Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassidy
Okay Ohio, then what did he mean by 4-in-1?
Are you saying Witness Lee taught the Body was in the Godhead? I would object to that.
Cassidy
|
What WL taught was that the body is in God and that God is in the body
just as the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father. I agree with everything except this phrase "
just as." Once WL used this phrase "just as," and others like it, then the next step or two was to use the phrase "four-in-one." Do you see how each of these "baby steps" leads to a conclusion which appears scriptural, yet is not? This is the danger in basing your theology on "
inference" and not on the plain words of scripture.
Once the expression "four-in-one" is used, most readers then consider that the body is "in the Godhead," even if WL says it is not. WL uses similar logic to imply that we are made god. Even though he adds caveats about the Godhead, he still says that we are "made god." This is another wrong step of inference. Yes ... "God became man," and yes ... we have the divine life, and yes ... we partake of the divine nature, but no ... we cannot infer by these, that we are "made god." The Bible never says that. It is these "leaps of inference" in WL's teachings that cause us so much concern.
In the early days of the Recovery, WL would speak about returning to the "pure word of God." He also said we have no need for "systematized theology." I still agree with these. This return to the "pure word of God," brought much blessing to the children of God, including those in the Recovery. Unfortunately, this practice has changed over the years. Now in the Recovery, returning to the "pure word of God" is looked upon with suspicion. That should tell you a lot.