Is the Processed, Four-in-One God a sound doctrine?

[Bible-believer]

Hi all, I am new here.
As I told the Admin that I am still a current member of LC. However, I can't go along with them in many ways, and the "title" question is one of them. I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion. They just gave a piece of writings from Lee's.
Please help me on this matter.
Thank you.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi all, I am new here.
As I told the Admin that I am still a current member of LC. However, I can't go along with them in many ways, and the "title" question is one of them. I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion. They just gave a piece of writings from Lee's.
Please help me on this matter.
Thank you.

Welcome Bible-believer!

I went along with lots of things LSM taught until they decided to excommunicate "greater Ohio." That's when I started comparing these teachings with the Bible.

Are they now teaching a "Processed 4in1" God? The Catholic church has a variant of that which includes Mary.

I no longer accept any teaching outside of scripture. Why? It's too dangerous. All of these recovered conjectures and inferences about God are not healthy for His children. As you say in your handle "Bible believer," the Bible is the entire extent of what we should believe.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi all, I am new here.
As I told the Admin that I am still a current member of LC. However, I can't go along with them in many ways, and the "title" question is one of them. I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion. They just gave a piece of writings from Lee's.
Please help me on this matter.
Thank you.

Welcome to the forum, Bible-believer!

What has helped me the most in evaluating the teachings in the local church are to ask these questions:

1. What does Lee/ministry teach?
2. What does the Bible actually say? (or, does the Bible actually say that?)

Do you have any examples of the writings from Lee that the elders/members pointed you to regarding this four-in-one teaching? If so, we can look at his claims directly.

Otherwise, I still have some thoughts about the teaching, but if we have ministry excerpts to look at I think it's best to start with what Lee claimed and how he supported his claims first.

Trapped

[UntoHim]

Bible-believer,
Welcome to the forum. My goodness, you really picked a doozy of a subject right off the bat!

Congratulations, my friend, for the very fact that you are asking the question means that God is doing a work in you! While I agree with Trapped that the first step in answering your question is to do some comparing and contrasting of the teachings of Witness Lee with the actual text of the Bible, this chore is complicated because Lee taught a scriptural/orthodox version of the Trinity (re: Triune God) along side of this unscriptural version. When one points to the unscriptural aspects of this teaching, then one is met with a barrage of examples where Witness Lee taught the traditional, orthodox version. This has been a typical diversionary tactic employed by false teachers and their followers since the beginning.

My suggestion would be to challenge the Local Church's premise that Witness Lee's teachings were/are "recovered truth", and that he was/is the "One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age". This premise is provably false. And the sooner you can dispel this myth, if only in your own heart and mind, the sooner you will find the answer to this question, and so many other questions that face all of us influenced by the teachings of Witness Lee.

May the Lord honor your seeking Him and his Truth. We are here to honor and encourage your seeking the truth as well.
-

[Zezima]

Im a pretty recent leaver of the LR, and have never heard the 4-1 doctrine, but that sounds pretty incorrect. Who’s the 4th?

Originally Posted by UntoHim

My suggestion would be to challenge the Local Church's premise that Witness Lee's teachings were/are "recovered truth", and that he was/is the "One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age". This premise is provably false.
-

How is this provably false?

Witness Lee on the four in one God:

Ultimately, the church is a group of people who are in union with the Triune God and are mingled with the Triune God. The Triune God and the church are four-in-one. Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the “four-in-one God.” These four are the Father, the Son, the Spirit, and the Body.
A Deeper Study of the Divine Dispensing p.203-204


Because the believers are incorporated into Him, He as the heavenly ladder serves as the personal bridge to the Triune God, incorporating in Himself the Divine Trinity and the believers. This is the very center of the universe, for in Him God and man are joined together, and the ministrations of God are focused on Him as this heavenly bridge. Within Himself He incorporates the unique enterprise of God’s economy, that is, the Triune God operating through Him by the Spirit in the believers for the manifestation and expression of God the Father on the earth.

…In this way the believers become the reproduction, expansion, and physical continuation of the incarnate and incorporate Son of God and indeed the organism of the Triune God Himself.
The Johannine Jesus as Bridge and Model for the Incorporation of the Believers into the Divine Trinity (2) - Kerry Robichaux


The salvation of God is not primarily to save us from hell and to bring us into heaven, but rather to impart His divine life into us. By regeneration, we receive His divine life into our spirit. From our spirit, He is spreading into our soul by the process of transformation, and at His second coming, He will even saturate our body.
Faith, Regeneration and the New Creation

New Jerusalem is actually a corporate person who includes the processed and consummated Triune God and, as the issue of God’s complete salvation, all the chosen, redeemed, regenerated, sanctified, renewed, transformed, built-up believers in Christ.
The Gospel in Romans
(Source/Citation needed)

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

My suggestion would be to challenge the Local Church's premise that Witness Lee's teachings were/are "recovered truth", and that he was/is the "One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age". This premise is provably false.
-

Originally Posted by Zezima

How is this provably false?

#1 Nowhere in the New Testament do we find any descriptive, prescriptive or instructional passage that even slightly hints at the notion that there will be any "one minister" or any "one ministry for the age" (unless you want to count the ministry of the Lord Jesus, of course)

#2 Since the scripture writing apostles, no one person in church history has ever met the qualifications to claim such a lofty title. If fact, any man who has ever claimed such a thing for himself has invariably been found to be a fraud, shyster, huckster and false teacher. Unfortunately, men like these are a dime a dozen in church history.

#3 Witness Lee had repeatedly disqualified himself as an elder of a local church, and therefore was even more disqualified from being a leader of an entire Christian organization of any kind. It should go without saying that he had no business being the chief theologian/teacher of an entire Christian movement.
-

[gr8ful]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi all, I am new here.
As I told the Admin that I am still a current member of LC. However, I can't go along with them in many ways, and the "title" question is one of them. I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion. They just gave a piece of writings from Lee's.
Please help me on this matter.
Thank you.

I was one who loved the theoretical theological explorations in W Lee's teachings. Really tickled my ear and the feeling of "WOW" gave me a buzz. When these things like 4-in-1 God were challenged, the only way they "worked" was to minimize the radicalness of the teaching by saying, "no, this doesn't mean..." or "well, in church history we find similar expressions from orthodox teachers, such as ...".

But I found these ear-tickling teachings meaningless in my daily life. The pride I felt in having "deeper understanding" or even the excitement of walking up to the edge of heresy without crossing over didn't matter in real life.

Getting caught in the swirl of "is it scriptural or not" is a trap. Considering "what does this matter, anyway?" was what saved me from the endless doctrinal debates.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by gr8ful

Getting caught in the swirl of "is it scriptural or not" is a trap. Considering "what does this matter, anyway?" was what saved me from the endless doctrinal debates.

It’s not a trap, it’s healthy to compare a teaching to the Bible. It’s a trap not to do this.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Witness Lee on the four in one God:

Ultimately, the church is a group of people who are in union with the Triune God and are mingled with the Triune God. The Triune God and the church are four-in-one. Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the “four-in-one God.” These four are the Father, the Son, the Spirit, and the Body.
A Deeper Study of the Divine Dispensing p.203-204

Thanks, Unregistered, for supplying some of Lee's teachings on the four-in-one God.

One thing that struck me about the excerpts was that they were chock full of Lee's specialized language - mingling, incorporation, God's economy, expansion, reproduction, corporate, processed, consummated.

The Bible doesn't speak this way. It says "I in you and you in Me". It says "that they all may be one even as we are one". Lee created a whole new language that took a lot of liberties with the simply-stated concepts in the Word. When he strings all the special vocabulary together, he produces something not found in scripture!

I don't have time to go through all the excerpts at once, but let's look at the first one, quoted above. My main question is going to be "where does the Bible ever talk about a four-in-one God?"

Read Paul's writings. There is one God and Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ. Is there EVER a time when a single apostle, Jesus, or any other disciple speaks of or makes the slightest reference to a future "four-in-one" God? I mean, anywhere?

Jesus' prayer is that we would be one. In what way? Just as the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father. And also that we would be in both the Son and the Father. This does not describe "mingling". It describes things that are in each other. To say this is a "mingled" situation takes it past what scripture says.

The Son and the Father are one and are in each other. But they are still a Son and a Father. The Son doesn't become the Father and the Father doesn't become the Son. As believers, we are in God and God is in us, but God does not become us and we do not become God. "Mingling" blurs the distinction between Creator and creation, and that's not something the Bible does.

To be fair, the sentence right after this excerpt Lee states, "The three of the Divine Trinity cannot be confused or separated, and the four-in-one also cannot be separated or confused." But with these kinds of statements, Lee has elevated us to the status of the Godhead, while simultaneously saying "not in the Godhead". Many of his teachings are self-contradictory one place from the other.

A few sentences later Lee says the "Father....continually dispenses Himself into us." This is, literally, meaningless. Where on earth does the Bible say God "dispenses Himself" into us?

To be "one with God" or to be "in God" or to have God in you does not mean that you are now God. Witness Lee says "we may say that the Triune God is now the four-in-one God". But look, the Triune God, or three-in-one God, is usually described as the Father, Son, and Spirit each being fully God. To parallel that and say that we are now the four-in-one-God necessarily implies that we are also now fully God. Hopefully I don't have to explain why this is heresy.

Sorry, but Witness Lee or anyone may say whatever they want to say, but if Scripture doesn't also say it, they are wrong! To be one with God means you are one with God. You are you, and God is God, and you are one with Him. To be in God means you are in God. Neither of these things mean you are "part of a four-in-one God".

I eat chicken sometimes. Does the chicken being inside me mean I am "part of a two-in-one chicken"? This is Lee's logic here.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I eat chicken sometimes. Does the chicken being inside me mean I am "part of a two-in-one chicken"? This is Lee's logic here.

Reminds me of a funny scene in Anaheim years ago. The FTTA trainees were called on to give the review test. They were always paraded out and showed off, so they had to give a good performance.

One young brother in his excitement says, "We are what we eat, if I eat chicken, then I become a ... "

He caught himself at the last moment, realizing what he was saying. His face turned red and he wanted to disappear, a few laughs came from the audience, and then we moved on.

So much for being a WL tape recorder.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi all, I am new here.
As I told the Admin that I am still a current member of LC. However, I can't go along with them in many ways, and the "title" question is one of them. I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion. They just gave a piece of writings from Lee's.
Please help me on this matter.
Thank you.

Bible-believer,

Can you explain at all what your own issues are with this teaching? You mentioned your confusion. Are there confusing things with the teaching? Or do you just not agree with it? What is the part you can't swallow?

Trapped

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Bible-believer,

Can you explain at all what your own issues are with this teaching? You mentioned your confusion. Are there confusing things with the teaching? Or do you just not agree with it? What is the part you can't swallow?

Trapped

The Trinity is one God existing in three Persons. The body of Christ is his church composed of believers. Believers are human, not God. We believe in Him and have Him indwelled. But it never means we can be God.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Welcome to the forum, Bible-believer!

What has helped me the most in evaluating the teachings in the local church are to ask these questions:

1. What does Lee/ministry teach?
2. What does the Bible actually say? (or, does the Bible actually say that?)

Do you have any examples of the writings from Lee that the elders/members pointed you to regarding this four-in-one teaching? If so, we can look at his claims directly.

Otherwise, I still have some thoughts about the teaching, but if we have ministry excerpts to look at I think it's best to start with what Lee claimed and how he supported his claims first.

Trapped

They teach
"The Bible reveals that God is immutable in His essence and that God has been processed in His economy. As the processed God, the Triune God has passed through crucial and interdependent steps in the divine economy in order to dispense Himself into His chosen and redeemed people…God’s process ultimately is related to becoming flesh through incarnation and becoming the life-giving Spirit through resurrection."
Our Unchanging, Processed God

“the Christ in whom we believe is the center of the Triune God.” Because of this, “the Triune God became mingled with man… He is not only the Triune God but also a man… He is the Triune God mingled with man. Therefore, He is the Triune God-man."
Witness Lee, The All-Inclusive Spirit of Christ
(Los Angeles: The Stream Publishers, 1969), pp. 8-11


It's like in this process is the Triune God becoming flesh. Jesus Christ is not the Second Person of the Trinity. Instead, “the Christ in whom we believe is the center of the Triune God.” It's like in this process is Jesus, the Triune God-man becoming the Spirit. If so, does it means they are not separate "three Persons", but just one? If so, does it means they are not separate "three Persons", but just one? and if so, is the teaching of Triune God the same as the Trinity?

