Look at the LC issue of reading "self" into the text. WL's followers said he had a "rich ministry", and he told us that he'd reached the "high peaks" of 2,000 years of Christian interpretation, that he'd learned nothing from anyone for 40+ years. Now, does that sound right-sized? Or does it rather look like the perilous position of Revelation 3:17, eventually reaching full flower or "consummation" in Rev 18:7?

01-12-2020, 10:10 PM

Psalm 3
Follower Rock Band
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C279gOt6tHs

Thou O Lord are a shield for me. You’re the glory and the lifter of my head.

https://biblehub.com/bsb/psalms/3.htm

The intro says David wrote this when he was being pursued by Absalom his son. When he wrote of being surrounded by 10,000 men who hated him and by 10,000 demons it was no joke. He had to rely on the Lord to be his shield. The Lord was the glory and the lifter of his head. This same Lord is ours too and offers the same powerful protection, glory, and lifting of our heads today. Praise Him.

aron

01-13-2020, 03:40 AM

The intro says David wrote this when he was being pursued by Absalom his son. When he wrote of being surrounded by 10,000 men who hated him and by 10,000 demons it was no joke. He had to rely on the Lord to be his shield. The Lord was the glory and the lifter of his head...Psalm 3 is a favourite, and this is why: Psalm 1 shows the way of the righteous man, Psalm 2 shows that righteous man enthroned as King of the nations (for confirmation, see Deuteronomy 17:18-20), and Psalm 3 shows the King now facing rebellion. Just like with Genesis 1 through 3, God doesn't waste time but gets right to the point: the fall of humanity, their inability to obey God's commands (both directly and through a King) and its consequences.

But look what the deposed and exiled King does in Psalm 3, surrounded by thousands who seek his life, betrayed by his former kinsmen and associates (Absalom et al) - the King lies down and goes to sleep, confident that God can raise him again (v5). Jesus said, "I have the power to lay my life down, and the power to raise it up again." It tracks Psalm 3:5 almost perfectly.

Do you see the faithful King? "He trusted in God, let Him save him now"

In this case, the consequences of rebellion are much different than in Genesis 3. In this case, not only the Faithful King willingly lays down, and is raised, but in his rising he redeems the land and the people. "Just as by one man death appeared, so by one man's death, salvation appeared to all." (cf Rom 5:12-17; 1 Cor 15:20-22)

See also John 4:42 They said to the woman, "We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Saviour of the world." And 1 John 4:14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Saviour of the world.

aron

01-13-2020, 07:00 AM

In the NT, one of the major arguments among the Hebrews is on the idea of resurrection: the Sadducees don't believe in a physical resurrection, and challenge Jesus (Matt 22:23), whilst the Pharisees believe (Acts 23:8). I wrote this earlier:

Psalm 3 is a favourite, and this is why: Psalm 1 shows the way of the righteous man, Psalm 2 shows that righteous man enthroned as King of the nations (cf Deut 17:18-20), and Psalm 3 shows this King now facing rebellion. Just like with Genesis 1 through 3, God doesn't waste time but gets right to the point: the fall of humanity, their inability to obey God's commands (both directly and through a King) and its consequences.

But look what the deposed and exiled King does in Psalm 3, sequestered in a cave, surrounded by thousands who seek his life, betrayed by kinsmen and former aides (Absalom et al) - now, the King lies down and goes to sleep, confident that God can raise him again (v5). Jesus said, "I have the power to lay my life down, and the power to raise it up again." It tracks Psalm 3:5 almost perfectly.

In this case, the consequences of rebellion are much different than in Genesis 3. In this case, not only the Faithful King willingly lays down, and is raised, but in his rising he redeems the land and the people. "Just as by one man death appeared, so by one man's death, salvation appeared to all." (cf Rom 5:12-17; 1 Cor 15:20-22).
Psalm 3:5 "I lay down and slept; I woke again, for the LORD sustained me." (ESV) is a prelude to Jesus' "I have the power to lay my life down and the power to take it back up again."

Often in the Psalms, the declaration of faith is in God's saving power towards the righteous servant, or the servant's power to obey God and be rewarded. The most relevant example for the NT is Psalm 16, given by Peter on Pentecost (and by Paul in Acts 13). But Psalm 18 has very similar intimations - "He rescued me because He delighted in me", which along with Psalm 42 quote Jonah's prayer in the whale's belly. "All your waves and your billows were over me/I was in the heart of the sea". Jesus of course references Jonah's experience, possibly through Psalms as well. "All the things written concerning me must come to pass."

Psalm 18
3 I will call upon the Lord, who is worthy to be praised: so shall I be saved from mine enemies.
4 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men made me afraid.
5 The sorrows of hell compassed me about: the snares of death prevented me.
6 In my distress I called upon the Lord, and cried unto my God: he heard my voice out of his temple, and my cry came before him, even into his ears.

15 Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O Lord, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils.
16 He sent from above, he took me, he drew me out of many waters.
17 He delivered me from my strong enemy, and from them which hated me: for they were too strong for me.
18 They prevented me in the day of my calamity: but the Lord was my stay.
19 He brought me forth also into a large place; he delivered me, because he delighted in me.

Psalm 42
5 Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted in me? hope thou in God: for I shall yet praise him for the help of his countenance.
6 O my God, my soul is cast down within me: therefore will I remember thee from the land of Jordan, and of the Hermonites, from the hill Mizar.
7 Deep calleth unto deep at the noise of thy waterspouts: all thy waves and thy billows are gone over me.
8 Yet the Lord will command his lovingkindness in the day time, and in the night his song shall be with me, and my prayer unto the God of my life.

