View Full Version : What about Inner Life?
Sons to Glory!
11-01-2021, 12:41 PM
I've been thinking about this topic for months now, ever since our discussions in a few threads earlier this year (e.g., the "Daily Devotional Inspirations" and "Examining LC Spinoffs" threads). And the thread Trapped recently started, "Is God a Trinity?" actually inspired me to start this thread, because I saw that we on here could have a civil discussion around certain topics after all! :) May the Lord give us grace and light for this topic as well.
Here’s some of my background, which should give you a view into where I’m coming from. As many of you know, I was led to the LC very early in my adult Christian life (age 18), and my walk with the Lord was therefore greatly influenced by that exposure. However, even before coming to the LC the Lord spoke to me clearly through the inner Anointing on various occasions. For instance, He spoke to me that I was dead and that I had no need of man teaching me outwardly, as He would speak to me inwardly. (1 John 2:27) At that time, I was too young and inexperienced in the word to even know that these truths were in scripture! He also spoke inexplicably to me then that He was, “the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” This let me know that He was the God of the Bible – again, I don’t remember that I’d ever heard this to that point (definitely never read it up to then). And then He put this specific longing in me and I prayed, “Lord, you have to take me to be with those who love you like I do!”
So even before coming to the LC, I had had experiences of His inner life and speaking. And I know, that I know, that I know that He was speaking to me directly and inwardly. His direct speaking and Anointing in me at that time was exceedingly wonderful!
Then I was led, in one week’s time (in 1974), across the country to miraculously “find” the LC in Berkeley (that’s a wonderful story for another time). There I found many other crazy lovers of Jesus. My experience of the LC for the next three years was a tumultuous one of leaving and coming back, due mainly to my immaturity and still having a love for the world’s things. Upon returning to Ohio (where I was from), I got married and started fellowshipping with a couple LC churches there, eventually winding up in Columbus with that LC. That lasted until 1988, when I got a job out west and we moved. The LC in Columbus was not as tightly in the LSM orbit as many other churches were, and was perhaps not as dogmatically focused on only Watchman Nee and Witness Lee authority. And I see it as sovereign of the Lord that He led us away from the LC in 1988. (of course, the Columbus group had a huge and rather violent split not too long after that). So, I think He preserved us in many ways, from much of the so-called “dirty LC bathwater.”
To some, the “dirty LC bathwater” may include their teachings and perhaps overemphasis regarding the inner life. That is, an unhealthy focus on the human spirit and spiritual things, often to the expense of the outward manifestations of Christian life and good works. I think there is some merit to this . . . (and one evidence of this could be said the be Lee’s disdain for the book of James).
After about ten years of minimal fellowship with any Christians (though I still prayed and called on the Lord’s name from time to time during these years), He led me to the fellowship here in Scottsdale. The group here is very focused on “Christ in you, the hope of glory,” and this is even written predominately on the inside front wall. Again, I convey this to give a background of where I am coming from. And my walk with God continues to be one where I see and greatly appreciate His Spirit operating in and through me and through those He’s placed me with.
So here’s the question: How much do you see the inner-life of Christ as being central to the Christian life? Personally, I see it as the focus of the New Covenant. But this is not to say that I think we should not be doing outward things. In fact, I’ve actually gained a good appreciation for the book of James in the last few years! I see much of what James is speaking about as not being possible without His moving in me to supply me to do those things. This is just like all the things Jesus spoke about in Mathew 5:1-12 (the “Beatitudes”) – does man have it in himself to do these things from the heart that Jesus spoke of? I don’t believe so, but through His indwelling and suppling us they are all possible.
Well, I must admit this has been a much longer opening post than I expected to do, but as I got to writing, it just came out, and I think some personal background is good to present here. I am interested in how important others’ view the working of the indwelling, inner life of Christ is, and how that corresponds with the more outward manifestations of good works – and I believe we children of the Most High can have a fruitful discussion around this. Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts, scriptures and experience!
Trapped
11-01-2021, 03:25 PM
What does "inner life" mean to you? What do you mean when you use that phrase?
What is some Scripture that comes to mind regarding inner life? You mentioned 1 John 2:27, which is a good one:
20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.
21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth.
22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son.
23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
24 As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father.
25 And this is what he promised us—eternal life.
26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray.
27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.
Where does the Bible say (or indicate or imply is good enough) that we have "the life of Christ" in us, i.e. what verses do you have in mind when you say that?
What are some verses that say or imply that "His life is working in us"? (I think what I mean here is, is there really the thought in the Bible that His life is working, as a separately identifiable concept than just He is working?)
I'm not arguing for or against; I just want to start with Scripture so we have a common understanding of what we are talking about!
Trapped
Robert
11-01-2021, 03:30 PM
Topic is good, but testimony better...:)
I am glad and recalling also my first years experience.
Inner life... it is hard to imagine visible fruits without invisible juice inside tree.
May be later I will continue.
Greetings Sons of Glory!
What does "inner life" mean to you? What do you mean when you use that phrase?
What is some Scripture that comes to mind regarding inner life? You mentioned 1 John 2:27, which is a good one:
20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.
21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth.
22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son.
23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
24 As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father.
25 And this is what he promised us—eternal life.
26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray.
27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.
Where does the Bible say (or indicate or imply is good enough) that we have "the life of Christ" in us, i.e. what verses do you have in mind when you say that?
What are some verses that say or imply that "His life is working in us"? (I think what I mean here is, is there really the thought in the Bible that His life is working, as a separately identifiable concept than just He is working?)
I'm not arguing for or against; I just want to start with Scripture so we have a common understanding of what we are talking about!
Trapped
I like your approach Trapped; scripture first, then opinions.
Trapped
11-01-2021, 10:10 PM
1 John 2:18-27
18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.
19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.
21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth.
22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son.
23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
24 As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father.
25 And this is what he promised us—eternal life.
26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray.
27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.
As a church kid who grew up in the LC and believed it all for decades, I do have the problems StG mentioned regarding the baby/bathwater with the inner life stuff, but I recognize that "the anointing" is a genuine concept in the Bible, so I'm trying to scoop the baby out here, and learn what the Bible says the anointing is.
Regarding the anointing in 1 John 2, I just looked the Greek word up, and learned two minutes ago that this chapter is the only place in the New Testament this word chrisma (anointing) is used. These three instances are it. This is the entire context we have.
So I guess another question I have is......do we see evidence here in this passage for "anointing" to be tantamount to "leading" as I often seem to see it referred to? I'll be honest.....I don't see that here.
Or does it have to do more with knowing the truth based on what we "have heard from the beginning"?
("from the beginning" meaning, of course, what the apostles taught that we now see in the NT....not necessarily whatever we each individually heard first in our lives, which for me in the LC would be lies, lies, and more lies)?
This passage seems more to be about discerning of false teachers (or, anyone opposed to Christ, or denying that Christ is the Messiah) and the anointing we received holding us steadfast to the truth of the apostles teaching. Maybe. Just trying to summarize what I'm reading here.
??
Trapped
Robert
11-01-2021, 10:45 PM
Col 1:27
Will be next question: Dead or alive?
Robert
11-01-2021, 11:22 PM
1 John 2:14.
Who is Word of God?
Tool called "implication" can be use in good or wrong way.
If You read John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
You see "implication" or direct meaning?
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2The same was in the beginning with God.
3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
You can always put in doubt what or which Word.
Personally I do not have problem with this:
God is Word, Word is God. In Him was zoe ( not bios, not psyche) divine live.
John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life (zoe, divine life): no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
This is not implication any more but connection all the time.
1 John 4:4
Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world.
So who is in us that Greater one?
27But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
28And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.[COLOR="blue"][COLOR="blue"][COLOR="blue"][COLOR="Black"]
So quiet good mixture! What is anointing? Person only can teach. Is it Word? Is it Truth? Is it Spirit?Is it Christ? Is it God? Is it light in us?
