[aron]

The Hebrews had two main foci - one was humanity's failure, and the other was God's beneficence. God's goodness, patience, kindness, long-suffering, his outstretched arm, power, wisdom, holiness and blessings were incomparable, and more than enough to make up for our many lacks. His ability to make good on his promises outstrip our inability to see, to lay hold, to appreciate.

Now, how does this relate to Jesus and his teachings? Those who are "something" in the world, because of sin, are actually "nothing" in the kingdom, and those who are least in the world become great in the kingdom. Any who elevate themselves above others, and take pride of place here on earth, are automatically demoting themselves in the kingdom. Conversely, those who lower themselves, and take the least place, can be positioned for blessing. (I could quote 15 or 20 verses in Jesus' teachings covering the above points. They are endemic to his message).

This is especially true in learning. Those who seem to be learned, who are wise, who have spiritual experiences, are in danger of getting blocked from learning. Those who know nothing/see nothing/have nothing are well-positioned for blessing. That's just the way it is - as soon as you think you have something you have nothing. Because of sin, no "experience" is trustworthy. Only at the Bema, when the Master says, "Come up further" can one move up in safety. Until then, any position is probably ruinous.

My theology today is that God raised Jesus on the third day, and gave him glory. Don't see how I can be Christian otherwise. But beyond that, I can hold no "truth". Maybe, "Love one another", but even that... how does one love? Lip service? Do I really know what love means?

---

Let me give an example. There are a lot of folks out there explaining things. Most of it is, frankly, rubbish. But if you sort around, someone may just blow your mind. The other day, I was reading about "faithfulness" - and it was presented quite different from "faith" a la Martin Luther - you know, as opposed to "works".

In the context of Hebrew Scripture, to be a "faithful" person, or one having faith, meant continual obedience to instruction. So the Hebrews had to be constantly obedient to God's command. You couldn't obey some, and ignore others. You couldn't keep the commands on Monday and Tuesday, then take Wednesday off. It was all in, at all times. THAT was what "faith" meant, in action. To have faith without works was nothing - don't be passive hearers of the word, but be doers of the word. It was about what you continually do. It is your life, your living, in toto, 24/7/365.

Now here's this guy Jesus being presented in the NT. He was the personification of the preceding paragraph. He was THE OBEDIENT JEW, and as such he was and is the King of Israel, the King of the Jews. He alone was the truly righteous one. "I always do the Father's will". Not sometimes - always. And now we recognise who he is, and what he is, and surrender. He's the King. As the Obedient One he's the Lawgiver, the New Moses. And as he obeyed the Father, we must obey him. That's our faith: to believe, to confess, and to obey. To hear, and to follow.

And I learned that from one who knew of "faith" in Hebrew language in the OT and was able to transpose it on Paul's writings on "faith" in the NT, e.g., Romans. So it was good, for me... food for thought. Now "faith" as a concept took on a deeper root within.

---

Ironically, LSM has always touted Watchman Nee for taking just this approach - he availed himself of thousands of sources of Christian learning. Witness Lee said that Nee had a library of 3,000 Christian books. How many different views did he open to? How many unique and disparate points of view, by quite different authors? Shouldn't we all do the same? Why limit ourselves to only one source? What do you think Nee's spiritual output would have been, with just one source of interpretive guidance, one source of spiritual light?