Jonah 2
1 Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish's belly,
2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
3 For thou hadst cast me into the deep, in the midst of the seas; and the floods compassed me about: all thy billows and thy waves passed over me.
4 Then I said, I am cast out of thy sight; yet I will look again toward thy holy temple.
5 The waters compassed me about, even to the soul: the depth closed me round about, the weeds were wrapped about my head.
6 I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God.
7 When my soul fainted within me I remembered the Lord: and my prayer came in unto thee, into thine holy temple.
8 They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy.
9 But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the Lord.

Psalm 69
2 I have sunk into the miry depths, where there is no footing; I have drifted into deep waters, where the flood engulfs me.

14 Rescue me from the mire and do not let me sink; deliver me from my foes and out of the deep waters.
15 Do not let the floodwaters engulf me or the depths swallow me up or the pit close its mouth over me.

Psalm 40:2
He lifted me up from the pit of destruction, out of the miry clay; He set my feet upon a rock, and made my footsteps firm.

__________________________________________________ _____________________

It's a bit 'esoteric', as I'm deriving a theme from observed textual patterns in poetic imagery and its use in the NT, but the NT keeps referring to the OT prophecy as pertaining to Jesus' experiences, so I am as well. Obedience + Suffering + Death = Resurrection. Jonah shows a glimpse, and Jesus quotes that, but the Psalms provide the details.

The arranged structure of the 150 Psalms may point to resurrection. If so, Psalm 3 isn't randomly placed, but keys to the Righteous King's death and resurrection, after 3 days. It's not too hard to connect the dots once you see them. The 150 Psalms were structured by a Pharisee, or Pharisee-agreeing person. It's about resurrection from the dead, and the Psalms are the proof-text of the redactor.

Of course, this resurrection-believing (and promoting) arranger of the Psalms is just a hypothesis. But my question is whether the placement of Psalm 3, right after Psalms 1 and 2 (which scholars see as deliberately forming an opening pair for the collection) a random thing, or is it also deliberate? And if it's placed there deliberately, then why? I see verse 5 as the key to my hypothesis.

And behind it all lies another question: David supposedly penned several thousand Psalms, which along with the Sons of Korah, Moses, Solomon, etc, would have constituted a very large body of work. Obviously many were lost. Why was this collection of 150 put together thus? Is it random, or arranged with a larger narrative (resurrection [??]) in mind?

And did Jesus see that narrative and walk into it? When you read his plain and deliberate statements in the gospels it seems entirely possible.

01-13-2020, 08:54 PM

Thanks for sharing with us aron. These Psalms have some things worthy of discussion in light of the New Testament. The works of law can’t make anyone righteous, but the faith of Christ can, then righteous works naturally come out of the man who lives by faith. Witness Lee had trouble differentiating that and proposed to skip over Psalms or portions of them that spoke of righteousness, robbing others of the chance to learn from profitable teaching in inspired Psalms.

David’s angry approach of wishing harm on his enemies is what we all think when attacked by others but need not emulate. Jesus and Paul taught a different approach “Love your enemies” and so heaping coals of destruction on them in the day of judgement. Often those enemies were won over for God’s kingdom (think Saul of Tarsus). David’s bloodthirsty ways cost him the right to build the temple, in favor of Solomon his more peaceful son. Wielding the sword and wishing evil on others is contrary to the heart of the a Father who desires that all men be saved and come to the full knowledge of the truth. Judgement will come, but we need not take the opportunity to show mercy away in this age.

OBW

01-14-2020, 08:22 AM

It's a bit 'esoteric', as I'm deriving a theme from observed textual patterns in poetic imagery and its use in the NT, but the NT keeps referring to the OT prophecy as pertaining to Jesus' experiences, so I am as well. Obedience + Suffering + Death = Resurrection. Jonah shows a glimpse, and Jesus quotes that, but the Psalms provide the details.Just read through this and something is bugging me. I agree that Jesus made reference to Jonah concerning being in the belly of the whale for 3 days. But for Jonah, the suffering/death metaphor is hardly useful as part of some formula because he did not obey, then suffer, then die (literally or figuratively) then resurrect. Instead, he disobeyed and suffered for it. That the worst part of that suffering was 3 days in the belly of a great fish, followed by preaching to Nineveh, does provide something to refer back to as foreshadow or prophecy concerning Christ does not make Jonah's experience completely like that of Christ.

If we are to use Jonah as the example, then it would be something like Disobedience (leads to) Suffering and Death (leads to) Resurrection (leads to) Obedience. If we insert "Repentance" between Death and Resurrection, it might look more like our history.

I have always liked the approach of preaching Christ from all of the Bible. But that does not mean that everything is directly linkable to Christ. Christ referred to Jonah in the fish for 3 days as a sign relating to him. But the rest of the account says more about us and how God will get what he desires despite us and our desires. Still good stuff, and also says something about Christ. But I surely cannot get Obedience + . . . = Resurrection from this account. Maybe that is not what you were suggesting and I just mixed two different things together that you did not intend.

aron

01-14-2020, 11:01 AM

Christ referred to Jonah in the fish for 3 days as a sign relating to him. But the rest of the account says more about us and how God will get what he desires despite us and our desires. Still good stuff, and also says something about Christ. But I surely cannot get Obedience + . . . = Resurrection from this account. Maybe that is not what you were suggesting and I just mixed two different things together that you did not intend.

Jonah prayed in the belly of the whale, that God could save him. That was obedience. God saved him. Jesus referred to Jonah's experience as what he would pass through.

In Psalm 16, David said God would keep him from the flesh-eating corruption of death. Peter quoted this on Pentecost as portraying Christ.

