Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aron
In the portrayal of the New Jerusalem we see a throne, and a river bright as crystal proceeding out of the throne, and a tree of life growing along the river. These are distinct items...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Evangelical
Those items don't actually exist of course. They are just metaphors for some spiritual truth. So everything mentioned is distinct in terms of an aspect of God, but in and of themselves they are not distinct because they all relate to the one Person. Similarly, terms such as bread of heaven, lamb of God, all relate to Christ. If we imagine the bread and the lamb to be distinct separate things, then we will find ourselves in a conundrum.
For example, typically God is pictured as a man with a long white beard sitting on a big chair, called God's throne. I don't think God sits on an actual throne. A throne is a human invention, an ancient piece of furniture, and monarchs in different ages and cultures have different ways to show their status and power - not necessarily a big fancy piece of furniture. Humans created chairs, and why does God have to sit anyway, does He get tired? And does the throne have any meaning when God is not on it? Can we consider a big chair in heaven as distinct from God? I don't think so. A picture of heaven with a big chair on it and God not there on the throne does not make much sense or mean anything. Symbolically it means "God is not on the throne", and this is related to God, not the chair. So the throne in itself has no meaning. So I understand "throne of God" to mean one aspect of God and not referring to a piece of "heavenly furniture". Similarly, the river in and of itself has little meaning, unless it is related in some way to God. So it is correct to say that "the throne is God" and "the river is God". It makes sense if we understand that they are metaphors for different aspects of the same Person. It is like saying "my arm is me", and "my leg is me", the arm is distinct from the leg but in a way they are just "me".
You said before "Let me suggest a subtitle: "Everything is Everything"."
Actually Lee believed "everything is Christ". So the tree of life is Christ, the altar is Christ, everything is Christ. Similarly, the cross or crucifixion without Christ has no meaning.
|
|
I'm glad you made all these metaphors plain. And I agree with you.
Except : I took a stand against what was called
The Flow of Oneness, brought by the lead elder from Anaheim. The flow of oneness didn't take the throne, river, and tree of life as a metaphor.
It was explained that, the river flows from Christ on the throne, carrying the authority of the throne, to, The Apostle on the earth, Witness Lee.
So you say, it's all metaphor, but Witness Lee took it as literal to establish himself as The MOTA.
Another Bible reference used to support The Flow of Oneness was :
Psa 133:1 A Song of degrees of David. Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!
Psa 133:2 It is like the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard: that went down to the skirts of his garments;
In this reference the precious ointment (the Holy Spirit) was poured upon the head, Witness Lee, then ran down the beard (the elders) and finally down to the garments (us little potato's).
I got the boot for disagreeing with The Flow of Oneness. The verses they used from Revelation and Psalms were not taken as metaphorical, but as literal, to established Witness Lee as the MOTA.