Wow! So many things! How this is possible to fit all of them in us?
And actually where they abide?
As a church kid who grew up in the LC and believed it all for decades, I do have the problems StG mentioned regarding the baby/bathwater with the inner life stuff, but I recognize that "the anointing" is a genuine concept in the Bible, so I'm trying to scoop the baby out here, and learn what the Bible says the anointing is.
Regarding the anointing in 1 John 2, I just looked the Greek word up, and learned two minutes ago that this chapter is the only place in the New Testament this word chrisma (anointing) is used. These three instances are it. This is the entire context we have.
So I guess another question I have is......do we see evidence here in this passage for "anointing" to be tantamount to "leading" as I often seem to see it referred to? I'll be honest.....I don't see that here.
The New Testament is filled with verses about God/Father/Christ/Spirit in us or dwelling in us. The "anointing" teaching us is just one aspect of "God in us." I think the context of I John is corrective in nature, with a background of misconceptions and errors that had affected the church of God. In this regard, John was hyperbolic here, saying "you don't need anyone to teach you." Obviously the readers needed Apostle John to *teach* them, or his letter would never have been written.
The Epistle begins with, "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, ... " John definitely connected the opening of this circular epistle with his gospel. His goal was to restore the church to their faith beginnings, just as Paul did with the Galatians.
So, I now understand the anointing in this context -- the One we should ultimately learn from is the same One we received for eternal life, and all the other teachers in our lives that may be leading us astray should be rejected.
Here is one example of the failures I had in the LC, on my "learning" journey. After one year in the LC, I was thrust into chaos -- the so-called "young Galileans" movement of WL, sending all the young peope to the campus. So much noise and confusion. I was specifically instructed, "You are in the Lord's army, and you will be told where to move to." I have often posted that my biggest failure was trusting in these people way too much. We all desperately needed I John 2.27 at that time.
Sons to Glory!
11-02-2021, 04:02 PM
What does "inner life" mean to you? What do you mean when you use that phrase?
What are some verses that say or imply that "His life is working in us"? (I think what I mean here is, is there really the thought in the Bible that His life is working, as a separately identifiable concept than just He is working?)
I'm not arguing for or against; I just want to start with Scripture so we have a common understanding of what we are talking about!
TrappedYes, starting with scripture is good!
One that comes to mind is Phil 2:13 "For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good purpose.…"
As Ohio said, "The New Testament is filled with verses about God/Father/Christ/Spirit in us or dwelling in us." In fact, this is the central theme, right? We can't do it, so Christ came to #1 redeem us, and #2 to fill us. "I am come that they might have (zoe) life." What life? His life, and His inner-life supplies us to do the good works we can't do on our own.
John 15 is about the life that is in the vine, and this life is conveyed to the branches if they remain attached to the vine. Without this, no fruit . . . nothing. "Apart from me you can do nothing.' (v.5)
His words are "Spirit and life." (John 6:63) What happens when the living word is accepted into a person? It bears fruit. The person is born-again of the Spirit. "That which is born of Spirit, spirit is." (John 3:6) So a man becomes living, born of God.
Hundreds of verses could be cited on this topic, but to keep it simple, that's a start.
Sons to Glory!
11-03-2021, 10:33 AM
This morning some other verse came to me to start this off:
"I am come that they might have life" John 10:10
"The one who has the Son has the life; the one who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." 1 John 5:12 NASB
“I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me" Gal 2:20
"When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory" Col 3:4
Trapped
11-03-2021, 01:56 PM
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is when, for example, Jesus says "I have come that they may have life"......are we sure it's HIS life versus eternal life?
I know "zoe" is often taught as "the uncreated eternal life of God".....but I am not 100% sure myself that's true.
When we see "eternal life" in the Bible.....it's not always just "zoe". It's often "aionios zoe". i.e., it actually has the adjective "eternal" in front of it.
There are instances where "zoe" on its own even means standard, human, mortal, fleeting, physical life, and not "the uncreated life of God".
For example:
Luke 16:25
"But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime [zoe] you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony.
1 Corinthians 15:19
If only for this life [zoe] we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
Philippians 1:20
I eagerly expect and hope that I will in no way be ashamed, but will have sufficient courage so that now as always Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life [zoe] or by death.
James 4:14
Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life [zoe]? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.
"Zoe" there is most definitely not the life of Christ, or the eternal uncreated life of God. So I'm not sure that when we see "zoe" we can automatically say "God's life!".
I can't get away from Adam and Eve having access to the tree of life in the garden of Eden. That tree of life is what was said to allow them to live forever, and that tree of life is what we see again in Revelation.....presumably because Christ paid our debt and we are allowed access to it again. In John 10:10 when Jesus says, "I have come that they may have life"....this is what I assume is meant - He takes the punishment for our sins so we can regain access to the tree of life and thus life forever.
I am just struggling to see evidence in Scripture for the thought of "His life does xyz". It disembodies Christ from His own life and it makes it sound like His life has a separate mind of it's own. Is there biblical evidence for "Christ's life doing something" versus just "Christ doing something"?
Trapped
Bible-believer
11-04-2021, 01:27 AM
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is when, for example, Jesus says "I have come that they may have life"......are we sure it's HIS life versus eternal life? I know "zoe" is often taught as "the uncreated eternal life of God".....but I am not 100% sure myself that's true. When we see "eternal life" in the Bible.....it's not always just "zoe". It's often "aionios zoe". i.e., it actually has the adjective "eternal" in front of it. There are instances where "zoe" on its own even means standard, human, mortal, fleeting, physical life, and not "the uncreated life of God".
I might misunderstand your passage. But I want to share my understanding.
In John 10:10, Jesus said he came so that they might have life and have it more abundantly.
Life in the verse includes two meanings:
1. the eternal life after the new birth.
2. the way of living a life after the new birth.
In John 10, Jesus said, "I am the door." So by him, we can be saved and enter into eternal life. (V.9)
"I am the good shepherd." So He gives his life for his sheep. His sheep have His life(eternal life) and live a life for Him. (the way of life).
Spiritually, John 10:10 goes with Rom. 8:28–39, 2 Cor. 9:8, Phil. 4:13,19,Heb. 13:5–6, 1Cor. 1:6, and 1 John 3:1–3. After the "New Birth," Christians get not only eternal life but a better life here on the earth than he deserves or expects. It is not just the “longevity.” It is the "way(quality)" of living that makes it "exceeding abundantly above all." (Eph.3:20).
(I don't know Greek, and I don't refer to Greek when reading the Bible. However, I can understand the scriptures in the context most of the time.)
I can't get away from Adam and Eve having access to the tree of life in the garden of Eden. That tree of life is what was said to allow them to live forever, and that tree of life is what we see again in Revelation.....presumably because Christ paid our debt and we are allowed access to it again. In John 10:10 when Jesus says, "I have come that they may have life"....this is what I assume is meant - He takes the punishment for our sins so we can regain access to the tree of life and thus life forever.
Adam and Eve did have the chance of accessing the tree of life, but they chose to eat the forbidden one first. They fell, and God expelled them out of Eden before they had a chance to get the tree of life. God even placed Cherubims to prevent them from getting back in.
And Yes, the tree of life is allowed them to gain eternal life. But we, Christians, don't need the tree of life to get eternal life, for the "eternal Spirit" indwells in us the moment when we are saved, and we sealed by the Holy Spirit unto the day of redemption. Adam and Eve need the tree of life because they don’t have what we have.
I am just struggling to see evidence in Scripture for the thought of "His life does xyz". It disembodies Christ from His own life and it makes it sound like His life has a separate mind of it's own. Is there biblical evidence for "Christ's life doing something" versus just "Christ doing something"?
To me, it sounds like a philosophical question, and I avoid it.
Can we really separate "Christ's life" from "Christ?" Can we separate "Trapped's posts" from "Trapped?" Obviously, I am not a philosopher at all.
-------
John 14:6, Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." Three absolutes; no indefinite articles.