My contribution was to note the "nautical theme" of many Psalms passages, which otherwise were very similar to the one quoted by Peter in Acts 2, and repeated by Paul in Acts 13. Even one of them used the same phraseology. "All your waves and billows have gone over me". Someone is copying, here. And they have the consistent theme of Righteous Obedience + Suffering + Death = Resurrection.

So I'm saying that the theme of "resurrection" looms larger in the Psalms than Psalm 16. And the 'formula' I gave is from the Psalms, not from Jonah. But otherwise, they have striking parallels. And Jesus referenced Jonah, and Peter referenced Psalms. Pretty interesting, to me.

Boxjobox

01-15-2020, 09:25 AM

I'll write this, and really do not want to get into a big theological debate, but only offer my view: WL's thing was the processed triune god. Reading and singing the psalms does not bring one into a thought that God is a processed trinity- in fact, quite the opposite. It brings one more into " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ". WL had to belittle the psalms and twist them and explain them in his own mixed up theology because they contradicted his money making product which he sold under the LSM brand.

01-15-2020, 10:18 AM

Boxjobox

01-16-2020, 10:29 AM

Aron, sorry to disrupt your excellent post with my comment about WL. I have been enjoying your writings.
And thanks JJ for your note.

aron

01-16-2020, 10:39 AM

Aron, sorry to disrupt your excellent post with my comment about WL. I have been enjoying your writings.

I agree with your point. WL couldn't get the Psalms to deliver value to his "Processed God" metric so he essentially dismissed them. He's not the first Protestant or post-Protestant to do so, but the grounds are weak.

~David was a sinner. Why then did Peter cite David's declaration in Psalm 16 in speaking on Christ's resurrection? Or why cite, "I come to do Your will, Oh God" etc? ~Heb 10:7; cf Psa 40:8. If all are sinners, and nobody can do God's will, why does the NT cite the verse? Answer: it was about Jesus. Duh.

~Violence and antagonism. In Ephesians Paul said, "We fight, just not against flesh and blood." Jesus conquered sin and death and Hades, and we celebrate his victory. David had nothing on Jesus. Demons cried out in fear when he walked in. "Oh! Jesus! Nazarene! What do we have to do with you! Have you come to destroy us?!"

Of course a new era came with Jesus. He was indeed the new Moses, the new Law-giver. But the pictures and types that support this Jesus are there, including his suffering the indignity of death on our behalf, and his being raised to glory. His obedience led directly to the Father's intervention and rescue - the pangs of death could not hold him. To me this is the central narrative in the Psalms. Everything else hinges on this one thing.

But WL had his "we're being processed to be baby gods" thing. And by being so self-focused, he missed a lot of Christ that is portrayed there.

01-17-2020, 07:51 AM

I agree with your point. WL couldn't get the Psalms to deliver value to his "Processed God" metric so he essentially dismissed them. He's not the first Protestant or post-Protestant to do so, but the grounds are weak.

~David was a sinner. Why then did Peter cite David's declaration in Psalm 16 in speaking on Christ's resurrection? Or why cite, "I come to do Your will, Oh God" etc? ~Heb 10:7; cf Psa 40:8. If all are sinners, and nobody can do God's will, why does the NT cite the verse? Answer: it was about Jesus. Duh.

~Violence and antagonism. In Ephesians Paul said, "We fight, just not against flesh and blood." Jesus conquered sin and death and Hades, and we celebrate his victory. David had nothing on Jesus. Demons cried out in fear when he walked in. "Oh! Jesus! Nazarene! What do we have to do with you! Have you come to destroy us?!"

Of course a new era came with Jesus. He was indeed the new Moses, the new Law-giver. But the pictures and types that support this Jesus are there, including his suffering the indignity of death on our behalf, and his being raised to glory. His obedience led directly to the Father's intervention and rescue - the pangs of death could not hold him. To me this is the central narrative in the Psalms. Everything else hinges on this one thing.

But WL had his "we're being processed to be baby gods" thing. And by being so self-focused, he missed a lot of Christ that is portrayed there.

While reading 2 Timothy I came cross two verses that corroborate what you have been saying about The Psalms being about Jesus Christ our Lord, the son of David, raised from among the dead and that we should be holding to this teaching with the faith and love which are in Him.

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/2-8.htm

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/1-13.htm

It really is that simple.

aron

01-17-2020, 08:39 AM

While reading 2 Timothy I came cross two verses that corroborate what you have been saying about The Psalms being about Jesus Christ our Lord, the son of David, raised from among the dead and that we should be holding to this teaching with the faith and love which are in Him.

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/2-8.htm

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/1-13.htm

It really is that simple.

2 Timothy 2:8
Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel

Pretty simple.

Also I like,

Romans 1:1-4
Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

There's nothing wrong from teasing esotericism from abstruse readings of Greek and Hebrew clauses, or from comments made by some inter-testamental "Second Temple" source like the Qumran caves, or from early non-canonical Christian writings like the Shepherd of Hermas. But everything - everything - points to this gospel, this event. When we see the earthly, suffering Christ, descended from David, now raised to glory, we lose sight of everything else. Everything else is subsumed by this singular experiential reality. An informative phrase is used by John, who saw this One and simply dissolved his consciousness onto the floor (Rev 1:17). And remember, this was a close disciple who'd hung out with him for 3+ years!

Some may say the words "Processed Triune God" speak to this very thing, but my experience is, look at how quickly that encapsulating label became the vehicle for focusing on self, on applying this "Processed God" to our subjective and fickle sensory life, this abstract "Christ is everything" and "all-inclusive Christ" becoming a cipher manipulated by charlatans for personal gain.