Maybe I didn't make myself clear on this matter, but you can see how confused I am about this teaching.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

They teach
"The Bible reveals that God is immutable in His essence and that God has been processed in His economy. As the processed God, the Triune God has passed through crucial and interdependent steps in the divine economy in order to dispense Himself into His chosen and redeemed people…God’s process ultimately is related to becoming flesh through incarnation and becoming the life-giving Spirit through resurrection."
Our Unchanging, Processed God

“the Christ in whom we believe is the center of the Triune God.” Because of this, “the Triune God became mingled with man… He is not only the Triune God but also a man… He is the Triune God mingled with man. Therefore, He is the Triune God-man."
Witness Lee, The All-Inclusive Spirit of Christ
(Los Angeles: The Stream Publishers, 1969), pp. 8-11

It's like in this process is the Triune God becoming flesh. Jesus Christ is not the Second Person of the Trinity. Instead, “the Christ in whom we believe is the center of the Triune God.” It's like in this process is Jesus, the Triune God-man becoming the Spirit. If so, does it means they are not separate "three Persons", but just one? and if so, is the teaching of Triune God the same as the Trinity?

Maybe I didn't make myself clear on this matter, but you can see how confused I am about this teaching.

Okay, I think I understand a little bit better. When I was thinking about how to talk about the four-in-one God, I realized that the confusion really started with the three-in-one, and just built upon that, but I didn't want to unnecessarily turn the thread into a discussion about the Trinity, so I shied away from it.

Others can and have said this more clearly than I will be able to, but Lee taught contradictory things about God. He simultaneously taught that the three of the Trinity are distinct while also saying that they actually are each other. This is a logical contradiction and has led to a lot of things being written about what Lee "actually" believed as people tried to sort out his confusing teachings. So the first thing I have to say is that you are right to be confused!

The problem is not you, and the problem is not that you don't understand something that you should. The problem is that Lee was not a good Bible teacher, he had no one to correct him, and he taught lots of things wrong. This is one of them.

The concept of the entire Triune God becoming flesh has been a contentious one. I think that is even one of the issues that other Christian scholars have had with the local church - Lee's teaching that the entire Triune God became flesh and the entire Triune God became processed.

But your name is Bible-believer, so let's remember what the Bible says.

The Bible says that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son. It does not say that God so loved the world that He sent Himself in His entirety. Or that God so loved the world that He gave Himself as the Trinity. It says He sent His Son. Jesus. The Son of God.

When Jesus was on earth, He repeatedly claimed to be the Son of God. He did not claim to be "the entire Triune God".

Yes, the Father was in Him and with Him, and He did the will of the Father, and when you saw Jesus you saw the Father, but Jesus never said He was the entire Triune God.

When Jesus was on the cross, He cried out asking why God, His God, had forsaken Him. God who forsook Jesus on the cross was God the Father. The Bible does not describe a situation where "in His essence" the Father was actually on the cross too, but "in His economy" the Father forsook the Son. The only record is that God the Father forsook His Son, who was on the cross dying for our sins.

Where the Bible shows distinctions, Lee dragged them together and mushed them into one. He should not have done that. The Bible uses words and metaphors in ways that help us understand what's being said. When Jesus says He is the bread of life, or the water of life, that means something to us because we know what bread and water are in our physical life. And when we talk about God the Father and Jesus, His Son, we can grasp that because we know what a father and son relationship is in our human life. And in no instance in our human life are a father and his son ever actually just one person. They are always distinct persons from each other. So no, the Father and Son are not actually just one person.

There's more to say on "the Triune God-man becoming the Spirit" but I'll have to do that later, or maybe others can chime in.

Is any of that more in line with addressing your confusion? Let me know if I'm in the ballpark, or if not, what I'm missing.

Trapped

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Okay, I think I understand a little bit better. When I was thinking about how to talk about the four-in-one God, I realized that the confusion really started with the three-in-one, and just built upon that, but I didn't want to unnecessarily turn the thread into a discussion about the Trinity, so I shied away from it.

Thank you so much, Trapped. I realize that Lee's teachings caused lots of semantic confusion. I don't know he did this purposely or because of the language barrier. He created certain terminologies and defined them. But his creative writings contradicted not only the Bible, when I read his writings, such as Witness Lee's Collection, that LC asks saints to read, but I also found there are lots of contradictions in his writings. I sensed his writings are of the shadow of Charismatic groups, for example, Jesus only, and Lee turned it into Christ- the center of Triune God.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion.

Excerpt from The Athanasian Creed:
That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.
The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.
And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.
So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;
And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

My friend, Bible-believer,
I am here to tell you that it is not your fault that you are confused. You are confused for a good reason. You are confused because Witness Lee was confused. The Athanasian Creed uses the term "confounding the persons", but in modern English it is actually "confusing the persons". Witness Lee confused the Father with the Son. Then he confused the Son with the Spirit. When Lee was challenged about his heresy, he called his detractors "blind moo-cows" who did not have an ear to hear "the heavenly music". Instead of coming up with some sensible, biblical logic behind his teachings, he always resorted to insulting his critics.

Then just when one wouldn't think that things could get worse, Witness Lee taught that "Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the 'four-in-one God'." This is rank heresy. Nowhere did the Lord Jesus or the Scripture writing apostles even faintly imply that the Body of Christ is to be considered part of, or equal to, the Trinity. This kind of nonsense springs directly from Lee's notion that "the believers become the reproduction, expansion, and physical continuation of the incarnate and incorporate Son of God" (as quoted by LSM spokesman Kerry Robichaux) Again, nowhere did the Lord Jesus or the Scripture writing apostles ever teach such a thing.

In the coming days I hope to be providing some examples of healthy, orthodox teachings and views regarding the Trinity. I think that Trapped has got us off to a good start with post #15.
-

[Bible-believer]

Thank you, UntoHim,
I never agreed with "Lee was/is the 'One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age". I tried raising my doubts, but my doubts were
ignored. Sometimes, in the meeting, if I said something different from Lee's teaching, I saw negative in their faces. Gradually, I say no more. I attend the meetings, but do not enjoy it. I persuade myself that I attend the meeting for the Lord, not anyone else.
Of course, I will seek Him and His truth always. Thank you for encouraging me.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

They teach
"The Bible reveals that God is immutable in His essence and that God has been processed in His economy. As the processed God, the Triune God has passed through crucial and interdependent steps in the divine economy in order to dispense Himself into His chosen and redeemed people..."
Our Unchanging, Processed God

Where did Paul present us with God processed in His economy? If Paul didn't say this, then why should we? Zezima mentions eisegesis, or putting ideas on the text, that don't come from the text. "God was processed in His economy" is surely that. Nowhere did Paul write of an intensified Spirit, for example. Yet WL claimed it was a "crucial and interdependent step of His divine economy." The divine economy according to who? Not any that Paul referenced.

I now believe that we were in the grip of some kind of sorcery. How could so many otherwise intelligent people fall for such a cheap, blatant con? We were under a spell, stripped of our God-given sensibilities.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by aron

I now believe that we were in the grip of some kind of sorcery. How could so many otherwise intelligent people fall for such a cheap, blatant con? We were under a spell, stripped of our God-given sensibilities.

My families and friends are in the group. I realize I can't say anything against Lee's teaching before them, or I will be in trouble. I've tried to tell them there is something wrong with Lee's teaching, yet they would reply to me with more Lee's writings. I know it's not right to keep silent, but what should I do? I can't just leave there and let them stay in the group. I don't know if there is any kind of sorcery; I learn the longer a man stays and listens to Lee's teaching, the harder it is for him to awake.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

My families and friends are in the group. I realize I can't say anything against Lee's teaching before them, or I will be in trouble. I've tried to tell them there is something wrong with Lee's teaching, yet they would reply to me with more Lee's writings. I know it's not right to keep silent, but what should I do? I can't just leave there and let them stay in the group. I don't know if there is any kind of sorcery; I learn the longer a man stays and listens to Lee's teaching, the harder it is for him to awake.

Bible-believer,

What should you do? We can't tell you what to do. As a Bible-believer, you know to pray. This is the greatest failure of following Witness Lee. We don't learn to pray. We learn to "shut up and do as you are told."

From Aron:

I now believe that we were in the grip of some kind of sorcery. How could so many otherwise intelligent people fall for such a cheap, blatant con? We were under a spell, stripped of our God-given sensibilities.

What Aron said is true. How can it not be true?

The Bible says this:

2 Corinthians 11:14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Pray that your heavenly Father will lead you and guide you. If your heavenly Father is leading you to leave...you can leave. Talk to Him and learn to hear and obey him.

Blessings to you, Bible-believer, on your journey to come. Consider talking to a Christian counselor. Learn to pray. Learn to hear and obey the voice of God.

I often pray this prayer, even after I've been "out" much longer than I was "in" the LC. "Lord, please don't let me be deceived."

Nell

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

My families and friends are in the group. I realize I can't say anything against Lee's teaching before them, or I will be in trouble. I've tried to tell them there is something wrong with Lee's teaching, yet they would reply to me with more Lee's writings. I know it's not right to keep silent, but what should I do? I can't just leave there and let them stay in the group. I don't know if there is any kind of sorcery; I learn the longer a man stays and listens to Lee's teaching, the harder it is for him to awake.

Use their own words against them, for example ...

Watchman Nee: "The Bible is our only standard. We are not afraid to preach the pure Word of the Bible, even if men oppose; but if it is not the Word of the Bible, we could never agree even if everyone approved of it."

When the Blendeds excommunicated the Midwest, Nigel Tomes wrote an article addressing this. This forum is filled with healthy Biblical exegesis exposing LC errant eisegesis.

Apostle Paul regularly admonished the church to prove the will of God (Romans 12.2-3) and to test all things (I Thess 5.21). We should never just accept one man's teachings as gospel truth. The Bereans were esteemed because they examined the scriptures daily concerning Paul's ministry. Even Apostle Paul's teachings were tested, examined, and proven.

Before my entire region was "quarantined," there was endless debate about whether the young people in the Recovery should study the teachings of Lee before reading the Bible (dangerous eisegesis method), or have a solid foundation in the scripture before reading Lee's messages (accepted exegesis method.)

[aron]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

My families and friends are in the group. I realize I can't say anything against Lee's teaching before them, or I will be in trouble.

I’d rephrase that. You aren’t saying anything at all against Lee’s teaching, but rather you want to pursue truth in the Bible, as it unfolds before you. If you share this seeking, lovingly and respectfully, yet firmly and consistently, they’ll hear. I repeat: we’re not against Lee, the “church life” or “the recovery”. Rather, as Bible believers, we’re trying to understand the things that God’s word says. All of us are in the same boat. Some of us have been in it longer, but it’s still the same boat: “Seek, and ye shall find”. This is our hope, our way, our faith.

Bob: “Hey Uncle Joe, how’s it going?”

Joe: “Hey Bob, good, praise the Lord!”

Bob: “Amen, praise the Lord! Hey, I’ve got a question: in reading the recovery version, in one place in Psalms the footnote says that the writer was in his natural, fallen concepts, when he was cursing his enemy. It says, as people of God, we’re called to bless, not curse. Yet in another Psalm, the same antagonistic language is labeled as a type of Christ defeating Satan? How can one footnote interpret a verse one way, and elsewhere has an opposite interpretation? Why the lack of consistency?”

Joe: “Little nephew, maybe that’s just how it is! Praise the Lord!”
---[later]
---
Bob: “We see in the epistle of Paul that women aren’t allowed to teach, right?”

Joe: “Yep - that’s God’s command, through the apostle.”

Bob: “But look at this: I’m here on the LSM book sales, and in section “G” it has “God’s Plan of Redemption” by Mary McDonough. How come they sell a book by a woman who’s a contemporary of Nee? I don’t see anything else on the page but Nee, Lee, McDonough.”

Joe: “You see, she must have gotten a special dispensation from God. Once the revelation was complete, no more women prophets.”

Bob: “But Paul doesn’t teach that. Why are we?”

Joe: “Maybe that’s just the way it is.”

Bob: “They even started a website: https://marymcdonough.ccws.org and if you click on the links it takes you to “Christ and the Church” website which links back to LSM. https://ccws.org

Joe: “Well, little nephew, those brothers must know something that we don’t know. Praise the Lord”
---[later]
---
Bob: “Joe, you believe that God was processed in his divine economy, right?”

Joe: “Yessir, that’s the revelation of the Bible. ‘Incarnation, inclusion, intensification’” (starts humming the memory song)

Bob: “But I got to thinking. Where does Paul include ‘intensification’ as part of the ‘God’s economy’ that he wants Timothy to stay in Ephesus and teach? How do we know that Paul and Timothy included ‘intensification’ as part of the God’s economy they were presenting to the church?”

Joe: “Well we can clearly see in the Bible the sevenfold intensified Spirit to overcome the degradation of the Church. Revelation shows us the degraded churches and the sevenfold Spirit to address the needs of the Church. So surely this was God’s process in His divine economy.”

Bob: “But Paul didn’t write the book of Revelation on Patmos. John did. So how do we presume that Paul was telling Timothy to remain in Ephesus and teach something from a book that wasn’t yet written?”

Joe: “All I know is that the complete revelation of the Bible shows us the intensified Spirit, and Paul said that “The Last Adam became a Life-Giving Spirit.” So this naturally follows.”

Bob: “I understand the thinking, and don’t say that it’s wrong. But it’s worth pointing out that Paul never taught ‘intensification’ as a step of God’s New Testament economy. Nor did John the apostle. This is merely one person’s idea. We should be very clear: Paul never taught this.”