All LIFE, physical or spiritual, comes from “THE LIFE.” ( Col. 1:13–17; John 1:1–4; and Rev. 1:8.)
----------
I interpret STG's "inner life" as the way a Christian lives his life after being saved, walking not after the flesh but after the Spirit. In other words, Christians live a life under the law of the Spirit of life. And eventually, we are all conformed to the image of the Son of God.
Sons to Glory!
11-04-2021, 09:00 AM
To me, it sounds like a philosophical question, and I avoid it.
Can we really separate "Christ's life" from "Christ?" Can we separate "Trapped's posts" from "Trapped?" Obviously, I am not a philosopher at all.
-------
John 14:6, Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." Three absolutes; no indefinite articles.
All LIFE, physical or spiritual, comes from “THE LIFE.” ( Col. 1:13–17; John 1:1–4; and Rev. 1:8.)
----------
I interpret STG's "inner life" as the way a Christian lives his life after being saved, walking not after the flesh but after the Spirit. In other words, Christians live a life under the law of the Spirit of life. And eventually, we are all conformed to the image of the Son of God.I concur . . . I don't think there's much I could add to that definition, except maybe to say that under the new covenant this is the operation of God inside us now.
I concur . . . I don't think there's much I could add to that definition, except maybe to say that under the new covenant this is the operation of God inside us now.
Anyone who can read the New Testament and not be startled by the incredible number of times the phrase "in you, in us" is mentioned has seriously missed the message of the New Covenant.
Robert
11-05-2021, 05:28 AM
From negative side now.
There is dr. Jim Richards, who is very good with separating Jesus from His power, anointing, and all divine aspects of zoe life.
He claims, that all who he was, he worked out by faith.
So if there is anyone who is interested in getting to know how to do it, he can read his books or watch movies.
But for this, Bible will be not needed.
And surely,he was not talking about "THAT" Jesus from Bible.
Sons to Glory!
11-05-2021, 09:00 AM
Anyone who can read the New Testament and not be startled by the incredible number of times the phrase "in you, in us" is mentioned has seriously missed the message of the New Covenant.And that's (obviously) what I think too! But I'm not sure that's how others view this . . . As mentioned in the opening post, there seemed to be significant push-back from some on here about the inner-life (specifically, in those earlier threads I mentioned in the opening post). I wasn't sure exactly what that was about - something more to do with WN/WL? Or was it about thinking those of the so-called "inner-life" focus were holding an unbalanced view, or what?
I can certainly see that if if someone was strong about teaching the indwelling of Christ, that someone else might think they were excluding good works and outward manifestations. But, to me and how I read those "incredible number of times" the NT references something about the indwelling, a focus on "Christ in you the hope of glory" is what produces all those good outward manifestations and good works (at least the ones that will remain after the holy fire of 1st Corinthians 3:15)!
Bible-believer
11-05-2021, 10:27 PM
I concur . . . I don't think there's much I could add to that definition, except maybe to say that under the new covenant this is the operation of God inside us now.
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Yes, the very moment when we are saved, and we are given the POWER to become the sons of God. The power of the indwelling Spirit (/Christ) works in us.
Sons to Glory!
11-06-2021, 08:19 AM
I am just struggling to see evidence in Scripture for the thought of "His life does xyz". It disembodies Christ from His own life and it makes it sound like His life has a separate mind of it's own. Is there biblical evidence for "Christ's life doing something" versus just "Christ doing something"?
TrappedI read these verses in the Daily Light* devotional this morning and thought to post - does this help address your question?
When Christ who is our life appears, then we will appear with Him in glory.
Colossians 3:4
I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, shall live.
John 11:25
God has given us eternal life and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who has not the Son of God does not have the life.
1 John 5:11-12
*Daily Light is a wonderful daily devotional of just scripture. Written by Samuel Bagster in 1875 and edited by Anne Graham Lotz
From negative side now.
There is dr. Jim Richards, who is very good with separating Jesus from His power, anointing, and all divine aspects of zoe life.
He claims, that all who he was, he worked out by faith.
Is it a "good" thing to have separated the man Jesus from all of His divine aspects? I doubt.
Repeatedly Jesus was able to "know the hearts" of both His lovers and His haters. How do we separate the man Jesus from His divine omniscience? Those who claim that Jesus received all of this "God power, anointing, and divine aspects" only after His baptism in the Jordan River have to address how some 12 year old Galilean boy was able to impress and frankly amaze all the "geniuses" in the Temple for 3 long days.
Robert
11-07-2021, 09:22 AM
To Ohio.
Robert:"From negative side now.
There is dr. Jim Richards, who is very good with separating Jesus from His power, anointing, and all divine aspects of zoe life.
He claims, that all who he was, he worked out by faith.
So if there is anyone who is interested in getting to know how to do it, he can read his books or watch movies.
But for this, Bible will be not needed.
And surely,he was not talking about "THAT" Jesus from Bible."
I hope You catched my point.
I was not recommending his teaching at all. Some people who claim to be Christians, do not consider Christ as God.
I do not live in air bubble . Sometimes I hit on channel (YT) of some "Christians". Although I had some felling on the beginning, but was watching an interview. After 30-40 minutes he started to say heresies that Jesus overcame death by his own faith which we have as well. Human's faith. As human's ability. And so on, and so on...
He mixed new age with Jesus.
But what is interesting, he could talk, and talk using christian language... And it seemed he is genuine believer. So, many heresies are accepted by Christians because they do not read enough Bible and they do not have proper picture of Jesus painted by Holly Spirit.
But for this, Bible will be not needed.
And surely,he was not talking about "THAT" Jesus from Bible."
That was about his teaching.
After some posts I hope it is clear what teaching I support.
Robert
11-07-2021, 09:36 AM
Ohio, You have marked in capital letters only part of sentence. Whatever has hit You in first reading, be faithful and do not create other meaning. "who is very good in..." makes a big difference.
I do not claim that seperating is good.
For now, probably some still have problem with accepting divinity of Christ.
So, some people by ignoring verses or adding anything else to Bible (like dr. Jim Richards) can claim and believe whatever.
If we do not start with base of our common agreement that Bible is completed God's Word and we can not add anything and subtract, then we will never come to same conclusions and knowledge of Christ.
. . . The "anointing" teaching us is just one aspect of "God in us." I think the context of I John is corrective in nature, with a background of misconceptions and errors that had affected the church of God. In this regard, John was hyperbolic here, saying "you don't need anyone to teach you." Obviously the readers needed Apostle John to *teach* them, or his letter would never have been written.Just started reading this thread and your response to this issue really makes a point. Yes, John pointed them back to what they did, or at least should, already know. But they weren't getting there themselves. They needed help. So this is not a support for a "me, my bible, and the Holy Spirit" kind of position (not what you said). We need direction in our learning. Not isolation.
Ohio, You have marked in capital letters only part of sentence. Whatever has hit You in first reading, be faithful and do not create other meaning. "who is very good in..." makes a big difference.
I do not claim that seperating is good.
For now, probably some still have problem with accepting divinity of Christ.
So, some people by ignoring verses or adding anything else to Bible (like dr. Jim Richards) can claim and believe whatever.
If we do not start with base of our common agreement that Bible is completed God's Word and we can not add anything and subtract, then we will never come to same conclusions and knowledge of Christ.
Robert, sorry if I misunderstood what you have written. It seems that English is not your native language.
Robert
11-08-2021, 07:59 AM
Robert, sorry if I misunderstood what you have written. It seems that English is not your native language.
Of course not! :))):thumbsup::hurray:
You are probably the last one who noticed this. Many already pointed this me out.
I am not sure if that was the case in that particular sentence.
Of course not! :))):thumbsup::hurray:
You are probably the last one who noticed this. Many already pointed this me out.
I noticed a while ago.
Currently I am also studying ESL.
That's emoji's as a second language. :lol:
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is when, for example, Jesus says "I have come that they may have life"......are we sure it's HIS life versus eternal life?