And I got onto this riff on Psalm 3, on post #882, because I was trying to make the case that the Psalms are a proverbial mother-lode of imagery of the "buried" Christ. Abandoned, betrayed, shamed, persecuted, and given up for dead. David in a cave, with Absalom and the nobles on a warpath, wondering if he'd ever make it out. Or, Saul and others hunting him. Or the Philistines eyeing him with muttering distrust. Then deciding, "Well, God has all power. If he put me here, He can take me out again." The link with Jonah is there. I showed the verses that overlap.

I just feel like, if "this gospel" referenced in the cited NT verses above is interesting, then this poetic imagery might be as well. Again, it's somewhat of a subjective response and isn't truth per se, but much of our sharing in the 'ekklesia' is in this vein: as long as we don't force the issue we shouldn't be afraid to present such ruminations. And I do thank all our readers for the grace afforded me here.

01-19-2020, 11:03 AM

2 Timothy 2:8
Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel

Pretty simple.

Also I like,

Romans 1:1-4
Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

There's nothing wrong from teasing esotericism from abstruse readings of Greek and Hebrew clauses, or from comments made by some inter-testamental "Second Temple" source like the Qumran caves, or from early non-canonical Christian writings like the Shepherd of Hermas. But everything - everything - points to this gospel, this event. When we see the earthly, suffering Christ, descended from David, now raised to glory, we lose sight of everything else. Everything else is subsumed by this singular experiential reality. An informative phrase is used by John, who saw this One and simply dissolved his consciousness onto the floor (Rev 1:17). And remember, this was a close disciple who'd hung out with him for 3+ years!

Some may say the words "Processed Triune God" speak to this very thing, but my experience is, look at how quickly that encapsulating label became the vehicle for focusing on self, on applying this "Processed God" to our subjective and fickle sensory life, this abstract "Christ is everything" and "all-inclusive Christ" becoming a cipher manipulated by charlatans for personal gain.

And I got onto this riff on Psalm 3, on post #882, because I was trying to make the case that the Psalms are a proverbial mother-lode of imagery of the "buried" Christ. Abandoned, betrayed, shamed, persecuted, and given up for dead. David in a cave, with Absalom and the nobles on a warpath, wondering if he'd ever make it out. Or, Saul and others hunting him. Or the Philistines eyeing him with muttering distrust. Then deciding, "Well, God has all power. If he put me here, He can take me out again." The link with Jonah is there. I showed the verses that overlap.

I just feel like, if "this gospel" referenced in the cited NT verses above is interesting, then this poetic imagery might be as well. Again, it's somewhat of a subjective response and isn't truth per se, but much of our sharing in the 'ekklesia' is in this vein: as long as we don't force the issue we shouldn't be afraid to present such ruminations. And I do thank all our readers for the grace afforded me here.

Indeed, great quote. If we get bored by this gospel it really has connected with us in a personal manner yet. When it does we really can’t stop speaking of this resurrected Jesus and his power to save, transform, and build up sinners in His love into a glorious assembly of Jews and gentiles that glorifies God, and Him alone. Praise Him.

Why not delve into 150 of the greatest poetic works designed for singing and pointing forth the coming son of David, son of God, the rightful king of Jews and gentiles knowing that Jesus fulfilled and fulfills them all to the glory of the Father forever and ever.

Boxjobox

02-07-2020, 10:41 AM

Psalm 110:1-2

1The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
2The Lord shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion.
Rule in the midst of Your enemies!

The phrase "till I make your enemies your footstool" I think would be what is really "God's Economy". God raised up His anointed one, our Lord Jesus, and set him as head over all. Our Christian faith is that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the Living God, that he died for our sins, that God raised him from the dead, and gave his this highest honor of sitting at God's right hand, and that one day the Christ, Jesus will return. Of course, there is a lot more to the Christian faith, but I think this is the foundation- Its the foundation, the ground of the church from which all else is built up.

So what is this "till"? Paul addresses this in 1 Cor 15: 25-28

25For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

This does not bode well with a processed triune god phony concept of God's Economy. The theology WL sold had to discount the Psalms, and the saints singing and considering the Psalms because his LSM products did not align with the scripture.

aron

04-07-2020, 05:41 PM

While talking someone frightened by the Coronavirus Pandemic, I told them, Watch Jesus... watch him, with fixation and utter intent. Don't look at anything else.

They replied, "I can't see him."

The issue is serious, pervasive, with real consequences. People are scared and alone, and they don't see Jesus. Their fear keeps them from seeing Jesus, and not seeing Jesus keeps them cut off from others, trapped in fear.

One passage of rescue is found in Hebrews 2. The author of Hebrews was likely not an original disciple, and had never met Jesus. “This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.” ~Heb 2:3 (This suggests that the writer was not Paul, who strongly asserted that his revelation wasn’t second-hand, but direct [Gal 1:12].)

Now to the passage: “But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honour because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.” ~Heb 2:9

Notice that the author says “we see Jesus”. “We” means all of us, writer and readers, and "see" is in the present tense. How? How do we see Jesus? The answer is in found in the surrounding text, which copiously quotes Psalms and Prophets. We see Jesus in Psalms, temporarily lower than the angels, suffering. We see Jesus in Psalms, persecuted, we see him dying in agony for our sins. We see him resurrected. We see him crowned with glory and honour, at the Father's right hand. We see Jesus.

There are a number of books on this kind of seeing, both on Psalms' reception in the NT in general and in individual NT books. One of my favourites has been by Gert Steyn, a professor of NT studies in the University of Pretoria. “Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception” T&T Clark, 2012.

