Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah
1Cor 10:6 “these things were spoken as our examples”
1Pet 2:5 “we are built up a spiritual priesthood to offer sacrifices”
Heb 10:1 “the law having a shadow of good things to come”
Col 2:17 “Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”
Heb 8:5 “Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things,”
|
Great verses. How do they establish that there is a "first" and "second" service?
What exactly is a "spiritual priesthood"?
And what are the "sacrifices" offered?
How does a general statement like "the law having a shadow of good things to come" make the analysis that Nee provided meaningful, rational, and supportable?
What do shadows tell us? Whatever someone dreams up and declares to be its meaning?
Every one of these things is written in a context about specific things. These are not broad overlays or world-views through which clear words take on different meaning. They are only meaningful when you actually see the way that the law is a shadow.
I have noted that the scripture is strong to see actual links and point them out. There were prophecies. With few exceptions, they weren't so obvious as to what they meant that everyone was looking for their fulfillment. Instead, the actual fulfillment occurred, then they realized that the prophecy was fulfilled.
So, for each of the vague, general statements in scripture, what actual parallels do you see that these could be pointing at? They aren't there to allow some alleged teacher to declare an otherwise nonexistent parallel to be there just because some verse declares that there are some things that are shadows, parallels, signs, etc.
Nee, and now you, never have made an actual connection between Ezekiel 44 and Mary and Martha. It is just said to be so. Then, when I ask where there is something that could support there actually being an ordering of ministry/service in the way that Nee taught it in that little booklet, you come back with these 4 verses that simply mention that there are shadows and a spiritual priesthood. Neither of those make Nee's teaching real. They make no comment whatsoever on the topic of the discussion.
It is almost a sort of stereotype. Find one thing that fits a pattern, then brow-beat everything with some common characteristic into that pattern even if it absolutely does not fit.