I know "zoe" is often taught as "the uncreated eternal life of God".....but I am not 100% sure myself that's true. . . .Not dismissing the rest of your post. But it does mainly follow this line of thinking.
In past studies, I have found that the Greek word "zoe" is not simply God's life. It is mostly used as something like the fullness of life, or all of life. Not just biological or psychological life. More like what they advertise in beer commercials. Or VRBO, cruise ship, luxury car, etc., commercials. I realize that these are "fallen," but they make a point. It is more about the actual or perceived quality of life. Surely if you have God's life you should have a more robust quality of life, even if it is not like being in a luxury car with Rolex on your arm, crusing a beautiful shoreline.
And when you start talking to people who are in need — spiritual, physical, emotional, etc. — they might agree that changing one's perspective on what is still wrong with this life is an improvement in the quality of life. I'm not diminishing the message of the gospel. I am simply pointing to the fact that even those worldy things that provide "life" eventually fail in some way. But the solid rock that is Christ does not fail.
So zoe is best fulfilled through the life of Christ. But that does not diminish or alter the broader aspects of the word.
In past studies, I have found that the Greek word "zoe" is not simply God's life. It is mostly used as something like the fullness of life, or all of life. Not just biological or psychological life.
I remember Philip Comfort, the renowned Greek N.T. scholar, describe zoe as "life in action." Think zoo, or zoology. As with so many other spiritual words, the Apostles used the best word they had in their vernacular to "communicate spiritual things with spiritual words." (I Cor 2.14)
That's why, when examining the usage of words in their day, there is limited assistance available. (Think about someone trying to understand, "my refrigerator stopped running.")
That's why it's often better to use the Bible to understand the Bible.
While I somewhat like where some of the posts have gone, what seems missing is the true definition of the "inner life" as commonly used in Christian circles, especially by those who somewhat think of themselves as being focused on the "inner life." I am not saying that whatever anyone has said to define the term is simply wrong. But it is not a term of varying meaning. It has roots and history.
But without trying to define it, I want to look at a couple of the early posts by StG.
Yes, starting with scripture is good!
One that comes to mind is Phil 2:13 "For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good purpose.…"
As Ohio said, "The New Testament is filled with verses about God/Father/Christ/Spirit in us or dwelling in us." In fact, this is the central theme, right? We can't do it, so Christ came to #1 redeem us, and #2 to fill us. "I am come that they might have (zoe) life." What life? His life, and His inner-life supplies us to do the good works we can't do on our own.
John 15 is about the life that is in the vine, and this life is conveyed to the branches if they remain attached to the vine. Without this, no fruit . . . nothing. "Apart from me you can do nothing.' (v.5)
His words are "Spirit and life." (John 6:63) What happens when the living word is accepted into a person? It bears fruit. The person is born-again of the Spirit. "That which is born of Spirit, spirit is." (John 3:6) So a man becomes living, born of God.
Hundreds of verses could be cited on this topic, but to keep it simple, that's a start."I am come that they might have life." How do we conclude that the reference to life here is simply His life? Surely we gain His life. But the importance of saying to "have life" (zoe) cannot be presumed to have its actual meaning replaced by an as-yet-unknown redefinition. It had to have meaning to those who were listening in the early years of what is now "A.D."
When you quote "That which is born of Spirit is spirit" then state "So a man becomes living, born of God" are you suggesting that the unregenerated man cannot be alive? Or cannot have "zoe"? I believe this is a construct that has been repeated to us for years. Whether it is originally from Nee and Lee or inner-life teachers in general, I believe it is incorrect. Man is alive and can have zoe without God. But he cannot have the kind of experience of zoe that God provides without God.
And in the context of what Jesus was saying, he was pointing to the hollowness of what was often thought of as life, or was speaking to those who had little to think of as "real life." But they all had an understanding of what was "zoe." And it wasn't simply God's life.
This morning some other verse came to me to start this off:
"I am come that they might have life" John 10:10
"The one who has the Son has the life; the one who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." 1 John 5:12 NASB
“I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me" Gal 2:20
"When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory" Col 3:4Nothing wrong with any of these verses. But they are all like fortune cookies quoted without reference to what they were responding to. For example, "I am crucified with Christ . . ." is part of a lengthy discussion by Paul concerning the Galatians who were chasing after old Jewish rituals as important to their position with Christ. As he moved along in his arguments against such teachings and actions, he notes that he is (and we are) already crucified (spiritually) with Christ. We now live a different life because of Christ in us. It is a fact. It is not a state that still needs to be entered. That would be little more than a NT kind of circumcision. A different thing that needs to be accomplished.
But it is already accomplished.
I have been somewhat vocal about not being much of a Calvinist. That is mostly because of the extremes to which predestination is taken and the idea that we cannot even believe without intervention. But what both the Calvinists and the Arminians get right is that the actual thing that saves us is Christ — his life, death, and resurrection. It is nothing we do, whether we get circumcised or conjur up an experience of being crucified with Christ.
And at some level, the same is true of all of the verses that you listed. They are true. They are facts. The do not require that we have an "inner-life" expreience about them for them to be true. If we believe, we have them.
And this is my problem with the inner-life movement in general. It distracts us from what is truly central in the NT. And it is not the inner life.
Jesus didn't tell everyone who encountered him to follow. He told many to "go and sin no more," to live a different life. And for those who sought to follow him, he put up some significant impediments. When you get down to it, for most of us, being the woman caught in adultery that was told to go and stop sinning is a more significant testimony of the change in life that Jesus provides than a bunch of people retreating to their sanctuaries and meeting halls to enjoy some more zoe.
StG, my goal has never been to pick on you, but to try by various ways to see if you might see something different than what I believe to be a distraction from the more important things about the real Christian life.
Robert
11-08-2021, 09:56 AM
OBW "Man is alive and can have zoe without God. But he cannot have the kind of experience of zoe that God provides without God.
And in the context of what Jesus was saying, he was pointing to the hollowness of what was often thought of as life, or was speaking to those who had little to think of as "real life." But they all had an understanding of what was "zoe." And it wasn't simply God's life."
Can You explain what you mean by this? I agree that in hebrew or greek some words were obvious and clear in their own language. But is not clear also for You in english language what "divine life" means? And what about experiencing this zoe live without God?
Do You mean by zoe " spiritual"? Like on third level?
"And at some level, the same is true of all of the verses that you listed. They are true. They are facts. The do not require that we have an "inner-life" expreience about them for them to be true. If we believe, we have them.
And this is my problem with the inner-life movement in general. It distracts us from what is truly central in the NT. And it is not the inner life.
Jesus didn't tell everyone who encountered him to follow. He told many to "go and sin no more," to live a different life. And for those who sought to follow him, he put up some significant impediments. When you get down to it, for most of us, being the woman caught in adultery that was told to go and stop sinning is a more significant testimony of the change in life that Jesus provides than a bunch of people retreating to their sanctuaries and meeting halls to enjoy some more zoe."
I think I understand somehow Your point of view.
First of all I do agree that LC turn our attention too much to three parts of our being. Too much! It is good to know, but they overemphasized it.
If I can use my other words: We act and live spontaneously. Nobody is planning to think about to send signal from brain to hand to lift up cop and open mouth... This is crazy!
The same is about connection between spirit and soul. It is good to mention about it once, but when they overemphasized this matter they produced doctrine and practice. But where is actually our heart? Is it not what God is interested in? To keep our hearts loving Him?
I have to be short so for now this.
Robert,
On the three parts of man, I think that, while it is not entirely incorrect, much of how they applied the idea of the three parts is not as clearly supported as they state. And the "separation" of soul and spirit is much muddier than the list of verses trotted out by Nee to support his teaching. I recall that several verses that were given to show an aspect of the spirit as clearly separate from the soul that actually looked nearly identical to verses about the soul. In other words, more of an overlap than a separation. At one point we somewhat concluded that the spirit looked more like an enhancement of the soul than something different from it.