When you see Jesus, everything changes. Everything.

"And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.” Zech 12:10, cf John 19:37

“No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven—the Son of Man. Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.” John 3:13,14, cf Num 21:8 “Then the LORD said to Moses, "Make a snake and mount it on a pole. When anyone who is bitten looks at it, he will live."

You have to see Jesus, to make it out of your current predicament Covid 19 or otherwise. That’s the way home to the Father in heaven. And it’s a way of peace. Once you see him, you have a peace that nothing can shake. Once you see (believe in), obey, and trust Jesus, no storm of life can shake you, no uncertainty or perilous circumstance can make your emotions jump. It’s the path of peace.

I’d like to conclude with two passages. Psalm 3 has David hiding in a cave, pursued by Saul and abandoned by his former associates. Verse 5 says, “I lie down and sleep; I wake again, because the LORD sustains me.” On this same regard, Jesus said, “I have the power to lay my life down, and the power to take it back up again. I have this authority because the Father gives it to me.” ~John 10:17,18

And Psalm 18:19 says, “He brought me out into the open; He rescued me because He delighted in me.” Like with companion piece, and neighbor Psalm 16, the text of Psalm 18 shows us the resurrection of Jesus because of the Father’s approval. And we know that the NT repeatedly emphasizes the Father’s delight in the Son. “This is My Beloved, in whom I delight. Hear him”. The Father's delight, approval, and rescue (resurrection) are strongly pervasive themes in the NT, and are foreshadowed repeatedly in David's rescue, from Saul, from the Philistines, from Absalom's rebellion etc etc.

Many on this forum are former prisoners from the Witness Lee Mind Control Programme and Guanxi Network, aka the Lord’s Recovery, aka the Local Church, aka Living Stream Ministry and aka Bibles for America. While under its strong thought control, we were kept from seeing Jesus. No, we were told, that’s not Jesus, just David the sinner presenting his "fallen human concepts" in the Psalms. One regularly sees these phrases in the footnotes, along with "mixed sentiments" and such.

Instead of seeing Jesus we saw money going into the Daystar Motorhome Company, aka Phosphorous and Overseas Christian Stewards, which funneled wealth to the Lee family network and those of his immediate peers. Nobody knows exactly how much went to whom because those who know don’t talk. But we know where the money went – into the Lee Network. Instead of Jesus, we got “the Office”, a euphemism for another of Lee’s sons, who repeatedly abused people. We got terms like “God’s humble bondslave” as a term for someone who never took direction from anyone, did whatever he wanted, and whose inspirations were supposedly tantamount to “God’s move”. And we got phrases like “a martyr who was poured out as a fragrant sacrificial offering” for someone who was repeatedly accused of sexual misconduct, not only by the government but by his own home church (!) and who when confronted didn’t deny (!), even knowing that many would be stumbled in their Christian walk. See Lily Hsu’s published account as an example of what his confession did to the church. It seems people who knew of Watchman Nee first-hand and second-hand didn’t hold him in such high regard, as those more distantly removed in time and space.

Now, to me those are our two choices: see the world, or see Jesus. The two options are mutually exclusive. You can’t have the one and the other. It’s an either/or predicament: there’s only one Way home to the Father, and it’s Jesus.

And we see Jesus. See the below quote, for example, from Psalm 110. Please note that the "Jesus quotes" are not merely limited to Psalm 2, 8, 110, and a few others. One merely has to seek, as I tried to present in the quotes from Psalm 3 and 18 above.

Psalm 110:1-2

1The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
2The Lord shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion.
Rule in the midst of Your enemies!

The phrase "till I make your enemies your footstool" I think would be what is really "God's Economy". God raised up His anointed one, our Lord Jesus, and set him as head over all. Our Christian faith is that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the Living God, that he died for our sins, that God raised him from the dead, and gave his this highest honor of sitting at God's right hand, and that one day the Christ, Jesus will return. Of course, there is a lot more to the Christian faith, but I think this is the foundation- Its the foundation, the ground of the church from which all else is built up.

So what is this "till"? Paul addresses this in 1 Cor 15: 25-28

25For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

This does not bode well with a processed triune god phony concept of God's Economy. The theology WL sold had to discount the Psalms, and the saints singing and considering the Psalms because his LSM products did not align with the scripture.

Ohio

05-14-2020, 08:48 AM

Reading thru Psalms 88, it almost reads as the voice of the Messiah in Sheol 3 days and 3 nights.

3. My life is nigh unto Sheol
4. I am reckoned with those in the pit
5. Cast off among the dead, like the slain who lie in the grave
6. You laid me in the lowest pit, in dark places, in the deeps
7. Your wrath lies hard upon me ......

I looked at a bunch of commentaries, but none seemed to take this view, including the Life Studies.

Read it again with the thought that we are hearing the voice of Jesus from the grave. Pretty fascinating.

Ohio

05-14-2020, 09:28 AM

One passage of rescue is found in Hebrews 2. The author of Hebrews was likely not an original disciple, and had never met Jesus. “This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.” ~Heb 2:3 (This suggests that the writer was not Paul, who strongly asserted that his revelation wasn’t second-hand, but direct [Gal 1:12].)

I agree this passage is a great rescue in order to see Jesus.

Concerning the authorship of Hebrews, a couple comments here. I don't see how v.2.3 and the authorship by Paul are mutually exclusive. Paul could have direct revelation of Jesus Christ, and yet still have confirmation from those who "heard Him," i.e. the disciples who were with Jesus in the flesh. Gal 2.2 verifies this. Even after 14 years of salvation, Paul went to Jerusalem "privately to them of reputation laying before them the gospel he proclaimed" just to confirm that he was not "running in vain." Some of the details here are recorded in Acts 15.

