Quote:
Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!
So no, you may be right in that there is no verse which seems to say that He specifically is IN our spirit, but from these verses above, I think one can draw that conclusion pretty easily, don't you think?
|
I have learned, mostly from experience with the LC, that reading
into the scripture (eisegesis (sp?) may ultimately be correct, but is seldom a basis for strongly-stated doctrine, or even "really-ought-to-believe-it" teachings. I have no problem with the idea. Or with the possibility that it
might be correct.
But one verse saying that what is born of Spirit is spirit does not definitively mean that it places Jesus in our spirit. I am born of my father, but he does not "live in me" in a way that warrants the kind of thought that could be a metaphorical (or even literal) comparison. Yes, I have some of his DNA, as well as my mother's.
Maybe you see my reluctance on this issue. It could be true. But that is insufficient to warrant emphasis, complete with songs heralding its alleged truth. I find it much better to understand the actual importance of what was being referred to when Jesus made his statement(s). It wasn't about stirring us into the Christian equivalent of a beer-hall song. It was to make a spiritual comparison of physical eating of nourishment to the spiritual benefits of hearing (and heeding) what He was speaking (and what had been written in the scriptures).
The LC was long on hooks to get us and keep us. We were the chosen generation. The ones who returned from Babylon (unlike the rest of Christianity). We found the talisman for the proper name of a church — and it was all tied up in the legally registered name of a city/town. We had the better lexicon, using the highest wording, especially when concatenated into almost meaningless, over-adjectivized banners at trainings.
And when some of us left (including me) we took some of it along with us. We thought it was actually somehow important. Like needing to pray more like a LC prayer meeting than like the Lord's prayer (or disciple's prayer). I have spent many years getting rid of what I have found to be "simply" wrong. (Lee was fond of the word "simply.") And I have tended to take what was not necessarily wrong and lowered it at least one or two notches in my book of importance. Mostly, I have sought to learn what really
is in the the Bible and hold to that regardless of where I heard it.
I would never say that there was nothing good to come from it. But to the extent that there is, it is mostly just for me, not as something to spread around like it is manna hidden from the mooing cows in Christianity. That is the way the LC would look at it.
BTW, there are some aspects of both Calvinist and Arminian theologies that are based on using their own special glasses (like "God's economy" was to Nee and Lee) all over the Bible to reinterpret things to say what they do not. It is a problem for everyone. I see some of the problems, and I am sure that I do not see others. I have found some in myself, and know that I will never find it all because I tend to like my "glasses."
But after 32 years, I no longer like the LC glasses.