Too much to dig back into, but worthy of thought.
Robert
11-09-2021, 04:53 PM
Robert,
On the three parts of man, I think that, while it is not entirely incorrect, much of how they applied the idea of the three parts is not as clearly supported as they state. And the "separation" of soul and spirit is much muddier than the list of verses trotted out by Nee to support his teaching. I recall that several verses that were given to show an aspect of the spirit as clearly separate from the soul that actually looked nearly identical to verses about the soul. In other words, more of an overlap than a separation. At one point we somewhat concluded that the spirit looked more like an enhancement of the soul than something different from it.
Too much to dig back into, but worthy of thought.
I did some home work and still laboring. It is probably in another thread and Nell will shout on us.
Generally I do more agree with "overlap" or "enhancement.
Rom 8:9-15
Jam 4:8 "doubleminden" focused sometimes on spirit or flesh. But we are one person. That is why Paul made this elaborate in Rom.
Is 53:12 He offered His soul. But in other place he cried in Psalm 31:6 spirit
Luc 23:46 spirit.
Mth 12: 18 very interesting.
So yes, overlaping. But we can also highlight subtle difference with context it was used. That would be worthy of study.
But about experiencing it we can pay attention to our bodies or to spirit as opposite. This is a fact. And leading by Holy Spirit is also what we should experience.
And as I said before, I think this strong separation opened door for false spirits. I've found today a clip with guy, who was citing word by word WL teaching about this subject! And just guess OBW where this guy come from and what is promoting? Hidden New Age within Word Fatih Movement.
They use it for mysticism and prove that we need separate our mind and meditate and catch the proper wave. I am afraid that this is exactly what happened with many LC believers. Rejecting good works ( or putting aside), lack of loving with our heart. Many saints justify their fleshly behavior strongly believing that they use "spirit" while they spread death and confusion. So we had trees without fruits.
Sons to Glory!
11-10-2021, 12:05 PM
And this is my problem with the inner-life movement in general. It distracts us from what is truly central in the NT. And it is not the inner life.
What do you think is the "truly central" theme in the NT?
What do you think is the "truly central" theme in the NT?
Initially, Christ Jesus died on the cross for our sins to redeem us from the curse of the law.
Secondly, Jesus Christ rose from the dead to give us eternal life by living in us.
Initially, Christ Jesus died on the cross for our sins to redeem us from the curse of the law.
Secondly, Jesus Christ rose from the dead to give us eternal life by living in us.
For the central theme of the NT, I would completely agree with the first part. The central problem faced down and resolved by the authors of the NT was that the holy God was separated from the sinful, fallen human race. The blood of bulls and goats (cf Heb 10:4) didn't solve the issue, merely ameliorated it. The blood of Jesus is presented in the NT as reconciling us with God. His death brought us back to life.
I'd come at the second part differently. Mind you, I don't disagree at all. I just phrase my self-narrative differently. To me, the central theme of the NT is love. Because of love, Christ left the Father and came. Because of love, while we were yet sinners Christ died. Because of love, the Father raised Jesus from the dead to eternal glory. Because of love, the reigning Christ poured out His Spirit, "that which you see and hear" according to Peter in Acts 2:33.
The death of Christ gave us peace toward God, and - importantly - toward one another. That same spirit that raised Christ from the dead, now dwells in us, that we might truly love the Father and love one another. The central command is love. And love is not sentiment, but action: just as Christ in love came down from glorious light to dwell amongst the darkened human race, so we in love are able to sense the light and to follow, to bless when we're cursed, to pray for those who smite us, to repent, to forgive, to give without thought of reward.
If you read the first few chapters of Acts, this is love in action. Paul and Barnabas coming back from Antioch and dispensing to the poor is love in action. Love from Antioch, flowing through Paul and Barnabas. If you look at the RecV the word in Acts 12:25 is 'dispensing', the other translations are 'mission' or 'service' but the Greek is 'diakonon'. It is giving. This is the narrative of the Samaritan portrayed in Luke 10, now working out in all of us.
The central theme of Paul's outreach to the gentiles was to give them the good news of Jesus as risen Lord, and to bring back to Jerusalem the 'love-offering' of the gentiles to the poor who dwelt there. Love flowed out, love flowed back. Galatians 2:10 (NIV) "All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along." Look at that word - 'continue'! It was a continuous effort!
The inner life as a subject of itself is perilous - even peripheral, much less central. Because of our fallen residues, we'll begin to focus on our own self-oriented enjoyment, while Lazarus lies outside our doors, covered in sores and dying. "Oh, I'm a man, I'm the meaning of the universe!" Remember singing that one? The man Lazarus is outside in the cold, whilst I'm inside, singing in the warmth celebrating the man Aron. Which man is therefore then the center and meaning of the universe? The self! Aron! Peril!
So while I recognise and affirm and celebrate the inner life, I'm wary that it becomes a thing-in-itself. The only thing-in-itself worthy of focused attention and consistently ambitious effort, is to follow Jesus by the pouring-out process of helping others. That is what the first chapters of Acts show, concretely, and what Paul tried to carry far beyond the borders of Jerusalem.
For the central theme of the NT, I would completely agree with the first part. The central problem faced down and resolved by the authors of the NT was that the holy God was separated from the sinful, fallen human race. The blood of bulls and goats (cf Heb 10:4) didn't solve the issue, merely ameliorated it. The blood of Jesus is presented in the NT as reconciling us with God. His death brought us back to life.
OK, agreed. Paul confirmed this to Timothy, "This is a trustworthy saying, worthy of full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners."
Furthermore, the animal sacrifices had the singular goal of reminding man of the promise of God made in the garden. I could also safely say that the "truly central" theme of every O.T. verse was the cross of Christ.
But aron you mentioned "His death brought us back to life," so that's why I mentioned the resurrection giving us life, ergo the way to the tree of life opened. Can't visualize one without the other.
Completely agree with your descriptions of love!
So while I recognise and affirm and celebrate the inner life, I'm wary that it becomes a thing-in-itself. The only thing-in-itself worthy of focused attention and consistently ambitious effort, is to follow Jesus by the pouring-out process of helping others. That is what the first chapters of Acts show, concretely, and what Paul tried to carry far beyond the borders of Jerusalem.
OK, good points!
I spent my best years sitting in endless meetings. Some of what I learned and spoke in those meetings was immensely valuable to my faith, but endless meetings and trainings became the be-all end-all goal which caused me to lose the "truly central" theme of my life with God. We had, for the most part, contented ourselves with pride and the condemnation of others.
I would say that the mandates of scripture and my own "inner life" troubles caused me to see the error of the way I was on.
But aron you mentioned "His death brought us back to life," so that's why I mentioned the resurrection giving us life, ergo the way to the tree of life opened. Can't visualize one without the other.
I agree. It is indeed central to the narrative. I stressed on love, and giving as love expressed, that we don't get stuck looking at indwelling life, and thinking we've arrived somewhere. Although it is real, our ability to focus on it is fleeting, and because of this, and our fallen nature, it can become somewhat chimerical.
Case in point, the LC experience. Life, life, life, we sang interminably. Yet the barest issues were not only ignored, but repressed by leaders.
Robert
11-11-2021, 10:28 AM
Aron:The inner life as a subject of itself is perilous - even peripheral, much less central. Because of our fallen residues, we'll begin to focus on our own self-oriented enjoyment, while Lazarus lies outside our doors, covered in sores and dying. "Oh, I'm a man, I'm the meaning of the universe!" Remember singing that one? The man Lazarus is outside in the cold, whilst I'm inside, singing in the warmth celebrating the man Aron. Which man is therefore then the center and meaning of the universe? The self! Aron! Peril!