Furthermore, the scholars' contentions against the authorship of Paul have to do with the actual Greek text of the book of Hebrews. Scholars also say the Greek text matches the writings of Luke but dismiss him readily as unqualified. (Philip Schaff said, "Hebrews is written in purer Greek than any book of the NT, except those portions of Luke where he is independent of prior documents.")

This apparently insurmountable quandary of authorship is easily explained by asserting that Paul wrote the rough draft outline, and Luke the polished text. Were not Paul and Luke constant companions? After Paul was sent to Felix in Caesarea under house arrest, he and Luke had much time and burden to corroborate on this book. Perhaps it was finished in Rome.

aron

10-21-2020, 04:23 PM

I was reviewing, and came across this:1 Peter 3:10 does not match God's economy I think that's why.WL had panned 1 Peter's quote of Psalm 34 and the question was, Why? This was the answer.

I used to say this, too. "Not God's economy". I'd left the LC physically, and was in another Christian meeting, and even if the speaking was 'inspired' and left the audience moved, not me. I'd seen "God's economy" and nothing else matched, even Peter quoting Psalm 34. But eventually I realized that WL's definition of "God's economy" had little scriptural basis, and other readings better aligned with "the whole Bible", or the whole textual corpus, as WL used to claim for support.

For example, what if Paul hadn't written, "To Timothy, my true child in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. As I urged you on my departure to Macedonia, you should stay on at Ephesus to instruct certain men not to teach false doctrines or devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculation rather than the stewardship of God’s work [oikonomian Theou], which is by faith."

Imagine if Paul had instead written, "...rather than the stewardship of God's work [or, God's economy], which is God dispensing Himself into His chosen people". In that case, there'd be some basis, no? But Paul didn't write that.

Or if the Blended Pillars in Jerusalem had given Paul the right hand of fellowship, and said "Only, remember the poor" and Paul had exclaimed, "No! I'm not here for that! I'm here for God's economy!" Then we'd have some basis, no? But instead, he said that he was eager to do that very thing (Gal 2:10). Then in Acts 24:17, Paul said, "After many years, I returned to Jerusalem, bringing alms for my people". Paul didn't just say it, and teach it, he did it. He carried it out. And this activity matches Paul's repeated comments in I and II Corinthians and Romans, to set aside funds for the poor of Jerusalem.

In the gospels, Jesus taught, "Give to those who can't repay you in this age, and your reward will be great in heaven" (Luke 14:13-21). It seems then that there's more basis to say that this is God's economy, because Jesus repeatedly stressed this, it's what the Jerusalem leaders stressed to Paul, it's what Paul eagerly assented to, and it's what Paul both taught others and did himself.

And Paul enjoined the Gentile churches to participate. Romans 15:26 says, "For Macedonia and Achaia were pleased to make a contribution for the poor among the Lord's people in Jerusalem." Do you suppose that the Apostle Paul taught the ones in Macedonia and Achaia and Rome and Corinth one thing, and then charged Timothy to teach something different to those in Ephesus? If God's economy is instead what Witness Lee said, then why isn't there NT textual support? No, it was an interpretive overlay produced by the 'revelation' of the 'seer'. It wasn't actually written down, defined, or presented, as such. Instead, you needed a revelation to see it. (You know, a hand is shaped like a glove, right?) And then, what actually was written down (both NT and OT) got panned, because, like 1 Peter quoting Psalm 34, that supposedly didn't "match God's economy", i.e. it didn't jibe with the home-brewed interpretive matrix.

When your interpretation causes you to dismiss the actual words of the Bible as the basis of your faith, preaching and practice, then perhaps you should instead drop the interpretation.

aron

05-21-2021, 06:02 PM

How can we find what God has called us to do on this Earth? What is God's plan for us on an individual level? Is it just to be part of his eternal plan? What about the goals I have in my life, whether professional or personal? Is it not good to fulfill them to the best of my abilities? To strive for the peak? What am I not seeing? Should I not strive to be the best human I can possibly be? At the same time, expressing the virtues of Christ and loving God more and more? does anyone else share my frustration??Reading this question on another thread, and get the frustration - it is the quintessential post-LC angst - but wanted to answer here, in a particular context. We do not know God, truly, or ourselves, but God know us, and this knowledge is complete. And in His knowledge, not ours, we find peace.