Joe: "Even if Paul didn't teach it, it's part of the complete revelation in the Bible. Other people wrote books, too."

Bob: "But if Paul didn't tell Timothy to teach 'intensification' as part of the divine economy, what basis do we have? What Bible writer says that "intensification is the third step of the divine economy?"

Joe: "I repeat, it's the complete revelation of the Bible"

Bob: "In other words, Witness Lee's interpretation, right?"

Joe: "That's right - WL was the apostle of the age, with the vision of the age."

Bob: "So Peter didn't teach intensification as part of God's economy, Paul didn't teach it, Jesus didn't teach it, John didn't teach it. But Witness Lee got the vision of the age."

Joe: "Yes, that's right. In the fulness of times, God raised up faithful brothers who put the vision together."

As long as you are respectful, and keep the topic on the Bible, most of them will engage you. But you have to seek the light. If you just want to contend, then we are all in the darkness, and your contention will not bring light. Only the Word conveys the Spirit which conveys Light.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

My families and friends are in the group. I realize I can't say anything against Lee's teaching before them, or I will be in trouble. I've tried to tell them there is something wrong with Lee's teaching, yet they would reply to me with more Lee's writings. I know it's not right to keep silent, but what should I do? I can't just leave there and let them stay in the group. I don't know if there is any kind of sorcery; I learn the longer a man stays and listens to Lee's teaching, the harder it is for him to awake.

As others have said, you must pray and study the Bible. Everyone must make their own choice whether they stay or not. Sadly your friends and family really do not know the decades of malfeasance which so characterizes those they follow at LSM.

The Bible does provide much instruction for your journey. Paul's letters to Timothy are especially helpful. Paul said, "in meekness instructing." (2T 2.25) Equip yourself with the truth (2T 3.17) Get your heart ready for suffering (2T 3.12). The mental strongholds in the Recovery are indeed formidable. You cannot just reason or convince them with scripture, the Spirit of God must also trouble their heart. I believe many LC members have already received this "troubling." As Jesus Himself admonished us, "Watch and pray."

[aron]

Originally Posted by Nell

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I believe many LC members have already received this "troubling." As Jesus Himself admonished us, "Watch and pray."

Yes, Jesus taught to watch unto prayer. Also he taught that every word should be fulfilled. So the word and our prayer life are our engagement with God - first we get the divine speaking, and our prayer is an assent back to God. "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as in heaven."

The key for me is not to react to what people are doing, have done (that includes us). Your situation may look unpromising, even grim. But, "Your word O LORD is eternal, it stands firm in the heavens"~Psa 119:89

Focus on the Word. It is the conduit to Jesus. It's the conduit to the power that raised Jesus from the dead, that now will give life to our mortal bodies. It is the basis of our prayers to God. By faith we speak God's word back to heaven, and the heavens open, and the angels of God ascend and descend upon the Son of Man.

If your friends and relatives see you seeking Jesus in the Word, you will have peace. And the King will rule, forever and ever.

[manna-man]

Greetings Bible believer,

You can't un-see what has been seen.

In other words you can't un-see what has been revealed. You are stuggling with Revelation.
Seek The Lords leading and you will find understanding, peace and safety.

Holy XOXO'S!

[aron]

What is sound doctrine?

God raised Jesus from the dead. All four gospels teach this, Paul teaches it, so do the other epistles.

Jesus' blood is our propitiation before God. Because of his resurrection, God showed His approval of Jesus as our Redeemer. This is clearly taught: "His blood makes us clean".

We should repent of our sin, confess, and believe, being baptized into the name of the Son of God. Here already it gets tricky because you get "name" and then "persons" and then "essences" and so forth. So even here, I get cautious.

Doctrines will pull you away from your fellow human being, shrivel up all your love. James teaches that true doctrine is to keep ourselves from sin and to visit widows and orphans in their afflictions. In other words, it's not parsing's of words, of "essences" and "energies" but the love outpoured, which reached us, which now flows through us to our nearby sojourners. We only have a brief while, so let us love one another.

The rest of it, the "processed" and "consummated" stuff is all over the place, and WL could traffic in words because so many have as well. It's an old scam, as old as gospel preaching. The solution? It's all about One Person. He is not hidden. The word is near, in our mouths, in our hearts, that we confess, that Jesus is Lord. The rest of it is, at best, distraction, and at worst a stumbling.

So then why the conversations that I presented earlier, about whether 'intensification' is seen as part of Paul's encouragement to Timothy (or anywhere else)? Because by that pragmatic outworking, that ability to cut straight the word, we're preserved from being taken captive by the merchandisers. We'll keep ourselves safe, and maybe some will hear God. But at the least, we're preserved from the ear-tickling enchantments.

[Zezima]

The entire movement of the Lord’ Recovery is predicated on Witness Lee being the minister of the age or apostle of the age. So no matter how much you reveal to members of the Lord‘s recovery they will always fall back on that idea. That this specific man received divine revelation and while they might not see it that revelation.. he saw it.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Zezima

The entire movement of the Lord’ Recovery is predicated on Witness Lee being the minister of the age or apostle of the age. So no matter how much you reveal to members of the Lord‘s recovery they will always fall back on that idea. That this specific man received divine revelation and while they might not see it that revelation.. he saw it.

When I realized that the Plymouth Brethren, supposedly our Recovery forebears, embraced the exact same errant dogma, and today his name is Bruce Hales, my mind was freed. Then I learned that this MOTA stronghold was based on Popery. Then I learned about every LC "storm" was actually honest men of God just crying out for righteousness.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

My families and friends are in the group. I realize I can't say anything against Lee's teaching before them, or I will be in trouble. I've tried to tell them there is something wrong with Lee's teaching, yet they would reply to me with more Lee's writings. I know it's not right to keep silent, but what should I do? I can't just leave there and let them stay in the group. I don't know if there is any kind of sorcery; I learn the longer a man stays and listens to Lee's teaching, the harder it is for him to awake.

Hi Bible-believer,

I know how you feel. I have the same quandary. You feel like you have to say something, but the whole system is self-defeating in the face of someone saying something! And none of us wants to lose our friends or family, so we dance around the big elephant of the truth. So do you maintain the relationship for the sake of having the grounds with them at some point later on? Or do you sacrifice the relationship to speak the truth and be able to say "I tried"?

I can't say much about how to handle family and friends because I think it's probably very specific one person to the next. But as a general "what do we do" about the local church as a whole.....I think the best thing is to get more and more word out on the internet. The local church's most used tool is control. And one of those types of control is information control.

But at a certain point, some people in the LC will reach a breaking point. And constrained by the inability to talk to anyone about their concerns, they will go to the internet in desperation.

And what a relief it is to go online and find out there are some people who see the same things you do, who see that those things are problematic like you do, and who put words to worries and thoughts you've been having!

The more talking, writing, websites, blogs, videos, comments, posts, forums, etc there are talking about the local churches the better. It takes away one of their major tools. It shines light where it needs to shine.

Trapped

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Zezima

The entire movement of the Lord’ Recovery is predicated on Witness Lee being the minister of the age or apostle of the age. So no matter how much you reveal to members of the Lord‘s recovery they will always fall back on that idea. That this specific man received divine revelation and while they might not see it that revelation.. he saw it.

That's is true. That's what they say all the time whenever anyone proposes different perspectives.
I don't think Lee was an apostle receiving the divine revelation at all, but just a man who came up with his own interpretation regarding the Scriptures.
Rev. 2:2I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Hi Bible-believer,

I know how you feel. I have the same quandary. You feel like you have to say something, but the whole system is self-defeating in the face of someone saying something! And none of us wants to lose our friends or family, so we dance around the big elephant of the truth. So you do maintain the relationship for the sake of having the grounds with them at some point later on? Or do you sacrifice the relationship to speak the truth and be able to say "I tried"?

I can't say much about how to handle family and friends because I think it's probably very specific one person to the next. But as a general "what do we do" about the local church as a whole.....I think the best thing is to get more and more word out on the internet. The local church's most used tool is control. And one of those types of control is information control.

But at a certain point, some people in the LC will reach a breaking point. And constrained by the inability to talk to anyone about their concerns, they will go to the internet in desperation.

And what a relief it is to go online and find out there are some people who see the same things you do, who see that those things are problematic like you do, and who put words to worries and thoughts you've been having!

The more talking, writing, websites, blogs, videos, comments, posts, forums, etc there are talking about the local churches the better. It takes away one of their major tools. It shines light where it needs to shine.

Trapped

Hi, Trapped,
"I tried" and I did lose some relationships. But it's worthwhile as long as some of them got my points. The sad part is they would get back to the system by the overwhelming teachings of Lee.
-----------
I think the best thing is to get more and more word out on the internet. ---Indeed, that's what happened to me, and I am introducing this web to my friends.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Ohio

As others have said, you must pray and study the Bible. Everyone must make their own choice whether they stay or not. Sadly your friends and family really do not know the decades of malfeasance which so characterizes those they follow at LSM.

The Bible does provide much instruction for your journey. Paul's letters to Timothy are especially helpful. Paul said, "in meekness instructing." (2T 2.25) Equip yourself with the truth (2T 3.17) Get your heart ready for suffering (2T 3.12). The mental strongholds in the Recovery are indeed formidable. You cannot just reason or convince them with scripture, the Spirit of God must also trouble their heart. I believe many LC members have already received this "troubling." As Jesus Himself admonished us, "Watch and pray."

Thank you for this point. I will pray for this to happen to them.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Use their own words against them, for example ...

Watchman Nee: "The Bible is our only standard. We are not afraid to preach the pure Word of the Bible, even if men oppose; but if it is not the Word of the Bible, we could never agree even if everyone approved of it."

The problem is they are hypnotized to a certain degree, they would just quote the remarks instead. For example, James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
They would tell you that means the Christians of the twelve tribes.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Use their own words against them, for example ...


Before my entire region was "quarantined," there was endless debate about whether the young people in the Recovery should study the teachings of Lee before reading the Bible (dangerous eisegesis method), or have a solid foundation in the scripture before reading Lee's messages (accepted exegesis method.)

One sister said we should study the Bible to have a solid foundation in the scriptures first so we could tell if anyone's teaching is biblical. (I agreed.)
Elders reproved her for bad influences on young people. She left.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by aron

I’d rephrase that. You aren’t saying anything at all against Lee’s teaching, but rather you want to pursue truth in the Bible, as it unfolds before you. If you share this seeking, lovingly and respectfully, yet firmly and consistently, they’ll hear. I repeat: we’re not against Lee, the “church life” or “the recovery”. Rather, as Bible believers, we’re trying to understand the things that God’s word says. All of us are in the same boat. Some of us have been in it longer, but it’s still the same boat: “Seek, and ye shall find”. This is our hope, our way, our faith.

I did, and I got into trouble. That's why I realized I'd better not bring it up again.
I tried the way you sampled in the post. I am being labeled as a trouble maker.
I study the Bible daily and seek the truth. Yet I feel so alone in the group, esp. when during the Bible study meeting. As one brother said one person against a system is kind of hopeless.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I did, and I got into trouble. That's why I realized I'd better not bring it up again. I tried the way you sampled in the post. I am being labeled as a trouble maker. I study the Bible daily and seek the truth. Yet I feel so alone in the group, esp. when during the Bible study meeting. As one brother said one person against a system is kind of hopeless.

I appreciate the severity of your situation, and don't presume to know what you can say or do. Yet as Trapped notes, we have the internet, and are neither alone nor hopeless. A lot of people agree with you. Some may be close by, but they can't speak up as you found out. I also agree with studying the Bible. I'd say, study Jesus and look at him carefully, what he did, what he said, how he viewed himself and those around him. You can spend a lifetime studying him. If you do, his Spirit will be with you.

Here's a recent example. He got touched by a sick woman. He said, "I felt power flow out of me". ~Luke 8:46 Can you imagine that? If a politician says to a poor person, jobless and hungry, "I feel your pain" and then gets back in his limo and returns to the State Capital, does he really feel the pain?

Yet when Jesus felt the woman's sickness, she got healed. For Jesus, to feel is not an emotion, it's a precursor of action: feed the hungry, clothe those who are shivering with cold, heal the sick. Listen to those who want to try and find their voice. Comfort the broken-hearted. And you'll feel that same power flow. If you feel others in their weakness and shame, where they really are, you can reach them. His Spirit will be with you.

Your situation, though difficult, is temporary. Don't be discouraged - you're not alone.

[aron]

21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:

24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.

27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Then in James 2:8 he calls it the "royal law of scripture" If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:

This "perfect law of liberty", this "royal law of scripture" is to love one another as our King commands, and not merely in lip service but in action. Our circumstance, and our perceived ability to love, are temporal. The command is eternal. If we break free from the prison of self, we realize our circumstances and even our abilities are nothing. The King has commanded us to love. We believe, and by faith we obey.