So while I recognise and affirm and celebrate the inner life, I'm wary that it becomes a thing-in-itself. The only thing-in-itself worthy of focused attention and consistently ambitious effort, is to follow Jesus by the pouring-out process of helping others. That is what the first chapters of Acts show, concretely, and what Paul tried to carry far beyond the borders of Jerusalem.[/I]
[/QUOTE]
Finally! First time someone describe it! When we focus on "inner life" the real zoe disappear. Holy Spirit does work in us but notice, that nowhere is mentioned to praise Holy Spirit but Jesus, God Father. The work of Holy Spirit is to glorify God and Jesus.
The same is with so called "inner live". This is rathe ability than object of our interest. So, as in many other cases, they overemphasized this fact in their teaching. Tha's why I say, behind this teaching is hidden hindu spirit. That is why LR and LSM is so dangerous. Very good teaching, christian background, wonderful symbols reading. But... hidden small garden gates where enemy can come in.
Sons to Glory!
11-11-2021, 11:09 AM
I certainly agree regarding what's been said about His love being central! To my understanding, His love is His motivation behind everything toward us. Thus, as Ohio pointed out, He did two key things according to this great love: 1) to rescue us from sin, and then 2) indwell us to facilitate our transformation into His likeness (which will then exhibit true love in action through us).
And, could we say the new covenant is synonymous with the New Testament? In Jeremiah 31:33 He says, "But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,’ says the Lord. ‘I will put my law in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people’” Then in Ezekiel 36:28-30 He adds more definition to this new covenant saying, “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.”
Why did He do this? He loves us! He has always loved us - the question is, what is the NT mainly about, that is, what is He doing in His love for us?
I believe that the gospel of Jesus Christ spread like wildfire through the Levant, and into Africa, Asia, and Europe in the first two centuries of the Common Era, because it provided something completely unheard-of and revolutionary, and yet instantly and recognisably familiar. Love one another. We all have the same Father. It was revolutionary, yet it was so simple, so obvious, and so true, that everyone (most everyone) could grasp it right off. The inner light within jumped up and said, "Yes!". If you were a human being and heard the gospel of Jesus Christ you wept with recognition that the divine truth had reached you. It was in some sense counter-intuitive, to care for the 'Other' rather than the 'Self', yet somehow when you got it, it was so obviously true! We are all connected! God, through Jesus, cared for us, and met us, now we can do the same for others!
This is the inner life that I see, contained in nearly every word of the New Testament, and bursting forth on its pages. Serving others without thought of reward brought joy after joy, freedom from all the devils that plagued me. And time and again, God met me in my pathetic circumstances. "The Holy Spirit/the Advocate/Paraclete will come alongside to help you..."
Trapped
11-11-2021, 08:07 PM
Adam and Eve did have the chance of accessing the tree of life, but they chose to eat the forbidden one first. They fell, and God expelled them out of Eden before they had a chance to get the tree of life. God even placed Cherubims to prevent them from getting back in.
And Yes, the tree of life is allowed them to gain eternal life. But we, Christians, don't need the tree of life to get eternal life, for the "eternal Spirit" indwells in us the moment when we are saved, and we sealed by the Holy Spirit unto the day of redemption.Adam and Eve need the tree of life because they don’t have what we have.
The tree of life is first found in Genesis 2 and last found in Revelation 22. The tree of life is part of the bookends of the Bible.
Revelation 22:14
“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.
As far as I can tell, Revelation speaks of the believers having access once again to the tree of life in the holy city. I don't see any evidence that the tree of life has any different purpose in Revelation than it had in Genesis. It makes perfect sense that access would be regained to it. Having access to it is the means by which we have eternal life. Jesus died for our sins so that the way to the tree of life would be opened to us again. It's right there - that we may have right to the tree of life.
To me, it sounds like a philosophical question, and I avoid it.
Can we really separate "Christ's life" from "Christ?" Can we separate "Trapped's posts" from "Trapped?" Obviously, I am not a philosopher at all.
Philosophical questions don't need to be avoided. That's an LC falsehood.
I don't see biblical grounds for separating Christ from His own life.
Maybe if I use a spouse as an example it will make more sense how weird talking about "the life inside doing xyz" sounds to me:
A wife wanting to make a career change would say, "My husband encouraged me!" No one would ever say "My husband's life encouraged me".
A husband would say, "My wife gave me the courage to reach out to my estranged sibling." Never, "My wife's life gave me the courage, etc".
No one would separate a spouse's life from the spouse as if the person and that person's life are separate things. I don't know why we do that with Jesus. We have the Person. Anything that comes from Him comes from the Person, not a separable "life". His speaking, His leading, His indwelling - it's not "a life" that's doing that....it's a Person that's doing that.
To say "the indwelling life of Christ"......why don't we just talk about "the indwelling Christ"? Jesus always spoke of the Father being in Him....not "the Father's life" being in Him.
I apologize (mostly to StG as this is his thread) if any of this seems like I'm splitting hairs. As a church kid, I grew up under a "minister of the age" who would slightly adjust scripture just a little bit, and then leverage that small adjustment to create wildly unbiblical teachings. I'm just at a place right now where I'm sensitive to accuracy, because the conclusions produced by ideas have to have an accurate foundation to begin with.
Trapped
I agree. It is indeed central to the narrative. I stressed on love, and giving as love expressed, that we don't get stuck looking at indwelling life, and thinking we've arrived somewhere. Although it is real, our ability to focus on it is fleeting, and because of this, and our fallen nature, it can become somewhat chimerical.
Case in point, the LC experience. Life, life, life, we sang interminably. Yet the barest issues were not only ignored, but repressed by leaders.
One of the chief, long term difficulties I have on this forum is not being able to distinguish between Biblical truths and errant LC practices when both ascribe the same terminology. I long ago concluded that much of what we in the LC called "life, life, life" was little more than "prideful feel-goodism."
We felt so special about ourselves knowing that all outsiders were "hopelessly pathetic and degraded,' while we alone were on the local ground, bearing the testimony of the Lord. That deceit produced a modern day Laodicea. The deception took us so far that we actually believed that God cares little for right and wrong, and we should "only care for life," which really meant that we should solely focus on "the ministry," while ignoring sin and corruption around us. Instead of "that which is really life," (I T 6.19) all manner of sin and unrighteousness were justified with that saying.
Yet being mindful of the "inner life" within us has nothing to do with that deception. Inner life simply means that we seek to know and serve the One who lives within us. How can we obey the Lord, become His disciples, and walk by the Spirit unless we have an ear to hear what the Spirit is speaking?
I agree that "love is the goal of the charge." (I T 1.5) In many regards the earliest days of my salvation in the church were filled with such love. Love for everything. Love I never known before. Love of God, love of His word, love for people, love for the brotherhood, love to speak the gospel. That fire was quickly distinguished. Not by sins or the world, but by LC leaders who inserted themselves between God and His people, replacing true shepherding for endless winds and waves of teachings.
Sons to Glory!
11-12-2021, 08:06 AM
To say "the indwelling life of Christ"......why don't we just talk about "the indwelling Christ"? Jesus always spoke of the Father being in Him....not "the Father's life" being in Him.
I apologize (mostly to StG as this is his thread) if any of this seems like I'm splitting hairs. As a church kid, I grew up under a "minister of the age" who would slightly adjust scripture just a little bit, and then leverage that small adjustment to create wildly unbiblical teachings. I'm just at a place right now where I'm sensitive to accuracy, because the conclusions produced by ideas have to have an accurate foundation to begin with.
TrappedNo need to apologize at all! I think I'm starting to see where you are coming from, and agree that we're better off focusing on "the indwelling Christ" than the inner-life per se. I look at His indwelling as being central to the new covenant/NT, and therefore, all else proceeds out of His indwelling - love, life, long-suffering, patience, kindness, gentleness, peace . . . all the fruit of the Spirit.
So life is just an aspect of His indwelling . . . and I get that the LC may have over-emphasized that to the somewhat exclusion of Christ Himself. It's perhaps sort of like how I view the admonition to "turn to your spirit" in that it is an extra-biblical phrase that tends to depersonalize things. That is, "turn to the Lord" or "turn your heart to Him" is biblical, so why not stick with that?