Psalm 139 O LORD, you have searched me and known me!
2 You know when I sit down and when I rise up;
you discern my thoughts from afar.
3 You search out my path and my lying down
and are acquainted with all my ways.
4 Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.
5 You hem me in, behind and before,
and lay your hand upon me.
6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
it is high; I cannot attain it.This shows an appreciation and awareness of God’s knowledge. The writer can't encompass God’s knowledge in full (v6) but is aware that God's knowledge encompasses the writer in full (vv 1-4). We don't know God, but we know that God knows us. ~Gal 4:9; cf 1 Cor 8:3
7 Where shall I go from your Spirit?
Or where shall I flee from your presence?
8 If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!
9 If I take the wings of the morning
and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea,
10 even there your hand shall lead me,
and your right hand shall hold me.
11 If I say, “Surely the darkness shall cover me,
and the light about me be night,”
12 even the darkness is not dark to you;
the night is bright as the day,
for darkness is as light with you.God controls all matter and space. There is nothing beyond God. No footstep of ours is beyond God’s grasp. No move escapes His will.
13 For you formed my inward parts;
you knitted me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
Wonderful are your works;
my soul knows it very well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you,
when I was being made in secret,
intricately woven in the depths of the earth.
16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance;
in your book were written, every one of them,
the days that were formed for me,
when as yet there was none of them.Time is in God’s hand. It is all in the ledger. “It is written”, said Jesus – it is definitively settled, even before we see it appear. We have free will – we can fight the ledger, ignore it. But it still exists. Everything in the ledger is true.
7 How precious to me are your thoughts, O God!
How vast is the sum of them!
18 If I would count them, they are more than the sand.
I awake, and I am still with you.Again, the scope of God’s thought is beyond our power to grasp. “Not a sparrow fall from the sky, but the Father knows it” said Jesus. “Every hair on your head is numbered.” Our job is not to know, as much as to appreciate that God knows. God knows all. Psalm 147:4 says, "He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name", and Isaiah 40:26 says "Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one and calls forth each of them by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing."
19 Oh that you would slay the wicked, O God!
O men of blood, depart from me!
20 They speak against you with malicious intent;
your enemies take your name in vain.
21 Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD?
And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?
22 I hate them with complete hatred;
I count them my enemies.Three times the Psalms speak this phrase – “away from me!” (Psa 6, 119, 139) – and three times Jesus spoke it. One with the tempter, one with Peter, one with the sheep and the goats. Coincidence? People say, “In the NT we love, not hate” but Jesus brooked no compromise. He was obedient without fail.
23 Search me, O God, and know my heart!
Try me and know my thoughts!
24 And see if there be any grievous way in me,
and lead me in the way everlasting!Again the writer/speaker is open to the God who knows all. Jesus fulfilled the first three lines of this section, and thus becomes our Way everlasting. The rest of us are “in the grievous way” of v 24, but Jesus was the Obedient Lamb who redeems humanity. Because Jesus was not "in the grievous way" he becomes our Way. Both the Gospel of John and the Epistle to the Hebrews make this utterly plain to the attentive reader.

OBW

05-21-2021, 08:03 PM

Psalm 139: 7-12
Where shall I go from your Spirit?
Or where shall I flee from your presence?
If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!
If I take the wings of the morning
and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea,
even there your hand shall lead me,
and your right hand shall hold me.
If I say, “Surely the darkness shall cover me,
and the light about me be night,”
even the darkness is not dark to you;
the night is bright as the day,
for darkness is as light with you.

God controls all matter and space. There is nothing beyond God. No footstep of ours is beyond God’s grasp. No move escapes His will.aron,

Not sure I see your comments about control and will as flowing from these verses. I see that no matter whether we are trying to avoid God or are in desperate situations, God is always there. But nothing (truly) about his control or his will. Whether we realize it or not, as those who believe and follow God, we are never separated from him even when we think we may be. And in our darkest moments — even if we try to hide from him — he IS still there and light is still available to us.

aron

05-22-2021, 10:25 AM

I see that no matter whether we are trying to avoid God or are in desperate situations, God is always there. But nothing (truly) about his control or his will.Yes, perhaps it was an overstretch. The question that I was trying to address was, apart from the constant mental massaging of the LC, how to comprehend God's will for us, personally? My point was that our knowledge is bounded, God's is not, at least operationally. And our comings and goings, risings and fallings, even our uncertainties and discord, all fit within his order. He may not order our failures but his order is not threatened by them.

In my case, one day I got a simple message: "serve others". That was the way home. And from that day I haven't been blindly beating the air, but have had a message and a mission. It has sustained me and conveyed me from one day to the next. And almost daily, if not daily, do I see 5 loaves feed 2,000 hungry mouths. God does it. I am dull in perception but not so dull that I can't perceive the utter improbability of it all. Yet it consistently occurs.

As a bit of an aside, I note that James doesn't call himself an apostle, but rather the introduction says, "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ..." James' service to God and to the Lord Jesus Christ was to serve others. In this he fulfills the Great Commandment in its two parts, what he calls the "royal law" and "the perfect law of freedom" (1:25; 2:8; 2:12). It is just to love, and to love is to serve. When you see this, you understand, and are set free. When James speaks of 'works' this is the only particular work that is noted. To visit widows and orphans in their afflictions. Other than that, stay humble, stay on the bottom, keep your mouth from prattling on. (of course I'm guilty of failure at the last point and apologize to our tired and afflicted readers. Please forgive me, for taking so much effort to make so little sense)

OBW

05-22-2021, 12:35 PM

And you know my constant drumbeat. Let each passage say what it says, and let others say what they say. Both can be correct, but not necessarily as the result of the passage in front of us at the moment.

And that is why I generally dismiss what Lee taught. He sometimes pointed to what was there, but also to what was not there. And the only way to make that point true is to find other verses. Since he did not, I can only question the validity of what he said. And it was usually the part that was missing the evidence that he was trying to get across.

I realize that was not your intent. What you said was true, just because we have seen it stated elsewhere. Lee, not so much.

12-17-2022, 04:49 AM

I was at a “Training” on Colossians, I think, when Witness Lee belittled some sisters for singing a song that included “His loving kindness endures forever”. He told them they should be singing a song that used New Testament words and was about Gods Economy (His favorite topic).

At the time, being a babe in the Lord, I didn’t have the discernment to question what he said.

Now, many years later, and hopefully more mature in Christ, I’ve come to really appreciate “His loving kindness endures forever” and of course we should sing that.

Here is a link to Psalm 118 that starts with those words https://biblehub.com/nas/psalms/118.htm

I think this is a great Psalm, fulfilled in Jesus Christ, the Lord, who I call on when in distress, and He delivers me. He has become my salvation. Better to trust the Lord than to trust in man. The stone the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone, this is marvelous in our eyes. Hosanna, do save, Oh Lord. Blessed is He who comes in the name of YVWH, Jesus, YVWH savior!