And obedience requires endurance. But the prize awaits. See e.g., James 1:12 Our prison is not circumstance. It is our inability to see past self, in the present circumstance. That's why James calls it "the perfect law of liberty". We see, we believe, we obey, we are set free.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

One sister said we should study the Bible to have a solid foundation in the scriptures first so we could tell if anyone's teaching is biblical. (I agreed.)
Elders reproved her for bad influences on young people. She left.

And these elders unknowingly helped the Lord in escorting this sister out the door.

I was active in the LC's for 30 years until I left in 2005 watching the Blended Wolves come to the Midwest. I have told many of those sad stories here on the forum. One family member helped me out the door when he literally said, "Returning to the pure word of God is a tactic of the enemy."

Hold on folks. When I came to the LC back in the 70's, that was like their sales pitch, "leave the old traditions, denominations, and teachings and come back to the pure word of God." Wow, have things changed.

The Recovery was fruitful in those early days because we returned to the scriptures. The Recovery has become barren and lifeless because they made it all about Witness Lee.

Bible-believer your story is very similar to that of the blind man in John 9. He testified that Jesus healed his sight, and look what happened to him. Like the Judaizers of old, the Recovery leaders hold their own people in morbid fear. Fear is an extremely powerful weapon that evil people in authority use to manipulate others.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I did, and I got into trouble. That's why I realized I'd better not bring it up again.
I tried the way you sampled in the post. I am being labeled as a trouble maker.
I study the Bible daily and seek the truth. Yet I feel so alone in the group, esp. when during the Bible study meeting. As one brother said one person against a system is kind of hopeless.

Bible-believer, actually you are sowing seeds, looking for "good soil."

Jesus said, "be wise as serpents, gentle as doves." Learn from Him.

All of the Lord's true followers were, from the little one to the great, "one person against a system."

It may seem "hopeless" to man, but being faithful to the Lord will always be rewarded by Him. Never allow yourself to be discouraged by others' reactions when you are speaking for Him.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Ohio

. I have told many of those sad stories here on the forum. One family member helped me out the door when he literally said, "Returning to the pure word of God is a tactic of the enemy."

Hold on folks. When I came to the LC back in the 70's, that was like their sales pitch, "leave the old traditions, denominations, and teachings and come back to the pure word of God." Wow, have things changed..

They have a blog post on Shepherding words that says just that

Here’s the link

This is the opening sentence…
“ From time to time a brother will trumpet the misguided notion that saints should read only the Bible, the 'pure Word'.”

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

The problem is they are hypnotized to a certain degree, they would just quote the remarks instead. For example, James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
They would tell you that means the Christians of the twelve tribes.

I know ex- LC'ers today, banned forever by LSM into "quarantine land," who still believe that Life-Study's give them "life." I am convinced that most of what they think is "life" is really a feel good version of arrogant pride, thinking that they are more special than the rest of the body of Christ.

[GraceAlone]

Bible-believer your story is very similar to that of the blind man in John 9. He testified that Jesus healed his sight, and look what happened to him. Like the Judaizers of old, the Recovery leaders hold their own people in morbid fear. Fear is an extremely powerful weapon that evil people in authority use to manipulate others.

I’ve struggled a lot with the idea of so much deception being mixed in with so much good, and also with the abuse of power among leaders who claim to represent God, as we all here have experienced and observed.

So I definitely took notes recently when our pastor said, “The abuse of power is part of our rebellion going back to the first lie accepted in the garden: ‘You can be like God.’” Boom!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by GraceAlone

I’ve struggled a lot with the idea of so much deception being mixed in with so much good, and also with the abuse of power among leaders who claim to represent God, as we all here have experienced and observed.

Have you read brother John Ingalls' account titled Speaking the Truth in Love? John spoke up concerning all of these same issues, and he was accused of orchestrating a global conspiracy. Actually he was just trying to protect the church of God from unending abuses at LSM, specifically Witness Lee's profligate son Philip who regularly molested the volunteer staff. Btw, that should have been the LC #MeToo movement, yet WL used all of his power to deceive us, protecting his own degenerate kid and his own "pristine" reputation. In this regard WL was the same as old Eli the high priest. (Read the opening chapters of I Samuel)

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Have you read brother John Ingalls' account titled Speaking the Truth in Love? John spoke up concerning all of these same issues, and he was accused of orchestrating a global conspiracy. Actually he was just trying to protect the church of God from unending abuses at LSM, specifically Witness Lee's profligate son Philip who regularly molested the volunteer staff. Btw, that should have been the LC #MeToo movement, yet WL used all of his power to deceive us, protecting his own degenerate kid and his own "pristine" reputation. In this regard WL was the same as old Eli the high priest. (Read the opening chapters of I Samuel)

Speaking the Truth in Love

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Have you read brother John Ingalls' account titled Speaking the Truth in Love? John spoke up concerning all of these same issues, and he was accused of orchestrating a global conspiracy. Actually he was just trying to protect the church of God from unending abuses at LSM, specifically Witness Lee's profligate son Philip who regularly molested the volunteer staff. Btw, that should have been the LC #MeToo movement, yet WL used all of his power to deceive us, protecting his own degenerate kid and his own "pristine" reputation. In this regard WL was the same as old Eli the high priest. (Read the opening chapters of I Samuel)

This seems like an axe to grind type of off topic story. Stuff like this may turn those who are questioning the LR away. Let’s stay on topic.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Zezima

This seems like an axe to grind type of off topic story. Stuff like this may turn those who are questioning the LR away. Let’s stay on topic.

Hardly. It addresses the abuse of power and the deceptions used by LC leaders. It is extremely important to address the character of those who claim to be Ministers of the Age on par with the original Apostles. If they knew the real events of LSM's history, every elder and every member would abandon their ties with LSM tomorrow and reject any thought of a "processed 4in1 God."

[aron]

I want to post a little more on the perfect law of freedom that James 1 mentions, and how it relates to our situations, including being stuck in a group of religious zealots who don't really care much about what the Bible says, unless they can shoehorn it into one of their pet causes.

One doesn't think much of "law" and "freedom" together. But the perfect law is different. Because of humanity's suffering under sin and death, the perfect law sets us free. Because of Jesus' obedience, including the sacrificial atoning death, we who obey him are set free from self, from anxiety, and even death. O death, where is your sting?

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

Jesus taught that the children of the Kingdom are free. I believe that they are under the perfect law, to love God and love one another. Your situation isn't as bad as you think, if you only have a little courage and a little faith.

Originally Posted by Ohio

It is extremely important to address the character of those who claim to be Ministers of the Age on par with the original Apostles.

The thread is on how to talk to church members about their beliefs, and what the Bible says about their doctrines, including but not limited to the Four-in-one God. Bad doctrine engenders bad behaviours, but the thread was on bad doctrines and how to address them if you are an LC member or have family/friends enmeshed in the thinking.

The Trinity I don't talk much about, because it seems to be a conceptual overlay. The only verse that directly supports the Trinity seems to be a forgery. I'm speaking of the so-called Johannine Comma in the Vulgate and KJV. It says, "The Three testify, and the Three are One". Seems like bad form if the only verse to support your thesis was a late insertion!

But I accept it as Christian Doctrine, because that's what history brought me. But a Three-in-One or Four-in-One probably doesn't affect my Christian walk unless I obsess on it in an unbalanced way.

My recommendation to all is to fortify oneself with the truth, as laid out in text. Where the text is uncertain, hold it, but carefully, not as a point of contention. Let me give an example. Jesus says that he will appear with in glory.

Matthew 25:31 When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, He will sit on His glorious throne.

Luke 9:26 For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.

Mark 8:30 For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”

So, in these verses I see what I call a 'proto-trinitarian formula', of the glory of the Son and the Father and the holy angels. But the angels are plural, ministering spirits, so how does this become the singular Holy Spirit? Or, how does it relate? We know that the singular capital 'h' capital 's' Holy Spirit [which is one] fills all things, including presumable the multitudinous holy angels. But beyond that I can't say. Yet my gospel confession isn't changed by what I don't know, and I don't get stumbled if other think this or that.

But if Watchman Nee was the Apostle of the Age, who was before him? Darby? Why did WN copy Jessie Penn-Lewis and not Darby in his 'Spiritual Man' if Darby was the preceding AotA? And who followed Paul? Timothy? I don't see it. And did James receive Paul as AotA in Jerusalem? Or was he 'rebellious'? Neither, clearly. And who was AotA, John Wesley or Jonathan Edwards, seeing as they both ministered separately? Or was one 'rebellious'? Hardly.

And how did the age change from the Age of Spiritual Giants when WL passed? That's what the Blendeds told us from the podium. What scripture supports a sequential string of singular AotA until the Last Spiritual Giant? There is no scriptural basis whatever.

I don't contend for ideas, but if someone else tries to impose theirs I'm ready to defend my space. I wasn't as a college student, and got ensnared by this group. So I share these few posts if any feel endangered by them. They can't touch you. You are free.

[GraceAlone]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hardly. It addresses the abuse of power and the deceptions used by LC leaders. It is extremely important to address the character of those who claim to be Ministers of the Age on par with the original Apostles. If they knew the real events of LSM's history, every elder and every member would abandon their ties with LSM tomorrow and reject any thought of a "processed 4in1 God."

Yes, I've read Ingalls' account; it was very eye-opening.

To Zezima's concern about relevance, I might offer this thought (because yes, I agree that we should be careful about axe-grinding): I wonder if one way that leaders become deceived over time and then are willing and able to manipulate others, even when they truly believe they are serving the Lord, is because the ability to speak in complicated terms such as the ones referenced in the title of this thread becomes a smoke-screen. People are impressed and reassured by sophisticated language spoken authoritatively from the pulpit. Combine that with ignorance of past events such as what John Ingalls described and with a culture that discourages thinking for oneself and searching the Scripture and other expounders of it, and you get a deeply flawed yet effectively persuasive system.

I really like Nell's prayer and have been using it myself: Lord, don't let me be deceived. Aron sets a good example of looking carefully at the Scriptures and sticking to what's there.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hardly. It addresses the abuse of power and the deceptions used by LC leaders. It is extremely important to address the character of those who claim to be Ministers of the Age on par with the original Apostles.

Agreed.

If they knew the real events of LSM's history, every elder and every member would abandon their ties with LSM tomorrow and reject any thought of a "processed 4in1 God."

Ohio,

What I believe, and fear, is that the "elders" and many members DO know the real events of LSM history; Lee and Nee history. Many, such as you and I, lived through it to one extent or another. Yet many stay, possibly with the knowledge that "something is terribly wrong here".

To wit, it's shocking to me that in March, 2021 they continue to propagate the heresy that reading the Bible, is "dangerous and unbiblical". In fact, as we have learned the hard way, NOT reading the Bible is dangerous and unbiblical. This is even worse than the heresy of the "Processed, Four-in-One God". Both of which are Demonic and Devilish.

If the Devil, through LSM operatives, can bully you to stop reading the Bible and only read Lee/Nee (two fallen men), the Devil propagates deception of the highest (lowest) magnitude. The Devil nullifies the entire Bible and removes your liberty to hear the speaking of the Holy Spirit for yourself. Instead you rely on the Devil, through fallen men, for "revelation" which is, in fact, deception.

Of course, all men and women who read the Bible and arrive at an interpretation are fallen. However, those of us who form an opinion from reading the Word do not believe we are God. We do not claim a place in the Godhead as #4. We do not claim to be the one and only church on the earth. We do not bully the membership into submission to our teachings and practices. In fact, we don't even have teachings and practices. We just read the Bible, as we are commanded to do, and are blessed by the Holy Spirit...or not.

Going back to Post #3 on this topic:

See how subtle that is? LSM consistently places ideas into the text..a method of interpretation called: eisegesis, rather than drawing ideas out from the text, a method called exegesis. With this understanding of how to interpret the bible, many of the blocks that supported our faith in what the recovery was offering began to fall… And soon the entire tower went with it. The local ground of the church, us becoming God, the white horse being the gospel, culture not being in the bible, the book of James missing the mark, Etc...

Thanks Zezima for bringing this word "eisegesis" to our attention! It explains a lot.

If you read through the .pdf on Shepherding Words, with particular emphasis on the verses cited, you can see a textbook example of "eisegesis". These verses simply state what was done in a particular example, but DO NOT convey a "dangerous or unbiblical notion" or command to not read the Bible.

It seems that the LSM, et al, have taken the position much like the Catholic Church did in the mid-1500's in the days of Martin Luther. After Luther was "banished" and became a wanted man, the story continues:

During his stay in the Wartburg, Luther began work on what proved to be one of his foremost achievements—the translation of the New Testament into the German vernacular. This task was an obvious ramification of his insistence that the Bible alone is the source of Christian truth and his related belief that everyone is capable of understanding the biblical message. Luther’s translation profoundly affected the development of the written German language. The precedent he set was followed by other scholars, whose work made the Bible widely available in the vernacular and contributed significantly to the emergence of national languages.

Martin Luther and the New Testament

This battle has already been fought and won...a long time ago.