With that said, life is also huge in the NT (but again, it is not to be separated from Christ)! For instance these familiar verses: "I am come that they might have life and have it to the full." "These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, and in believing you may have life in His name." "The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed me from the law of sin and of death." "He who has the Son has the life." And since He indwells us, we get to participate in His awesome life, which produces all the fruit of the Spirit in us.
No need to apologize at all! I think I'm starting to see where you are coming from, and agree that we're better off focusing on "the indwelling Christ" than the inner-life per se. I look at His indwelling as being central to the new covenant/NT, and therefore, all else proceeds out of His indwelling - love, life, long-suffering, patience, kindness, gentleness, peace . . . all the fruit of the Spirit.
This is a great summary. Focusing on the "inner life" can degenerate into "we only care for life" and that "life" in the mind of the beholder can mean most anything. Just ask Philip Lee.
Bible-believer
11-12-2021, 08:27 PM
As far as I can tell, Revelation speaks of the believers having access once again to the tree of life in the holy city. I don't see any evidence that the tree of life has any different purpose in Revelation than it had in Genesis. It makes perfect sense that access would be regained to it. Having access to it is the means by which we have eternal life. Jesus died for our sins so that the way to the tree of life would be opened to us again. It's right there - that we may have right to the tree of life.
Sure, that's the same tree of life with the same purpose. My concern is who needs it. Do we, Christians, need it?
Philosophical questions don't need to be avoided. That's an LC falsehood.
I avoid it because I am not good at reasoning kind of stuff as you do. I admire that ability.
As a church kid, I grew up under a "minister of the age" who would slightly adjust scripture just a little bit, and then leverage that small adjustment to create wildly unbiblical teachings. I'm just at a place right now where I'm sensitive to accuracy, because the conclusions produced by ideas have to have an accurate foundation to begin with.
I can relate to the feeling. I was reading brother Jacob's article regarding Lee's TYD. While looking up Lee's writings, I learned how Lee manipulated the scriptures. Firstly, he made a statement or assumption. Secondly, he took verses out of context. And then he mixed them for mutual support.
Trapped
11-12-2021, 11:14 PM
Sure, that's the same tree of life with the same purpose. My concern is who needs it. Do we, Christians, need it?
You know, honestly, good question. I think you mentioned a post or two ago about the eternal Spirit indwelling us and our being sealed by the holy Spirit unto the day of redemption, and that those facts mean we don't need access to the tree of life.
I guess my view is that the sealing is the guarantee, the promise, and we know that when it comes time for each of us to go before the throne.....that sealing, that promise, is like the blood on the doorposts ... and we are "passed over" and we are approved because of the blood of the Lamb. This approval (nothing we did, but just our belief/trust/faith in what HE did) means we are those who have our names written in the book of life and are those who are given the right to the tree of life again.
I know the Bible says "He who has the Son has the life", but since you've kind of made me think about it.....I don't know that I considered that to mean we have that eternal life right now. I guess I considered it that our having the Son means we have the promise, the hope, the assurance of eternal life. That's what the being sealed unto the day of redemption means. We are marked now....but the day of redemption itself is still coming. There are some present realities and some future realities, and the future realities are so sure because we have God's word and God cannot lie, that we can talk about them and consider them as if they have passed already or are true now. We can say "we have eternal life" and know that we have it, even though right now we don't literally have that eternal life but are in our mortal, limited life.
Kind of like heirs to an inheritance (which we are). The inheritance is "already" the heirs, even before the parent has passed, because the will, the guarantee is there.....even if the reality of it doesn't come true until the future.
Normally I would go digging for verses and backup, but I'm too tired right now, so for now I'm just free-writing the unspoken steps I had in my head about this. It's more than possible that verses could be found to show my thought process was wrong, and more than possible that I made some erroneous connections and strung things together that shouldn't be, but......that's what a public forum is for - so people can throw a red flag when that happens!
And I guess my musing response to your question is.....if we don't need the tree of life, why would God bother putting it in the holy city? If it still serves the same purpose, but we don't need it.....then who does?
I know the nations are healed by its leaves....but Revelation still speaks of it producing fruits every month. My assumption, and I think it's a reasonable one, is that those fruits are for the believers. It producing new fruits every months seems to indicate to me that we are to continually eat of its new produce......thus the way we continue on in eternal life, just like Adam/Eve would have if they hadn't disobeyed.
But maybe I'm making assumptions that aren't really stated in Scripture. I don't know. What did you have in mind, or what are your thoughts about why the tree of life is there?
I avoid it because I am not good at reasoning kind of stuff as you do. I admire that ability.
Well, thank you, and I don't know how good I am at it, but I will say that listening to apologetics debates and Q&A's and presentations, and debates about theological questions has helped me a lot. That learning was crucial for my breaking apart Witness Lee's faulty logic ("the bible says A, therefore we have to see this means D!" --- nope!)
The main type of questions are simply things like "what lead you to that conclusion?" Or "how do you know that?" or "what are you basing this on?" And then you go look at the evidence they point to and see for yourself if the conclusions they have drawn are logical and reasonable. If someone makes a statement and can't answer those kind of questions about that statement, then......watch out! The LC/ministry/Lee's teachings evaporate if you actually start investigating where they says they get their proof from.
I can relate to the feeling. I was reading brother Jacob's article regarding Lee's TYD. While looking up Lee's writings, I learned how Lee manipulated the scriptures. Firstly, he made a statement or assumption. Secondly, he took verses out of context. And then he mixed them for mutual support.
Verrrry much so! Lee would make things up out of thin air, and state them as if they were so obvious that you felt too dumb to ask "but how did you get THAT assumption?" or as if they were so hidden and esoteric you were too dumb to ever have seen it and had to trust his special insight.......and then he just went along like every other cult leader and merrily cherry-picked verses out of context to prop up his false assumption.
What is fascinating is that he did this using a medium that often makes it difficult to do this - the Life-Studies. He actually did go through the Bible book by book, verse by verse, and going through the Bible like that usually makes it much more difficult to make things up that aren't there. But somehow he did it, and somehow managed to have people read verses while he taught the polar opposite of what those verses really say, and so people are all the more deceived. Argh.
Trapped
Trapped
11-12-2021, 11:17 PM
No need to apologize at all! I think I'm starting to see where you are coming from, and agree that we're better off focusing on "the indwelling Christ" than the inner-life per se. I look at His indwelling as being central to the new covenant/NT, and therefore, all else proceeds out of His indwelling - love, life, long-suffering, patience, kindness, gentleness, peace . . . all the fruit of the Spirit.
So life is just an aspect of His indwelling . . . and I get that the LC may have over-emphasized that to the somewhat exclusion of Christ Himself. It's perhaps sort of like how I view the admonition to "turn to your spirit" in that it is an extra-biblical phrase that tends to depersonalize things. That is, "turn to the Lord" or "turn your heart to Him" is biblical, so why not stick with that?
With that said, life is also huge in the NT (but again, it is not to be separated from Christ)! For instance these familiar verses: "I am come that they might have life and have it to the full." "These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, and in believing you may have life in His name." "The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed me from the law of sin and of death." "He who has the Son has the life." And since He indwells us, we get to participate in His awesome life, which produces all the fruit of the Spirit in us.
This is a great summary. Focusing on the "inner life" can degenerate into "we only care for life" and that "life" in the mind of the beholder can mean most anything. Just ask Philip Lee.
Agreed, and agreed! Thanks for giving me the chance to fumble around with my words as I tried to put together what I was bumping up against!
Trapped
Agreed, and agreed! Thanks for giving me the chance to fumble around with my words as I tried to put together what I was bumping up against!