Matthew 1 tells the origin of Jesus and ends with why Joseph gave him that name. Relevant reading during this season. Jesus, the king, of kings.

aron

02-05-2024, 06:12 PM

My point is simple - there's a pattern of reception in the NT, and WL breaks that pattern.

Over on the “God’s economy” thread, I’d been discussing my issues with Witness Lee misusing the NT text, and misreading the OT whilst fabricating and supporting his interpretations of Paul. But I felt to bring my further remarks here, as it’s more specific to this topic. I wanted to expand how I came to this view.

I was at home, singing Psalm 3 from the KJV. It had a nice melody that forced me to stretch my voice, and I used to rehearse the tune. I got to, “I laid me down and slept; I awaked; for the LORD sustained me” and I fell to the floor as if struck by a solid blow. I couldn’t sing. I couldn't see. I slowly raised up, began again, and again I was put down. The third time I tried, and the same thing happened again. I lay there for some time after the third try, slowly got up, and stopped singing. I later considered the text and was thunderstruck: I could actually seem to hear Jesus' voice in my consciousness: “I have the power to lay my life down, and the power to take it up again.” It was the Lord!

When I shared the verse in a meeting, as an example of a revelation of a type or figure of Christ, the LC Elder wouldn’t hear it. He just clammed up, stared straight ahead, rigid. I slowly began to sense what I was up against here. He couldn’t deny the close textual parallel, but since WL hadn’t expounded it, he couldn’t affirm it either. So he froze, and the meeting with him. Silent, still, quite awkward. Very uncomfortable.

Later, the same thing happened when singing Psalm 18 in the NIV text. “He rescued me because He delighted in me” – I could hear the voice from heaven, saying to Peter and James and John, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I delight, hear him.” I never sensed the import of the Father’s delight in His Son, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, until Psalm 18, then I couldn’t deny that it was an absolute show-stopper. Then it said, “The LORD has dealt with me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands he has rewarded me” and I knew it was the clean hands of the Lord. There are none other.

(On a related topic, as an example of scholarship with a careful and thorough examination of the NT reception of Psalm, see the book edited by Human, D. J., & Steyn, G. J. Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in reception. 2010, Bloomsbury Publishing. The Epistle to the Hebrews cited Psalms 19 times without implying it was fallen concepts or vain striving by a failed law-keeper.)

aron

04-24-2024, 12:01 PM

Aron and others do not like us dividing scripture by human vs divine concepts, because they must believe that all Scripture as in every jot and tittle speaks about Christ regardless of what it actually says. This is more of a mechanical view of divine inspiration because it suggests that the words on the page are the divinely inspired Scripture. This view can sometimes place an emphasis on error-free translations, versions, and using the absolutely best and most correct manuscripts. "KJV-onlyists" and others fall into this category.

Others on the other hand may not see a problem with dividing Scripture if they think that only parts which can inspire them about Christ are divinely inspired. This is an "organic view" of divine inspiration - whatever the Scripture says, regardless of whether it contains translation errors or not, the Spirit will provide the correct understanding.

What's interesting about this statement is that it says that I believe that "every jot and tittle speaks about Christ regardless of what it actually says." In fact, on one of the first posts on this thread, I said that Psalm 51's sinful protagonist David bemoaning his transgressions doesn't speak about Christ at all. So, Evangelical's word is painting an overly broad brush.

What I said, rather, was that the NT repeatedly speaks of the Psalms as "the word of Christ", and nowhere does it refer to Psalms as "fallen human concepts", so we should be careful to follow the pattern set by NT reception, within the limits of human reason, of course. I was thinking of this recently, and the attempts to cover up WL like seen by Evangelical above, and others with their make-believe characterizations. I was reading Psalm 5, verses 1-3 (KJV) and this came up:

Give ear to my words, O Lord, consider my meditation.

Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God: for unto thee will I pray.

My voice shalt thou hear in the morning, O Lord; in the morning will I direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up.

Following the NT pattern of reception, i. e., Psalm 40:7 & Heb 10:9; Psalm 16 & Acts 2; Psalm 22:25 & Hebrews 2:12, the first person here is Christ, and the second is the Father. By reading the Psalms, you get to see the relation of the Son on earth with the Father in heaven. We know that God doesn't hear sinners, but Jesus wasn't a sinner. So when he prayed, "Hearken unto the voice of my cry", the Father did hearken.

My point is, that as a Christian, I see the Lamb of God, and hear his voice. My consciousness isn't self-aware but Christ aware. Through Christ I can see the Father. Paul said, "It is no longer I but Christ" and the Psalms are a vehicle to experience this. It isn't mere doctrine, "I have been crucified so reckon myself dead" but rather that my consciousness has been displaced by his. In Psalm 5, the "I" isn't Aron the Christian believer but Christ the Son of God. That's what I see Paul saying, which bookends with his idea of the Psalms as the words of Christ: the "I" is not Paul (or David) the fallen sinner trying to please God, rather the "I" is Christ pleasing God. "The Father delights in me, because I always do His will". The words of the Psalms were the framework, and Jesus inhabited them. No one else could. But as we appreciate Jesus, we are vicariously drawn to Jesus' appreciation of the Father.

The error of Lee was that he often created a false dichotomy, giving the choice of either "fallen human concepts" or "NT believers enjoying the Processed Triune God", but he didn't see Jesus the Nazarene praying to the Father in heaven. But look how often the NT showed us this very thing?