Nell

[UntoHim]

This thread is wondering guys. Let's tighten it up a bit. Our new friend Bible-believer has asked a specific question:

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Is the Processed, Four-in-One God a sound doctrine?
I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion.
Please help me on this matter.

Applicable Quote from Witness Lee:

Ultimately, the church is a group of people who are in union with the Triune God and are mingled with the Triune God. The Triune God and the church are four-in-one. Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the “four-in-one God.” These four are the Father, the Son, the Spirit, and the Body.
A Deeper Study of the Divine Dispensing p.203-204

Here are some helpful (I think) responses so far:

Originally Posted by Zezima

It’s not a trap, it’s healthy to compare a teaching to the Bible. It’s a trap not to do this.

Originally Posted by Trapped

1. What does Lee/ministry teach?
2. What does the Bible actually say? (or, does the Bible actually say that?)

Originally Posted by gr8ful

I was one who loved the theoretical theological explorations in W Lee's teachings. Really tickled my ear and the feeling of "WOW" gave me a buzz. When these things like 4-in-1 God were challenged, the only way they "worked" was to minimize the radicalness of the teaching by saying, "no, this doesn't mean..." or "well, in church history we find similar expressions from orthodox teachers, such as ...".

Originally Posted by Trapped

One thing that struck me about the excerpts was that they were chock full of Lee's specialized language - mingling, incorporation, God's economy, expansion, reproduction, corporate, processed, consummated. The Bible doesn't speak this way.
The Son and the Father are one and are in each other. But they are still a Son and a Father. The Son doesn't become the Father and the Father doesn't become the Son. As believers, we are in God and God is in us, but God does not become us and we do not become God. "Mingling" blurs the distinction between Creator and creation, and that's not something the Bible does.
Sorry, but Witness Lee or anyone may say whatever they want to say, but if Scripture doesn't also say it, they are wrong! To be one with God means you are one with God. You are you, and God is God, and you are one with Him. To be in God means you are in God. Neither of these things mean you are "part of a four-in-one God".

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

The Trinity is one God existing in three Persons. The body of Christ is his church composed of believers. Believers are human, not God. We believe in Him and have Him indwelled. But it never means we can be God.

Originally Posted by Trapped

Others can and have said this more clearly than I will be able to, but Lee taught contradictory things about God. He simultaneously taught that the three of the Trinity are distinct while also saying that they actually are each other.
The problem is not you, and the problem is not that you don't understand something that you should. The problem is that Lee was not a good Bible teacher, he had no one to correct him, and he taught lots of things wrong. This is one of them.
Where the Bible shows distinctions, Lee dragged them together and mushed them into one. He should not have done that.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Then just when one wouldn't think that things could get worse, Witness Lee taught that "Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the 'four-in-one God'." This is rank heresy. Nowhere did the Lord Jesus or the Scripture writing apostles even faintly imply that the Body of Christ is to be considered part of, or equal to, the Trinity. This kind of nonsense springs directly from Lee's notion that "the believers become the reproduction, expansion, and physical continuation of the incarnate and incorporate Son of God" (as quoted by LSM spokesman Kerry Robichaux) Again, nowhere did the Lord Jesus or the Scripture writing apostles ever teach such a thing.

Originally Posted by aron

Where did Paul present us with God processed in His economy? If Paul didn't say this, then why should we? Zezima mentions eisegesis, or putting ideas on the text, that don't come from the text. "God was processed in His economy" is surely that. Nowhere did Paul write of an intensified Spirit, for example. Yet WL claimed it was a "crucial and interdependent step of His divine economy." The divine economy according to who? Not any that Paul referenced.

Originally Posted by Nell

Of course, all men and women who read the Bible and arrive at an interpretation are fallen. However, those of us who form an opinion from reading the Word do not believe we are God. We do not claim a place in the Godhead as #4. We do not claim to be the one and only church on the earth. We do not bully the membership into submission to our teachings and practices. In fact, we don't even have teachings and practices. We just read the Bible, as we are commanded to do, and are blessed by the Holy Spirit...or not.

-

[aron]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

This thread is wondering guys. Let's tighten it up a bit. Our new friend Bible-believer has asked a specific question:

The question was, Is the processed, four-in-one God a sound doctrine? The answer from all corners was a "No." Not sure how much discussion that warrants.

A related question was, "How does one address such things in a supposed Bible study group that really isn't interested in open inquiry but becomes antagonistic if anyone tries?" That second question might benefit from some varied approaches, relating to experience, history, scripture, psychology, sociology and so forth. How, if at all, may one exercise open inquiry in the face of a high-control group?

[UntoHim]

aron and others.

Our friend thoughtfully and intentionally entitled the thread "Is the Processed, Four-in-One God a sound doctrine?" And then ended with "Please help me on this matter". This warrants much, much more than a simple "no". After all, the "no" was a given. Our friend is looking for help. I took a few minutes and referred to the posts that I feel have headed us and him in the right direction. How bout we finish up on the main question before we head off into some of the other related questions?

Witness Lee got the doctrine of the Trinity wrong. He confused the Persons of the Trinity. He quite literally "confounded the Persons and divided the substance" The Trinity is one of the core, essential items of the Christian faith. Aside from the deity of Christ, and the death, resurrection and bodily ascension of Christ, nothing touches more upon the core and essential heart of the Christian faith, and the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
-

[aron]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

aron and others.

Our friend thoughtfully and intentionally entitled the thread "Is the Processed, Four-in-One God a sound doctrine?" And then ended with "Please help me on this matter". This warrants much, much more than a simple "no". After all, the "no" was a given. Our friend is looking for help. I took a few minutes and referred to the posts that I feel have headed us and him in the right direction. How bout we finish up on the main question before we head off into some of the other related questions?-

Originally Posted by Kerry Robichaux

Because the believers are incorporated into Him, He as the heavenly ladder serves as the personal bridge to the Triune God, incorporating in Himself the Divine Trinity and the believers. This is the very center of the universe, for in Him God and man are joined together, and the ministrations of God are focused on Him as this heavenly bridge. Within Himself He incorporates the unique enterprise of God’s economy, that is, the Triune God operating through Him by the Spirit in the believers for the manifestation and expression of God the Father on the earth…In this way the believers become the reproduction, expansion, and physical continuation of the incarnate and incorporate Son of God and indeed the organism of the Triune God Himself. The Johannine Jesus as Bridge and Model for the Incorporation of the Believers into the Divine Trinity (2) - Kerry Robichaux

If you look at the verse referenced by Kerry Robichaux, in John 1:51, Jesus said, "You will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man." Elsewhere as I've shown in post #48, the other 3 gospels have Jesus and the Father and the holy angels revealed together in glory. Nothing in either section about the Holy Spirit, capital 'H' capital 'S'. You have the Father, the Son, the ministering spirits plural. Now, elsewhere there is "one Spirit" a la Paul to the Ephesians. But should you ignore John, Jesus, and the synoptic gospels (and the book of Revelation)? Everything must be factored in.

So Kerry Robichaux is imposing an abstract motif, the ladder/bridge, and creating his own meaning, and - importantly - ignoring what the actual words of the scripture say. An abstraction is used to parse scripture, what is noted and what is ignored. And perhaps this is what our poster Bible Believer can say in his LSM-run Bible study group. But I personally believe that if you get into fencing matches with abstractions, you'll never win. You have entered enemy territory. They're built for this - they love this stuff. I think that pursuing this line with LSM adherents is playing in their court. They love to shuffle words around. 'Trinity' versus 'Triune', and 'essences' versus 'energies', and 'Godhead' versus 'persons'. Its all a shell game with words, it's what they do for a living. If you want to arm Bible Believer for that, be my guest.

But then, where is the love? No, then it's all about 'truth' which is really what definitions of words are used, which scriptures are 'crucial' and which are deliberately ignored. Who wants to play that game?

[UntoHim]

My brother aron, I'm sorry you would think anyone here is playing games. I'm also sorry you would think that "it's all about truth" to the exclusion of love. I'm not sure how much more plainly I can state this - this thread is about answering a question. It's an important question. It's a crucial question. It's not a game.

Witness Lee taught that God was "processed". This is not the truth. It is not the truth according to the Bible. It is not the truth according to things taught by the first generation of apostles and teachers, nor is it the truth as taught by any of the orthodox Christians in the following generations up to this very day. It is not a sound doctrine.

The church has not been mingled or incorporated into the Godhead, creating some monstrous, amalgamated "Four-in-One" God. This is not a sound doctrine. In fact, rather than being a sound, healthy doctrine, it could more appropriately be placed in the category of a "doctrine of demons" that Paul warned Timothy about (1 Tim 4:1)

Finally, I would note that at the close of the age of the New Testament, the apostle John, known as "the apostle of love", greatly emphasized "truth". To see that the saints were walking in truth gave him the greatest joy. "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth."(2 John 4:4) You see, the apostle knew that love was not enough to save the children from the doctrines of demons - they needed truth. How much more today are we latter day followers of the Lord Jesus in need of truth? How much more are those of us affected by the false teachings of Witness Lee in need of truth?
-

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

My brother aron...
-

I think aron's remarks are pointed at LSM, not at the thread.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I think aron's remarks are pointed at LSM, not at the thread.

UntoHim doesn't think he's playing games. And I get his protest - arguably, he's not. But my point is that anyone who goes onto their (LSM, DCP) ground and tries to debate "trinity" versus "four-in-one God" is playing their game on their rules. And that is a game, a vain exercise.

Who on this forum has gone to an LSM Bible study or Facebook page or chat forum and corrected them, or even made any headway at all, gotten any acknowledgement that the "four-in-one God" idea may possibly need, um, some adjustment? If anyone has, I stand down. Otherwise I rest my case.

Now, on this forum it's different. But on this forum who's defending the "four-in-one God"? If none, then pursuing the matter will soon become an exercise in posturing.

Has anyone gone to Kerry Robichaux' Bible study, or with anyone promoting his writing, and gotten admission that there's any meaningful content in John 1:51 past a "ladder", "an uplifted standing staircase", or an "incorporated Triune God"? If so, I stand down. Otherwise I rest my case.

I'm not saying anyone on this forum is playing games. I'm saying that if you engage them with parsing's of words, that's what they do for a living. You're in their turf, on their terms. I don't see that as anything but an exercise in fruitlessness. But I may be wrong. I'm just a person with an opinion. Others may think differently and that's okay, too. Sorry if my stridency is off-putting... I really use it for my own protection, because I got caught, once. And I don't want to again.

[UntoHim]

Thanks aron for you thoughtful post. As always, your points are well taken.

I still think it's important and worthwhile (for those of us who think it's important and worthwhile) to try our best to answer the question at hand. For those of you who think it's an exercise in posturing, or fruitlessness or that we are merely engaging LSM on their turf, I would ask you to give others the grace and latitude to assist Bible-believer and anyone else concerned, by answering the question at hand by speaking the truth in love as best we know it.

In any event, and as always, may the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, guard our hearts and our minds in Christ Jesus.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

So Kerry Robichaux is imposing an abstract motif, the ladder/bridge, and creating his own meaning, and - importantly - ignoring what the actual words of the scripture say. An abstraction is used to parse scripture, what is noted and what is ignored. And perhaps this is what our poster Bible Believer can say in his LSM-run Bible study group. But I personally believe that if you get into fencing matches with abstractions, you'll never win. You have entered enemy territory. They're built for this - they love this stuff. I think that pursuing this line with LSM adherents is playing in their court. They love to shuffle words around. 'Trinity' versus 'Triune', and 'essences' versus 'energies', and 'Godhead' versus 'persons'. Its all a shell game with words, it's what they do for a living. If you want to arm Bible Believer for that, be my guest.

Originally Posted by aron

I'm saying that if you engage them with parsing's of words, that's what they do for a living. You're in their turf, on their terms. I don't see that as anything but an exercise in fruitlessness.

Aron, totally agree with you. Like the Plymouth Brethren tract-wars of old, LSM loves this stuff. They are seasoned wordsmiths. They invite you in and then fight the fight they love to fight. I lived this for 30 years, and studied it for another 15 years. Even God is tired of their word games.

This is why I always bring it back to LSM's character, to their unrighteousness, to their rotten behavior. The old LSMers on this forum like Bilbo, Cassidy, and Drake hated it. They claimed I was like a broken record, stuck on Philip Lee. I could care less.

Jesus in the Gospels rebuked the Jews for their hypocrisy. Read Paul's many epistles. He fought this same battle for decades. He often used the character standard too. The Jews hated him for that. Paul even got punched in the mouth for saying that he "conducted himself in all good conscience." (Acts 23.1-2)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I still think it's important and worthwhile (for those of us who think it's important and worthwhile) to try out best to answer the question at hand.
-

OK, here has long been my response ...

Whether it be the "4-in-1 God" or any other of their exclusive and esoteric doctrines, I respond simply that it's not in the Bible. This is why Bible-believer is/was troubled in the first place. There is no verse that says "4-in-1 God". Both Jesus and the Apostles had ample opportunity to say things like this, of such great import, but they did not. Why not?

