Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay
Definitely a lot of food for thought here
But as far as my Bible reading is concerned. I believe that Jesus was talking about spiritual oneness in regards to "that may be one, father, as you and I are one." But there are different types of oneness. Paul says in Philippians 2:2 I urge you, then, to make me completely happy by having the same thoughts, sharing the same love, and being one in soul and mind (International standard version)
Philippians 2:2 Make my joy full, that you think the same thing, having the same love, joined in soul, thinking the one thing (Recovery version)
The difference between these two translations is kind of pertinent to the opposing concepts you and I are talking about. The ISV version is pretty general and could be more open to interpretation. You said you felt one with other Christians in their giving and their good works. But Lee's translation says 'thinking the one thing' which the ISV doesn't say. That little difference is probably huge. In the footnote he elaborates and says "According to the context of this book, the one thing here must refer to the subjective knowledge and experience of Christ (Phil. 1:20-21; 2:5; 3:7-9; 4:13). Christ, and Christ alone, should be the centrality and universality of our entire being. Our thinking should be focused on the excellency of the knowledge and experience of Christ. Focusing on anything else causes us to think differently, thus creating dissensions among us."
This type of oneness is in the soul and the mind, and apparently the spirit. Implying to share the same thoughts and be of the same spirit. It's not saying a oneness in spirit in the verse, but Lee is attaching it to the oneness of the spirit of Christ, particularly in our subjective knowledge and experiences of Him
In John 17:21 I believe Jesus was talking about a oneness in the spirit similar to how the triune God is one
Here's Lee's interpretation in his footnote for John 17:21. He says "This is the second aspect of the believers' oneness, the oneness in the Triune God through sanctification, separation from the world by the word of God. In this aspect of oneness the believers, separated from the world unto God, enjoy the Triune God as the factor of their oneness." So Lee's interpretation of John 17:21 is that the believers are one with one another through sanctification and separation from the world. Which that is yet another different type of oneness
So we see different types of oneness in the Bible. Which is all pretty confusing. I suppose I understand why people would just stop short because it's a lot to understand
I don't think though, that oneness has much to do with good works. But I suppose we could say that's a certain kind of oneness in a general sense. If a large stadium of people go to a football game, they are "one" in the sense that they're all at the football game. They are one physically in location.....but does any of it matter? I suppose if you say that God only blesses 'one group of people who are standing in oneness on the correct ground' and 'in the same thought, mind, and sprit of oneness' then it certainly does matter what is meant by oneness. Because according to Lee Christians who are not in the spirit are not one according to the Bible. And according to Lee Christians who are not meeting on the ground of locality are not really one according to the Bible. And according to Lee Christians who are not sanctified and seperated from the world are not one according to the Bible. Which are very very cut and dry pivotal things to say
Or another way to say it is that can Christians really be one if they're not exercising their spirit, seperated from the world, sanctified, and meeting on the correct ground? Which is a crucial question. I think if that's true it would be very hard for Christians to be one with one another. But I suppose it all hinges on the way you interpret the word. It would almost lend to judgements being passed on others such as "oh I can't be one with so and so brother because he watches TV," or "oh I can't be one with so and so sister because she dresses worldly." It sounds like a great way to create factions and schisms. But then some might say, "well we all just need to turn to our spirit because we can only be one in spirit." Which is kind of like glossing over all that other very strong and differentiating type of oneness. Or maybe that's the truth. Maybe we all just need to come together and be in spirit and be built up in spirit with one another
So is it all open to personal interpretation? Idk, is any of the Bible open to personal interpretation? Or is that dangerous? Is Lee's interpretation the only correct one? That's dangerous to say too. I guess we have to make up our own minds and work out our own salvation according to the best way we see fit and God will judge our works at the end. A questionable test? Or are the dominoes all set up around Lee's theology? If there's a hole in Lee's theology somewhere does the entire dominoes fall over? Should we throw out all of Lee's theology if he is wrong at a certain point or conflating two crucial ideas?
|
Oneness does have much to do with good works. The Bible is clear about it once you look into it. However, my explanation was a summary of my impression of someone else's explanation, so that connection probably wasn't very clear, and that's my fault. Rather than type an explanation, you are welcome to watch the rest of the video on oneness. It explains how the Father and the Son are one, and how Jesus says that the evidence of their being one is the good works He does.
Or don't watch it. It's entirely up to you.
You talk a lot about what Lee says about oneness or what he says about the different types of being one, but honestly, who cares? Is Lee God? Is Lee the arbiter of the ultimate truth? What qualifies Lee to be the determiner over someone else? The answer is no and nothing. What matters, if a person is a genuine Christian, is what the Bible says. I would encourage you to look into what the Bible says about it, and not what Lee thinks he knows about it.
If there is a hole in Lee's theology, then at a minimum everything else is up for question. You've already mentioned several points of teaching you do not agree with, so there are already numerous holes. Numerous holes starts to add up to a real problem, Jay. Especially when someone claims to have all the pure riches, and yet those riches are not pure or rich, but are riddled through with errors and abuses.....
You have everything you need to make the right decision. It's just hard to do it, which we all understand.
By the way, I do understand what you mean about questioning God from one of the other threads. Christians from all over wrestle with difficult parts of the Bible or difficult aspects of life where we all think we would do things differently than God has done. I think that's normal and it shows we have a brain and are thinking and trying to make things make sense. But what is not normal, particularly for a professing Christian, is to state without irony that you would be more apt to question God than to question Nee and Lee....two men you have already said in plenty of words have committed a plethora of abuses and sins.
May the Lord bless you with understanding and grace.
Trapped