[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Tomes

LSM’s Deification Doctrine—Biblical or Blasphemous?

Nigel Tomes

W. Lee asserted “I have not been influenced by any teaching about deification, but I have learned from my study of the Bible that God does intend to make the believers God in life & in nature but not in the Godhead.” Skeptics might doubt this statement’s veracity; I do not. It is essentially true.-

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Dear Confused Skeptics,

Back to an earlier topic, Did not anybody notice that Nigel Tomes completely agrees with Witness Lee on the notion of "God becoming Man that Man may become God in life and nature but not in the Godhead"...You are all such gainsayers, yet I haven't heard a single robust defense or read a single word from any of you (other than that we should all try and be good people and model citizens, then die and go to heaven to play harps with the angels) that even comes close to exhibiting a firm grasp of the overall arc of the Scriptures and of God's chief intention in creation.

So why all the hullabaloo?!!

Why cut off your noses to spite your faces?!!

Come back to your senses, bothers and sisters!

Hey Unregistered, sounds like you have some very strong opinions regarding things that are posted on our little forum. Seems like you have a lot to say. Why not take a few minutes and register for the forum. This way your postings will not have to go through the moderation que, and you will have access to the Private Messages system. I think I have implored you to register in the past. Let's get it done today!

In any event...I don't think you have fairly represented Nigel's position here. Let's take a look at the entire context by reviewing the entire paragraph:

W. Lee asserted “I have not been influenced by any teaching about deification, but I have learned from my study of the Bible that God does intend to make the believers God in life & in nature but not in the Godhead.”185 Skeptics might doubt this statement’s veracity; I do not. It is essentially true. W. Lee did not adopt Orthodoxy’s theosis; this explains his radically different version. W. Lee clothed his own homespun theological system with the mantle of deification. The sole item he appropriated from Orthodoxy was Athanasius’ maxim. Witness Lee’s theology (like Watchman Nee’s) is a ‘patchwork quilt,’ cobbled together from Keswick ‘higher life,’ Brethren186 dispensationalism, typology. Cloaking this potpourri with deification gives an aura of respectability & novelty.

What Tomes was contending as "essentially true" is NOT that Lee's teachings regarding man's deification are biblical or orthodox (small o), rather that Lee did not necessarily adopt them from Orthodoxy's theosis.

The rest of your post here is a little bit on the blustery side, and I wouldn't normally care if it was from a registered poster, but as it is, it's kind of a hit and run job. Don't be that way bro. Stick around! Register as a member and give us a "robust defense" of your positions. And while you're at it, you can provide some quotes from any of us who have contended that everything is as simple as "we should all try and be good people and model citizens, then die and go to heaven to play harps with the angels". Were you perhaps just funnin with us? Ether way, I for one, would be interested in hearing from you regarding the "overall arc of the Scriptures and of God's chief intention in creation." Sounds fascinating and should be great discussion material for the forum! Again, please consider registering as a member. It's super simple and super fast. Simply send an email requesting registration and your desired UserName to: LocalChurchDiscussions@Gmail.Com
-