Why should we focus on that which is not in the Bible and miss that which is? Isn't the Bible enough? Should we not stick to our common faith?

[UntoHim]

Applicable Quote from Witness Lee:

Ultimately, the church is a group of people who are in union with the Triune God and are mingled with the Triune God. The Triune God and the church are four-in-one. Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the “four-in-one God.” These four are the Father, the Son, the Spirit, and the Body.
A Deeper Study of the Divine Dispensing p.203-204

Originally Posted by Zezima

It’s not a trap, it’s healthy to compare a teaching to the Bible. It’s a trap not to do this.

Originally Posted by Trapped

1. What does Lee/ministry teach?
2. What does the Bible actually say? (or, does the Bible actually say that?)
Sorry, but Witness Lee or anyone may say whatever they want to say, but if Scripture doesn't also say it, they are wrong!

Originally Posted by Trapped

The problem is that Lee was not a good Bible teacher, he had no one to correct him, and he taught lots of things wrong. Where the Bible shows distinctions, Lee dragged them together and mushed them into one. He should not have done that.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Then just when one wouldn't think that things could get worse, Witness Lee taught that "Because the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all one with the Body of Christ, we may say that the Triune God is now the 'four-in-one God'." This is rank heresy. Nowhere did the Lord Jesus or the Scripture writing apostles even faintly imply that the Body of Christ is to be considered part of, or equal to, the Trinity.

Originally Posted by aron

Where did Paul present us with God processed in His economy? If Paul didn't say this, then why should we?

Originally Posted by Nell

In fact, we don't even have teachings and practices. We just read the Bible, as we are commanded to do, and are blessed by the Holy Spirit...or not.

And now the coup de gras:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why should we focus on that which is not in the Bible and miss that which is? Isn't the Bible enough? Should we not stick to our common faith?

------------------------------------------------------------

[aron]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

.. at the close of the age of the New Testament, the apostle John, known as "the apostle of love", greatly emphasized "truth". To see that the saints were walking in truth gave him the greatest joy. "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth."(2 John 4:4)

I concede to the primacy of truth, in the sense of "widely understood and agreed-upon events, facts, or phenomenon". But even in Jesus' day, the Twelve didn't have a good handle on it. The gospels repeat this theme, with, "They were amazed and afraid, and wondered what was going on." The NT isn't always explicitly detailed - it says that Jesus taught in parables, then explained privately. We don't know the contents of many long conversations that Paul had with Timothy (for example), but only two epistles and some verses in Acts. We may read deeply into the texts, and arguably should (and I do), but to argue over our readings as "truths" is itself the grip of error.

And to do this with ones like DCP who want to argue (imo) plays right to their hands and stumbles the weak and the wavering. If an unbeliever comes by, and sees us hotly debating the "trinity" versus the "quadnity" - I just made that last word up - will they go, "Oh wow, God really loves me!"? I doubt it. They'll be like, "Okay.. eh.. not for me" and keep going.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Because the believers are incorporated into Him, He as the heavenly ladder serves as the personal bridge to the Triune God, incorporating in Himself the Divine Trinity and the believers. ~Kerry Robichaux

Back to Ohio's point about sticking to what's in the scriptural text. John 1:51 is probably the key verse here, that Robichaux uses to jump-start his four-in-one theory. He uses the word 'incorporated' and then the ladder motif is used to extend this incorporation into the believers. But what does Jesus actually say? He says, "You will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man." This of course references the famous OT vision of "Jacob's ladder".

But what do we really see in these words: incorporation? First, Jesus says "an open heaven". I argue that this implies obedience. "Because I obey my Father, I always see what he is doing" and conversely "Because I always see (know/understand) my Father's will in scripture, I can always obey him." Seeing necessitates obedience, and obedience follows seeing (Pharisees were called blind because they didn't obey scriptures, and they didn't obey because they couldn't see).

The scriptures foretold the coming Messiah, and Jesus as this Messiah (aka Christ, Son of David, King of Israel, Saviour of the World, Ruler of the kings of the earth) lived completely and unequivocally within prophetic strictures. If a prophet wrote it, Jesus lived it, period. He never lived outside the Father's will for him, outlined in what we today call the OT. How many times did Jesus say, "that the scripture must be fulfilled" or "as it is written" (why I cited James' idea of the "perfect law of freedom"; see also Psa 119:32). That's the Son of Man on earth, living and walking and acting under the open heaven. We see him, and recognize this, and see in him our own pathway to freedom. When he obeyed, we then believed the scriptures' fulfillments, and were ourselves set free from sin, death, self, hell. Jesus is the Way.

Now, as to "angels ascending and descending" upon the Son of Man, it seems simple - Jesus and the writers of the NT believed in angelic mediation, that angels carried prayers and messages to and from God (see, e.g., Rev 8:2-6; cf Matt 4:11; Acts 12:15; John 5:4) None of this obviates the "One Spirit" or the unique "Holy Spirit" but John 1:51 isn't bringing us to the Trinity or the Quadnity. It's rather presenting us with a view of a unique Man on earth who was fully obedient to the Father in heaven. Through our faith we're "incorporated" into Jesus, but that incorporation is wholly predicated on our obedience to his will, just as his to the Father. "Even as I obey the Father's commandments, so also you should obey my commands". Pretty straightforward: when Jesus teaches, "Even as 'X', so also 'Y'", don't you think we disciples should pay attention?

I don't deny, reject, or ignore the doctrine of the Trinity as an established historical Christian doctrinal exposition. But we should never allow ourselves to be carried away from the actual text at hand. Where the Bible is explicit, we say, "Amen". Which is why I continually cite the resurrection of Jesus on the third day: every NT witness includes this. Where we're reading into gaps, or pasting together disparate sections, caution and humility are our best guides.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Nell

Agreed.
To wit, it's shocking to me that in March, 2021 they continue to propagate the heresy that reading the Bible, is "dangerous and unbiblical". In fact, as we have learned the hard way, NOT reading the Bible is dangerous and unbiblical. This is even worse than the heresy of the "Processed, Four-in-One God". Both of which are Demonic and Devilish.
If the Devil, through LSM operatives, can bully you to stop reading the Bible and only read Lee/Nee (two fallen men), the Devil propagates deception of the highest (lowest) magnitude. The Devil nullifies the entire Bible and removes your liberty to hear the speaking of the Holy Spirit for yourself. Instead you rely on the Devil, through fallen men, for "revelation" which is, in fact, deception.

Indeed. My locality is having the "pursuing of Lee's collection" meetings. Some are selling Lee's collection. Members are being asked to participate in the meetings and prophesy. I haven't attended any of the meetings, for I don't want to repeat the teachings of Lee like a recorder, and if I say anything different from Lee's teaching I will be stopped. Like I said in my post, in the Bible study meetings, we were just read through Lee's remarks, and marveled at his teachings, and nothing else.

I don't think members in the Local churches have the true knowledge of the Bible. The majority rely on Lee's remarks without digesting the words.
The worse part is Lee said that we should not have opinions. The truth is that the local church is full of Lee's opinions and his opinions only.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

The worse part is Lee said that we should not have opinions. The truth is that the local church is full of Lee's opinions and his opinions only.

I agree with your views, but will comment elsewhere, as I don't want to sidetrack this thread.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi all, I am new here.
As I told the Admin that I am still a current member of LC. However, I can't go along with them in many ways, and the "title" question is one of them. I asked questions, but no responses from other members or elders could solve my confusion. They just gave a piece of writings from Lee's.
Please help me on this matter.
Thank you.

Hi Bible-believer,

Thanks for asking your question in this relevant thread.

What is your understanding of this verse?

1 Corinthians 12:12

"For even as the body is one and has many members, yet all the members of the body, being many, are one Body, so also is the Christ."

Thanks,
Drake

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hi Bible-believer,


What is your understanding of this verse?

1 Corinthians 12:12

"For even as the body is one and has many members, yet all the members of the body, being many, are one Body, so also is the Christ."

A text without a context is a proof text. I understand Bible passages by comparing verses with verses in the contexts.
There is one body. Paul, Peter, James, and John are in Christ and in God and are indwelt by the Holy Ghost (John 17:21–26). There is ONE BODY and one Spirit, and the same Spirit who baptized Peter, James, and John into it at Pentecost, baptized the Corinthians into it in 1 Cor. 12:13, and us, too.

1Cor. 12:11-12 “11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. 12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

1Cor.12:12-27 begins a practical discussion of the Body of Christ.
Eph. 4:12 “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;”
"There is One Body (the Church) and One Spirit (the Holy Spirit), even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord (Jesus), One Faith, ONE BAPTISM (of the Holy Spirit), One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." Eph. 4:4-6.
2 Cor.12:13-14 “13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.14 For the body is not one member, but many.
The fact that the Church is a "Body" made up of "living members". Paul has illustrated v.14 in vss.15-17 that once a man is in the Body of Christ, he is a member.
Paul, in v. 17, said that God has given a particular job to each member of the Body of Christ. Each Christian is to do the job the Lord has set for him to do. v. 18. We are the body of Christ, and Jesus Christ himself is the Head. The body does things according to the Head’s will (see v.11 the One Spirit's will).
Vss. 22–23 are about the Body of Christ and about the cohesion of the Body, how it sticks together and operates together. It shouldn’t have any schism or splits in it. He likens it to a human body.
V. 27, “Now ye are.” Definition: “the body of Christ.” Plural, “ye are the body of Christ.” There’s the one Body. There are many churches, but there is one Body that is THE Church, the Church of God. “and members in particular.”
Why call the Church the "Body of Christ?" A body is for the manifestation of a personality. Christ, who is now in glory, can manifest Himself to the world through His Body THE CHURCH, so the world can see Christ in Christian believers, who are His Body. Paul said, “For to me to live is Christ”.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

A text without a context is a proof text. I understand Bible passages by comparing verses with verses in the contexts.
There is one body. Paul, Peter, James, and John are in Christ and in God and are indwelt by the Holy Ghost (John 17:21–26). There is ONE BODY and one Spirit, and the same Spirit who baptized Peter, James, and John into it at Pentecost, baptized the Corinthians into it in 1 Cor. 12:13, and us, too.

1Cor. 12:11-12 “11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. 12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

1Cor.12:12-27 begins a practical discussion of the Body of Christ.
Eph. 4:12 “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;”
"There is One Body (the Church) and One Spirit (the Holy Spirit), even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord (Jesus), One Faith, ONE BAPTISM (of the Holy Spirit), One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." Eph. 4:4-6.
2 Cor.12:13-14 “13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.14 For the body is not one member, but many.
The fact that the Church is a "Body" made up of "living members". Paul has illustrated v.14 in vss.15-17 that once a man is in the Body of Christ, he is a member.
Paul, in v. 17, said that God has given a particular job to each member of the Body of Christ. Each Christian is to do the job the Lord has set for him to do. v. 18. We are the body of Christ, and Jesus Christ himself is the Head. The body does things according to the Head’s will (see v.11 the One Spirit's will).
Vss. 22–23 are about the Body of Christ and about the cohesion of the Body, how it sticks together and operates together. It shouldn’t have any schism or splits in it. He likens it to a human body.
V. 27, “Now ye are.” Definition: “the body of Christ.” Plural, “ye are the body of Christ.” There’s the one Body. There are many churches, but there is one Body that is THE Church, the Church of God. “and members in particular.”
Why call the Church the "Body of Christ?" A body is for the manifestation of a personality. Christ, who is now in glory, can manifest Himself to the world through His Body THE CHURCH, so the world can see Christ in Christian believers, who are His Body. Paul said, “For to me to live is Christ”.

Sorry, there is a typo. It is "pretext" but not "prooftext".

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

A text without a context is a pre-text. I understand Bible passages by comparing verses with verses in the contexts.
There is one body. Paul, Peter, James, and John are in Christ and in God and are indwelt by the Holy Ghost (John 17:21–26). There is ONE BODY and one Spirit, and the same Spirit who baptized Peter, James, and John into it at Pentecost, baptized the Corinthians into it in 1 Cor. 12:13, and us, too.

1Cor. 12:11-12 “11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. 12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.

1Cor.12:12-27 begins a practical discussion of the Body of Christ.
Eph. 4:12 “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;”
"There is One Body (the Church) and One Spirit (the Holy Spirit), even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord (Jesus), One Faith, ONE BAPTISM (of the Holy Spirit), One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." Eph. 4:4-6.
2 Cor.12:13-14 “13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.14 For the body is not one member, but many.
The fact that the Church is a "Body" made up of "living members". Paul has illustrated v.14 in vss.15-17 that once a man is in the Body of Christ, he is a member.
Paul, in v. 17, said that God has given a particular job to each member of the Body of Christ. Each Christian is to do the job the Lord has set for him to do. v. 18. We are the body of Christ, and Jesus Christ himself is the Head. The body does things according to the Head’s will (see v.11 the One Spirit's will).
Vss. 22–23 are about the Body of Christ and about the cohesion of the Body, how it sticks together and operates together. It shouldn’t have any schism or splits in it. He likens it to a human body.
V. 27, “Now ye are.” Definition: “the body of Christ.” Plural, “ye are the body of Christ.” There’s the one Body. There are many churches, but there is one Body that is THE Church, the Church of God. “and members in particular.”
Why call the Church the "Body of Christ?" A body is for the manifestation of a personality. Christ, who is now in glory, can manifest Himself to the world through His Body THE CHURCH, so the world can see Christ in Christian believers, who are His Body. Paul said, “For to me to live is Christ”.

