[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Here is a statement from an article titled "Gnosticism and The Gnostic Jesus";

"Gnosticism is a philosophy that refers to a body of teachings that stress the acquisition of “gnosis,” or inner knowledge. This knowledge is not mere intellectual, but mystical knowledge; not merely knowing about something or someone, but a mystical knowledge that comes from within each of us. This special mystical knowledge allows us to discover an esoteric divine nature within each of us that is obscured by ignorance and false teaching about God and Jesus.""Furthermore, the Gnostics believe this knowledge is not in the possession of the masses, but only to the Gnostics (the Knowers) who truly understand its benefits and how to attain it. To the Gnostic, the masses are trapped in the ignorance of religious teaching and doctrine that serves to control and regulate the conduct of believers. The Gnostic, on the other hand, believes he has pierced through the ignorance and trappings of organized religion and has reached the core of special spiritual knowledge about God and the God-nature in each of us. The only problem is that this “core of special spiritual knowledge” of God and the God-nature is a “core of special spiritual knowledge” of their own creation."

Alot of what this article states about the characteristics of gnosticism sound eerily similar to the sentiments held within the LC.

Similarity does not make it the same. All religions are similar in many ways. When you compare the whole teaching of gnosticism as I have showed before, they are miles apart. For example - Gnostics do not uphold the Lord Jesus and God the Father. Christian mystics do. It's that simple.

Originally Posted by Jo S

You already openly acknowledge that mysticism is practiced within the LC. This above statement then highlights the LC's gnostic influences as well as showing mysticism and gnosticism go together hand in hand.

It has never been denied that mysticism is practiced within the LC. But mysticism does not mean contacting an alternate reality or a Jesus who is a spirit only and not flesh and blood (the gnostic Jesus), but the realm of spiritual reality contained in Christ.

Originally Posted by Jo S

You can make the argument that the LC's belief on Satan literally dwelling in our flesh lines up with this gnostic teaching very well.

"If we did not have such an evil thing as the flesh with us, we might not pray so desperately." -Witness Lee

I have already proven by providing scholarly references from evangelical theology that the LC's belief on Satan aligns with the beliefs of the orthodox (not gnostic) early church and proper interpretation of Romans. Such evidence is hard for you or anyone to refute and so far has not been easily disproven on this forum.

Originally Posted by Jo S

Reading the above statement by Lee, my question would be; who is 'us' if not our body of flesh? Here, Lee is merely viewing flesh as an accessory that is "with us". What then makes up "us". Is it our Spirit?

Lee's teachings do emphasize getting into your spirit. He suggests that our minds and flesh are not good, only the spirit is good.

This means the fallen sinful flesh, not the physical flesh. Again, Lee's interpretation of "the flesh" is correct and matches Paul's usage of the term, as proven by the scholarly work of Dr Burrowes (I showed in the other thread discussing Satan).

Originally Posted by Jo S

In Christianity, it's sin that dwells in our flesh and it's sin that is evil. Our literal flesh is just a vehicle. When God first created man, he was created "good" and that included his body. For a new creation in Christ or a born again Christian, our body is now a temple for the Holy Spirit. How then can something holy dwell in something that is evil?

In scripture the term "flesh" is used to point back to sin nature where as the gnostic understanding objectifies "flesh" and points it to matter. This lines up with the above gnostic teaching. Taken to an extreme, this is where the religious practices of asceticism and flagellation or penance comes from.

Again, if human flesh was objectively evil, how is it possible that the Holy Spirit operates through God's people? Did Jesus Christ and the apostles lay evil flesh on those that they healed?

The part highlighted in bold is exactly why Lee's teaching is not Gnostic.
Lee is not talking about our literal physical flesh. The term flesh as used by Lee means the fallen self and the sinful elements of our human nature.
This is documented throughout his books and ministry material.

Originally Posted by Jo S

You can liken this belief to the LC's teaching that; First, Jesus before incarnation was spirit. He then was temporarily incarnated as a human being. And then after resurrection, Jesus returned to being a life giving spirit.

The LC does not teach this and these allegations have never stuck, even on this forum because they are so easily disproven. Lee and the LC affirms that Jesus came in the flesh and remained in the flesh after resurrection and ascension, satisfying the test of 1 John 4:2. The LC affirms the eternal incarnation of Christ.

For proof, see first sentence of third paragraph here:

https://www.ministrybooks.org/books....=984TJOTAIU1OS

I can be helpful and tell you where the exact difference lies between the LC and orthodoxy (open for debate). The difference is in the understanding of the relationships between the person of the Trinity, not the fundamental nature of the Son. The Trinity says the Son is not the Father, Lee says the Son is the Father based on a literal interpretation of Isaiah "everlasting Father".

Also, Lee's meaning of "Jesus becoming the Spirit" does not mean what you think. It means that Christ's experiences of the cross were infused into the Holy Spirit. Jesus as a fully incarnated man in a fleshly resurrected physical human body does not change back, to or from flesh and spirit at all. Also, the Spirit does not become human but remains 100% divine nature.

Originally Posted by Jo S

Scripture doesn't teach that humans were spirit before birth and neither teaches that any of us will ever be just spirit. So one can conclude that this teaching does not teach a fully human Jesus, only a Jesus that temporarily "seemed" human because no human operates or has ever operated in such modalities.

Furthermore, if it's stated that the only good part of us is our spirit (because our flesh is evil) then it's easy to conclude in error that Jesus shed his human flesh and ascended into heaven as a "life giving spirit" and that we to will one day be just as him, spirits. This belief would be considered gnosticism.

I am happy to say that the LC teaches none of this.