Trapped
I doubt that you are against having an “inner life” relationship with the Lord Jesus, but what you are “bumping up against” is the extremism so often confronted in the Recovery. Like the sort of stuff confronted years ago, “I have life and peace with ‘the brudders’ decision to quarantine the Midwest for being ‘divisive.’”
Huh?
The church with no name sued us for our name, and you still have “life and peace?”
Something’s wrong here.
UntoHim
11-13-2021, 09:12 AM
In my experience and observation "inner life" usually means something very subjective. "I feel the Lord has lead me to..." "I have the peace to...". These kinds of subjective feelings are not necessarily a bad thing, however many times they need to come under the testing or discernment of another mature member of the Body. They also need to come under the scrutiny of the Word of God.
So when Minoru Chen, a prominent Local Church/LSM ministry leader proclaims, in an official meeting of the Local Churches, that he is "full of Brother Lee's spirit", the inner life of anyone who even faintly knows the Bible, or has known the Lord for even the least amount of time, would sound out the loudest of alarms and would lead this person to reject and repudiate such a heretical and dangerous speaking.
So when another prominent Local Church/LSM ministry leader, Ron Kangas, publicly proclaims that another Christian brother is "a man of death" simply because he has become critical of Witness Lee and the religion of the Lord's Recovery, the inner life of anyone who even faintly knows the Bible, or has known the Lord for even the least amount of time, would sound out the loudest of alarms and would lead this person to reject and repudiate such a heretical and dangerous speaking.
So when another prominent Local Church/LSM ministry leader, Benson Phillips, in a public conference meeting of the Local Churches, proclaims that if you leave the religious organization of the Local Church of Witness Lee/Living Stream Ministry "you will have no way for the process of sanctification to go forward within you. Instead, you will just enter into a bankrupt situation. I know of no one who has left the Lord’s recovery and today is a great spiritual person on the earth. The sanctification process is carried out in the Lord’s recovery”, the inner life of anyone who even faintly knows the Bible, or has known the Lord for even the least amount of time, would sound out the loudest of alarms and would lead this person to reject and repudiate such a heretical and dangerous speaking.
-
On_Blended_Knee
11-13-2021, 09:23 AM
That's odd, I thought the central thrust of the gospel was...
...wait for it...
The Kingdom!
The kingdom of God ! ! ! (Mark 1: 14 - 15, Matthew 1: 17)
I know that crucial matters like love and good works are important, and I do not mean to diminish them, but they are important in the same way that it would be vital -if you were an earthly king, to take an example- that your heir, and the heir to your throne, learn in his infancy how to wall and talk, and read and write, handle a sword or ride a horse, et cetera, until the time he should succeed to the throne of his father's kingdom.
I mean, come on, once you've received all your awesome rewards for all the good works you've done and the love you've shown over the course of your brief life, then what next? What next for the following billion years or so?
Well, I hope you're all good at playing the hard or an electric guitar, or something...
... my two shekels worth...
Sons to Glory!
11-13-2021, 10:58 AM
Agreed, and agreed! Thanks for giving me the chance to fumble around with my words as I tried to put together what I was bumping up against!
TrappedYou bet! And I'm glad we had this conversation as it helped clarify for me some others' perspective on this matter. From comments on previous threads, I had something of an idea that several on here were not advocating Christ's indwelling as a key of the new covenant. But I now think that this is not the case - what people were talking about was the LC overemphasis on the "life, life, life" and how that turned into a thing in and of itself, depersonalizing Christ. That is, through the focus on "life,'life,'life" we may loose sight that it is Christ actually dwelling in His saints . . . a person, not just some rather nebulous concept!
I must say in my 50 years as a regenerated one, I'm constantly needing to be led back to the reality of the person of Christ Himself, instead of just some idea, teaching, practice or whatever it is that tends to replace Him! So nothing wrong with appreciating the LIFE of Christ living in and through us, but even that can become "a thing" which robs us of our "exceeding great reward" of simply God Himself. (Gen 15:1)
I thought the central thrust of the gospel was...
...wait for it...
The Kingdom!
The kingdom of God ! ! ! (Mark 1: 14 - 15, Matthew 1: 17)
I know that crucial matters like love and good works are important, and I do not mean to diminish them, but they are important in the same way that it would be vital -if you were an earthly king, to take an example- that your heir, and the heir to your throne, learn in his infancy how to wall and talk, and read and write, handle a sword or ride a horse, et cetera, until the time he should succeed to the throne of his father's kingdom.
I mean, come on, once you've received all your awesome rewards for all the good works you've done and the love you've shown over the course of your brief life, then what next? ...
Very good point. The central thrust of the NT is the kingdom. After Jesus rose, and stayed with them 40 days talking of the kingdom of God, they asked him, "Are you at this time restoring the kingdom to Israel?"
The kingdom of God belonged to Israel and to her king. Years, decades even, in Protestant and post-Protestant (LC, Anabaptist) churches and I never heard this. I had to find out on my own. Jesus is the King of Israel, the King of the Jews. (John 1:49; Matt 2:1-2) The restoration of the kingdom of God is to Israel.
All those years going to church meetings and such a basic, essential truth was hidden from me. It was suppressed by church authorities, because it undermined their kingdom! So when people talk of the kingdom I really wonder what kingdom they mean.
Safer to focus on God's saving and redeeming love toward us, our subsequent love toward one another. If you have love but not the kingdom, at least you're close. You have something. If you have the kingdom but not love, you have the wrong kingdom. You* have nothing.
(Of course when I say 'you' this is self-talk, and perhaps only applicable to me. Others may have different narratives, realities. I am sharing my own)
Robert
11-14-2021, 03:48 PM
Safer to focus on God's saving and redeeming love toward us, our subsequent love toward one another. If you have love but not the kingdom, at least you're close. You have something. If you have the kingdom but not love, you have the wrong kingdom. You* have nothing.
Your words are exactly my conclusion from recent trip.
Me and my wife just came back from Christian conference organized by some churches from few denominations. I did not even ask for names.
They had burden to meet, share Word of God. Group of elders and pastors had a desire to focus on Christ and nothing else. Two busy days!
Differet brothers, different background, same Holy Spirit, the same Jesus Christ.
I can asure all of You, that there was no word of "inner life" spoken.
There was fruit of that life!
Real shinning brothers! Not in the meaning of LC but rather from OT.
Few brothers had real testimony from God. Confirmation from God that they spent time with Him in private prayer. Every word was proper and full of encouragement. Nothing from themself. It was blessing to me to see His influence on people ( LC- work of inner life, God working in Himself into them, etc).
Words they used: Lord Jesus showed me... Holy Spirit led me... Holy Spirit showed me... I was in presence of my dearest Lord Jesus...
It seems like their understanding was, Lord is "there", we are "here", but we can come in private prayer and be blessed, gain strenght, and power to provide daily live. They say this way. Their words. But what I see as former LC member? I see brothers who like Moses brought piece of God's glory here on the Earth. I do not say, that they are perfect or so. But for me, it was example what means to shine as light in this world.
Did I mentioned about their "inner life"?
So may be it is healthier, to keep biblical words to describe biblical things or events?
I am so happy so I wanted to share with You. I am encouraged to spend more time with my Lord.
Bible-believer
11-14-2021, 07:07 PM
And I guess my musing response to your question is.....if we don't need the tree of life, why would God bother putting it in the holy city? If it still serves the same purpose, but we don't need it.....then who does?
I know the nations are healed by its leaves....but Revelation still speaks of it producing fruits every month. My assumption, and I think it's a reasonable one, is that those fruits are for the believers. It producing new fruits every months seems to indicate to me that we are to continually eat of its new produce......thus the way we continue on in eternal life, just like Adam/Eve would have if they hadn't disobeyed.
But maybe I'm making assumptions that aren't really stated in Scripture. I don't know. What did you have in mind, or what are your thoughts about why the tree of life is there?
I do have some thoughts, and I try to organize them together. I'll start a new post regarding this subject when ready. (Avoid getting STG's post off track.)
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.