Thanks Bible-believer for your reply. I've read and pondered it a few times and cannot disagree with any of it. Not that I was looking to find something to disagree with but rather to see if your understanding of 1 Cor 12:12 was similar to mine. So, rather than presume that it is I'd like to return to that verse and in future posts return to your excellent and relevant points in your reply.

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

This verse states that our human physical body is like the Christ. We have a head and a body ...so also Christ. His body here refers to His corporate Body... the many members of Christ. The Head (Christ) and His Body (all the believers) are one in the same way that our head and bodies are also one. They are not only connected and attached but also are intrinsically one life and one living.

Do you agree with my understanding of this verse?

Drake

[Drake]

Bible-believer wrote> "Sorry, there is a typo. It is "pretext" but not "prooftext"."

You can always Edit any post. The edit button is in the lower right hand corner of your posts. I put your edit in my reply to you.

I love and appreciate that Edit button. ;-)

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bible-believer wrote> "Sorry, there is a typo. It is "pretext" but not "prooftext"."

You can always Edit any post. The edit button is in the lower right hand corner of your posts. I put your edit in my reply to you.

I love and appreciate that Edit button. ;-)

Drake,

No. Not always. You only have a few hours, maybe 12+, to edit your post before the Edit button goes away.

But, you can always use the quote button in the lower right when replying to a post instead of typing: username wrote> “quoted text”. Love that Quote button!

From FAQ: If you have registered, you will be able to edit and delete your posts. Note that the administrator can disable this ability as he desires. Your ability to edit your posts may also be time-limited, depending on how the administrator has set up the forum.

Nell

[Drake]

Ah yes Nell. I recall now. There is a time limit. Thanks for the correction.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Ah yes Nell. I recall now. There is a time limit. Thanks for the correction.

And how ‘bout that sweet little quote button???

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

And how ‘bout that sweet little quote button???

yes, indeed... It is a sweet little button!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Thanks Bible-believer for your reply. I've read and pondered it a few times and cannot disagree with any of it. Not that I was looking to find something to disagree with but rather to see if your understanding of 1 Cor 12:12 was similar to mine. So, rather than presume that it is I'd like to return to that verse and in future posts return to your excellent and relevant points in your reply.

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

This verse states that our human physical body is like the Christ. We have a head and a body ...so also Christ. His body here refers to His corporate Body... the many members of Christ. The Head (Christ) and His Body (all the believers) are one in the same way that our head and bodies are also one. They are not only connected and attached but also are intrinsically one life and one living.

Do you agree with my understanding of this verse?

Drake

Hi Drake,

You forgot to say that only those in the Recovery are the body of Christ, and not those in "degraded Christianity." I heard that many times during my visits to Anaheim.

[Bible-believer]

Anyway, I learned that I'd better get rid of Lee's or the Local church's teachings, spend time reading and studying the word of God. It's much more profitable and easier than figuring out if I am on the right track. That's what I am going to do from now on.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Anyway, I learned that I'd better get rid of Lee's or the Local church's teachings, spend time reading and studying the word of God. It's much more profitable and easier than figuring out if I am on the right track. That's what I am going to do from now on.

Good decision. By reading the Bible, you can be confident you’re on the right track.

Nell

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

Thanks Bible-believer for your reply. I've read and pondered it a few times and cannot disagree with any of it. Not that I was looking to find something to disagree with but rather to see if your understanding of 1 Cor 12:12 was similar to mine. So, rather than presume that it is I'd like to return to that verse and in future posts return to your excellent and relevant points in your reply.

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

This verse states that our human physical body is like the Christ. We have a head and a body ...so also Christ. His body here refers to His corporate Body... the many members of Christ. The Head (Christ) and His Body (all the believers) are one in the same way that our head and bodies are also one. They are not only connected and attached but also are intrinsically one life and one living.

Do you agree with my understanding of this verse?

Drake

Notice that your conclusion is nowhere found in 1 Corinthians 12. The full portion of verses that you pulled verse 12 from is about distinctions of members, variety in the body of Christ, and distinctions of gifts.

That's the comparison. That's the metaphor. (The exact opposite of "having no individual distinction" that Witness Lee taught concerning blending using that portion of Scripture, for the record).

If you speak of "intrinsically one life" you are going beyond what scripture says in that portion. "Life" is nowhere mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12. The analogy to the human body is to show the variety of members working together as one, and stops well short of some kind of a head/body shared life.

Our life is hidden with Christ in God. Christ lives in us. But we don't have "the life of Christ", and have to stretch scripture past recognition to make that claim in order to leapfrog into a "four-in-one God". As I mentioned previously in this thread, errors quickly build upon errors.

If you google "we have the life of Christ", most of the search results are LSM related blogs or sites. The others are a small, random scattering of returns. Notice that Galatians 2:20 says that Christ lives in us. This is a completely different thing from the Lee claim that "we have the life of Christ".

Notice that? Lee uses similar sounding biblical words to what is in scripture. But words and grammar mean something, and his juggling the words in a big blur in front of our eyes changes the meaning. Keep your eyes on what the Word says!

Trapped

[GraceAlone]

I came across this article recently and thought it might be pertinent to the discussion of eisegesis vs. exegesis, taking verses out of context, etc.

“Never Read a Bible Verse.”

https://www.str.org/w/never-read-a-b...nd%20uplifting.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Anyway, I learned that I'd better get rid of Lee's or the Local church's teachings, spend time reading and studying the word of God. It's much more profitable and easier than figuring out if I am on the right track. That's what I am going to do from now on.

With deft use of the cute little Quote button I chime in....

Bible-believer... okay... let's read and study the word of God. If I teach anything that you do not believe to be in the Bible then call that out and let's compare scripture with scripture. I'll do the same.

Obviously, 1 Cor 12:12 does not completely define what is meant by the title phrase... but in my view it provides clarity on the principle.... here is what I mean.

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

Paul uses the physical human body to express the spiritual reality concerning Christ. Our head and body are one by an organic physiology and animated by our human life. Our physical body only functions because of the human life and without it we don't have a functioning body ..... rather there is only a corpse. In Paul's analogy of the human body he did not in this verse use the words "human life" but since he speaks of a functioning body then it is already presumed. A corpse has no ability to function and Paul saw no need to explain here that a human body must have life in order to function. The Corinthians knew that else Paul's analogy would make no sense. From the other verses you quoted about the Spirit I assume you and I are in agreement about this most basic and fundamental teaching of the Bible ----that He came that we might have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10) and Christ is our life (Col 3:4) and for us to live is Christ (Phil 1:21)

If this basic truth is not understood then most everything in the New Testament would be closed to us because everything that pertains to the Christian life, the growth in the divine life, fruit bearing, the Body of Christ, and God's purpose issue from the seed of divine life that then grows in life (Matt 13:23). That began with our regeneration.

Bible-believer, assuming we are in agreement about the the testimony of the Scripture concerning the life of Christ in us (if not we can backup before going forward) then we can examine how Paul applies the analogy of the human body to Christ. Just as a human body has a head and a body and lives and functions as an organic whole according to the life within so also the Christ has a Head and a Body, functions according to the life of Christ, grows with the growth of God.

According to Eph 4:16 only that which issues out of the Head may be considered the Body of Christ.

I'll pause to hear your point of view on this so far. Based on your previous response I am certain that we are in agreement on this part. But again, I do not want to presume.

Thanks,
Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

Paul uses the physical human body to express the spiritual reality concerning Christ. Our head and body are one by an organic physiology and animated by our human life. Our physical body only functions because of the human life and without it we don't have a functioning body ..... rather there is only a corpse. In Paul's analogy of the human body he did not in this verse use the words "human life" but since he speaks of a functioning body then it is already presumed. A corpse has no ability to function and Paul saw no need to explain here that a human body must have life in order to function.

Paul's thought here has little to do with dead corpses and those with organic physiology and animated by our human life. You are missing the forest from the trees. You miss the message by doing this deep dive into some obscure esoteric message that needed to be "recovered" by the your favorite ministry in Anaheim.

Paul's message is simple. The body of Christ has tremendous diversity. Whether the numerous gifts of the Spirit, the diverse ministries in the body of Christ orchestrated by the Lord, or the many services and operations arranged by God Himself, all are needed and absolutely necessary. Paul emphatically reminded the Corinthians that even the less comely "problem cases" fit this category too. Then Paul points them to God's love, without which everything else is vain.

Which reminds me of why I left the Recovery in 2005. The Blendeds had decided to excommunicate us for endless petty differences. The same kinds of meany matters that plagued Corinth. Did LSM learn from Corinth or Paul's letter to the church there? Absolutely not! We were 99.94% identical to other LC's, but that was not good enough for the Blendeds. Instead they send their agents from DCP to file lawsuits and divide the LC's in the Midwest over men. Each member here was forced to decide, "am I of W. Lee, or am I of T. Chu," just like the Corinthians.

To my dear brother Drake, please read Paul's letter to Corinth. Listen to what he is writing. Please purge out all the leaven of Lee's teachings which conflict with Paul's truth. Stop micro-reading into verses and get the big picture. Read the context. Get the big picture: the Love of God!

Sincerely in Christ,

Your brother Ohio

[Ohio]

How I wish LSM would read this great message from W. Nee:

The Church of God includes a vast number of believers, living at different times, and scattered in different places throughout the earth. How has it come about that all have been united into one universal Church? With such differences in age, social position, education, background, outlook, and temperament, how could all these people become one church? What is the secret of the oneness of the saints? The Spirit who dwells in the heart of every believer is one Spirit; therefore, He makes all those in whom He dwells to be one, even as He Himself is one.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

With deft use of the cute little Quote button I chime in....

Bible-believer... okay... let's read and study the word of God. If I teach anything that you do not believe to be in the Bible then call that out and let's compare scripture with scripture. I'll do the same.

Obviously, 1 Cor 12:12 does not completely define what is meant by the title phrase... but in my view it provides clarity on the principle.... here is what I mean.

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

Paul uses the physical human body to express the spiritual reality concerning Christ. Our head and body are one by an organic physiology and animated by our human life. Our physical body only functions because of the human life and without it we don't have a functioning body ..... rather there is only a corpse. In Paul's analogy of the human body he did not in this verse use the words "human life" but since he speaks of a functioning body then it is already presumed. A corpse has no ability to function and Paul saw no need to explain here that a human body must have life in order to function. The Corinthians knew that else Paul's analogy would make no sense. From the other verses you quoted about the Spirit I assume you and I are in agreement about this most basic and fundamental teaching of the Bible ----that He came that we might have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10) and Christ is our life (Col 3:4) and for us to live is Christ (Phil 1:21)

If this basic truth is not understood then most everything in the New Testament would be closed to us because everything that pertains to the Christian life, the growth in the divine life, fruit bearing, the Body of Christ, and God's purpose issue from the seed of divine life that then grows in life (Matt 13:23). That began with our regeneration.

Bible-believer, assuming we are in agreement about the the testimony of the Scripture concerning the life of Christ in us (if not we can backup before going forward) then we can examine how Paul applies the analogy of the human body to Christ. Just as a human body has a head and a body and lives and functions as an organic whole according to the life within so also the Christ has a Head and a Body, functions according to the life of Christ, grows with the growth of God.

According to Eph 4:16 only that which issues out of the Head may be considered the Body of Christ.

I'll pause to hear your point of view on this so far. Based on your previous response I am certain that we are in agreement on this part. But again, I do not want to presume.

Thanks,
Drake

Once again, you are making statements separate from Scripture and then overlaying them on top of a portion of Scripture that is not about that statement.

You speak of the the head and body living and functioning "as an organic whole according to the life within". 1 Corinthians 12 never mentions a life within, or even Christ as the head. The word "head" appears only once and it is not in reference to Christ, but just in reference to being just another part of the example body (although Christ IS the head as taught elsewhere, it is just not the point in this portion). Paul does not mention the shared life creating an "organic whole" or anyone functioning "according to the life within".

I could easily say "Paul did not need to mention that a human body lives and functions as an organic whole.......but it is obvious that any infection in the body could spread to the head too, so we need to make sure we as the body are healthy so we don't spread gangrene to Christ the head and cause Christ to die with the body. Paul didn't say that, or allude to it, or mention it at all, but it was obvious and so Paul didn't even need to say it.....just accept what I say!"

But Paul isn't talking about any of that. Just like he's not talking about what you are stating.

Paul is speaking of distinctions and varieties of members and gifts.

Take an analogy outside of it's biblical bounds and you get deviated teachings. Even if it sounds good.

Paul is saying just as a human body has many parts and is still one body, so Christ is the same way - His body has many parts with much variety and distinction one from the other, and yet is still one body.

Find another verse to prop up the four-in-one God teaching.

Trapped

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

With deft use of the cute little Quote button I chime in....

Bible-believer... okay... let's read and study the word of God. If I teach anything that you do not believe to be in the Bible then call that out and let's compare scripture with scripture. I'll do the same.

Obviously, 1 Cor 12:12 does not completely define what is meant by the title phrase... but in my view it provides clarity on the principle.... here is what I mean.

12"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

Paul uses the physical human body to express the spiritual reality concerning Christ. Our head and body are one by an organic physiology and animated by our human life. Our physical body only functions because of the human life and without it we don't have a functioning body ..... rather there is only a corpse. In Paul's analogy of the human body he did not in this verse use the words "human life" but since he speaks of a functioning body then it is already presumed. A corpse has no ability to function and Paul saw no need to explain here that a human body must have life in order to function. The Corinthians knew that else Paul's analogy would make no sense. From the other verses you quoted about the Spirit I assume you and I are in agreement about this most basic and fundamental teaching of the Bible ----that He came that we might have life and have it abundantly (John 10:10) and Christ is our life (Col 3:4) and for us to live is Christ (Phil 1:21)

If this basic truth is not understood then most everything in the New Testament would be closed to us because everything that pertains to the Christian life, the growth in the divine life, fruit bearing, the Body of Christ, and God's purpose issue from the seed of divine life that then grows in life (Matt 13:23). That began with our regeneration.

Bible-believer, assuming we are in agreement about the the testimony of the Scripture concerning the life of Christ in us (if not we can backup before going forward) then we can examine how Paul applies the analogy of the human body to Christ. Just as a human body has a head and a body and lives and functions as an organic whole according to the life within so also the Christ has a Head and a Body, functions according to the life of Christ, grows with the growth of God.

According to Eph 4:16 only that which issues out of the Head may be considered the Body of Christ.

I'll pause to hear your point of view on this so far. Based on your previous response I am certain that we are in agreement on this part. But again, I do not want to presume.

Thanks,
Drake

Hi, Drake,
1. Sorry, I don't see your argument relate to the topic of this post.
2. The context of 1Cor.12 is on the gifts of the Spirit. Chapters 12–14, as a unit, deal with the gifts of the Body of Christ. It starts with 12:1, “Now concerning spiritual gifts,” and ends with 14:40, “Let all things be done decently and in order.”
Every member functions according to his/her gifts, so "whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." That is individual members growing so that the Body will grow into “maturity” (in the sense of Christ-likeness).

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi, Drake,
1. Sorry, I don't see your argument relate to the topic of this post.
2. The context of 1Cor.12 is on the gifts of the Spirit. Chapters 12–14, as a unit, deal with the gifts of the Body of Christ. It starts with 12:1, “Now concerning spiritual gifts,” and ends with 14:40, “Let all things be done decently and in order.”
Every member functions according to his/her gifts, so "whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." That is individual members growing so that the Body will grow into “maturity” (in the sense of Christ-likeness).

Hi Bible-believer,

You don't see how my argument relates to the topic of the post because of one very important reason........ I haven't done a very good job of explaining it! But be patient and maybe I'll get there.

I Corinthians 12:12 in and of itself does not explain the phrase "the Processed, Four-in-One God". It does however by way of analogy show how Christ has a Head and a Body just like our head and body. The phrase "...so also is..." confirms that. v12 does not use the words "life" but it is understood ...for the body without life is a corpse. Just as John 15 speaks about the Vine and branches, the word "life" is not mentioned but it is understood that the branches are organically one with the vine... it is a life union. So with the Christ - the Head and the Body.

You mentioned chapters 12-14 and said "That is individual members growing so that the Body will grow into “maturity” (in the sense of Christ-likeness)"


Okay, ... but how?

I Corinthians 12: 4-11

"But there are distinctions of gifts, but the same Spirit; And there a distinctions of ministries, yet the same Lord; and there are distinctions of operations, but the same God, who operates all things in all. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is profitable. For to one through the Spirit a word of wisdom is given, and to another a word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit; to a different one faith in the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing in the one Spirit, and to another operations of works of power, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits; to a different one various kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues. But the one and the same Spirit operates all these things, distributing to each one respectively even as He purposes."

The Body grows to maturity by the Spirit, carries out its ministries by the Lord, and it is God who operates all things in all. The Body of Christ functions through and according to the same Spirit in the one Spirit. It is the one and same Spirit that operates all these things by that operation becomes the Spirit is manifested.

By these verses it is clearly stated that the Spirit, the Lord, and God operate in His many believers in an organic union to bring the many members of the Body of Christ into their God-given functions (gifts). The "Christ-likeness" you mention is really a manifestation of the Spirit and not just an imitation. It's not just something outward but something that issues out from God's operation within.

Do you concur with that explanation, Bible-believer?

Thanks,
Drake

[Nell]

Drake,

Your argument is off topic. No further explanation necessary. Please start another thread if you want to continue. We will move your “off” posts from this thread. Your alternative is to review the OP and post accordingly.

BTW, please tone down your “teachie” approach to addressing others. This is a discussion forum, not a lecture hall.

Nell

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

Drake,

Your argument is off topic. No further explanation necessary. Please start another thread if you want to continue. We will move your “off” posts from this thread. Your alternative is to review the OP and post accordingly.

BTW, please tone down your “teachie” approach to addressing others. This is a discussion forum, not a lecture hall.

Nell

Nell,

This is the answer to the question in the base note. The scriptures in I Cor 12 substantiate the phrase Bible-believer asked about and provide an explanation from scripture as he sought..... and these are only a few of the scriptures that, given time, we will examine.... if the forum provides the liberty to do so.

Thanks
Drake

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Nell,

This is the answer to the question in the base note. The scriptures in I Cor 12 substantiate the phrase Bible-believer asked about and provide an explanation from scripture as he sought..... and these are only a few of the scriptures that, given time, we will examine.... if the forum provides the liberty to do so.

Thanks
Drake

Bible-believer? Does this cryptic response make any sense to you?

Please hold your posts until Bible-believer responds.


Nell

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hi Bible-believer,

You don't see how my argument relates to the topic of the post because of one very important reason........ I haven't done a very good job of explaining it! But be patient and maybe I'll get there.

I Corinthians 12:12 in and of itself does not explain the phrase "the Processed, Four-in-One God". It does however by way of analogy show how Christ has a Head and a Body just like our head and body. The phrase "...so also is..." confirms that. v12 does not use the words "life" but it is understood ...for the body without life is a corpse. Just as John 15 speaks about the Vine and branches, the word "life" is not mentioned but it is understood that the branches are organically one with the vine... it is a life union. So with the Christ - the Head and the Body.

You mentioned chapters 12-14 and said "That is individual members growing so that the Body will grow into “maturity” (in the sense of Christ-likeness)"


Okay, ... but how?

I Corinthians 12: 4-11

"But there are distinctions of gifts, but the same Spirit; And there a distinctions of ministries, yet the same Lord; and there are distinctions of operations, but the same God, who operates all things in all. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is profitable. For to one through the Spirit a word of wisdom is given, and to another a word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit; to a different one faith in the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing in the one Spirit, and to another operations of works of power, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits; to a different one various kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues. But the one and the same Spirit operates all these things, distributing to each one respectively even as He purposes."

The Body grows to maturity by the Spirit, carries out its ministries by the Lord, and it is God who operates all things in all. The Body of Christ functions through and according to the same Spirit in the one Spirit. It is the one and same Spirit that operates all these things by that operation becomes the Spirit is manifested.

By these verses it is clearly stated that the Spirit, the Lord, and God operate in His many believers in an organic union to bring the many members of the Body of Christ into their God-given functions (gifts). The "Christ-likeness" you mention is really a manifestation of the Spirit and not just an imitation. It's not just something outward but something that issues out from God's operation within.

Do you concur with that explanation, Bible-believer?

Thanks,
Drake

Hi, Drake,
Rom.8:17 "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. "
A pastor said if we did any good, it's not because of ourselves, but the indwelling Spirit who guided us into goodness. We should give the credit to Him, and I Amen to that.
I appreciate your explanation and understand your points. However, every saved Christian has God's operation within doesn't mean every Christian is God. That's two different things. Things different are not equal.

My question is not aimed at Br. Lee, but the teaching. I notice the method of his teaching, sometimes, was radical. i.g. "Four-in-one God".
In an LSM publication, A Deeper Study of the Divine Dispensing (p. 54), Lee states, ”My burden is to show you clearly that God’s economy and plan is to make Himself man and to make us, His created beings, God.” On page 53 we read, “We are born of God; hence, in this sense, we are God.”

To make radical statements and then balance them elsewhere in his teachings is not a good way, it's against the idea of “say what you mean and mean what you say.”
We can apply Bible verses to daily life devotionally, but when comes to the doctrines, we have to be careful not to make the Bible say things it doesn't say.

Br. Lee said that's his burden. Is his burden equal to God's burden? I am not sure. So I'd better ask the indwelling Spirit, the Spirit of truth, for the answer. He will guide me into all truth.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Nell

Bible-believer? Does this cryptic response make any sense to you?

Please hold your posts until Bible-believer responds.


Nell

I need to admit that "I am not good a hitter when facing breaking balls."

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I need to admit that "I am not good a hitter when facing breaking balls."

More like you’re facing off topic wild pitches!

If the discussion has run its course, we can close it. Your call.

Nell

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Nell

More like you’re facing off topic wild pitches!

If the discussion has run its course, we can close it. Your call.

Nell

With the guidance of the Holy Spirit and everyone's contribution, I have the answer. This post serves its purpose. Thank you.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

They teach
"The Bible reveals that God is immutable in His essence and that God has been processed in His economy. As the processed God, the Triune God has passed through crucial and interdependent steps in the divine economy in order to dispense Himself into His chosen and redeemed people…God’s process ultimately is related to becoming flesh through incarnation and becoming the life-giving Spirit through resurrection."
Our Unchanging, Processed God

“the Christ in whom we believe is the center of the Triune God.” Because of this, “the Triune God became mingled with man… He is not only the Triune God but also a man… He is the Triune God mingled with man. Therefore, He is the Triune God-man."
Witness Lee, The All-Inclusive Spirit of Christ
(Los Angeles: The Stream Publishers, 1969), pp. 8-11


It's like in this process is the Triune God becoming flesh. Jesus Christ is not the Second Person of the Trinity. Instead, “the Christ in whom we believe is the center of the Triune God.” It's like in this process is Jesus, the Triune God-man becoming the Spirit. If so, does it means they are not separate "three Persons", but just one? If so, does it means they are not separate "three Persons", but just one? and if so, is the teaching of Triune God the same as the Trinity?

Maybe I didn't make myself clear on this matter, but you can see how confused I am about this teaching.

Hopefully I can squeeze this post in before the thread is closed. I had intended to circle back to your sentence that "It's like in this process is Jesus, the Triune God-man becoming the Spirit" but hadn't gotten the chance to yet.

My first thought is about the first excerpt you included from Lee's Our Unchanging, Processed God. Notice that Lee deftly says that God is "unchanging" and also "processed".

This doesn't work. To process something by definition means it undergoes a change. Lee gets around it by saying God is unchanging in His essence but processed in His economy......but.......huh? To me, this is like saying I'm faithfully married when my eyes are open, but commit adultery when my eyes are closed, and yet try to claim that I'm faithfully married the whole time. It's an irreconcilable contradiction.

God is God. He just is. Inside of time, outside of time, in His essence, in His economy. He is unchanging. He cannot be unchanging in His essence while be changing in His economy and still be said to be the God who does not change.

So that's my first thought about Lee's assertion that God became Jesus who became the life-giving Spirit. The Bible is false if Lee's assertion is true. "Become" means change. But God is unchanging.

Many people inside and out of the church have tried to take Lee or the ministry to task about that teaching because it's clearly modalistic, but Lee would just speak out of the other side of his mouth and claim the that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are ever co-existing and eternal even though he also taught they successively became each other.....both of which can't be true.......and that is not the sign of someone speaking the truth of God.

My other thought was about last part of that excerpt about becoming the life-giving Spirit. This has been discussed in detail very well in several other threads somewhere on the forum, but we have to look at 1 Corinthians 15 to see how badly Lee bungled this teaching.

Of course, 1 Corinthians 15:45 is, So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being” ; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

Witness Lee tried to say that there is only one Spirit that gives life - the Holy Spirit, and so the life-giving spirit in this verse could only be the Holy Spirit.

If I remember right, He called everyone else heretical for even thinking that the life-giving Spirit could be something other than the Holy Spirit. Two Spirits! How absurd! he said.

But as you said earlier in this thread, a text without context is a pretext (as well as oftentimes a prooftext), and the context of 1 Corinthians 15 is about what kind of resurrected body we will have. The chapter very clearly contrasts our current natural bodies with our future resurrected spiritual bodies. Since Jesus was the first one to resurrect with a spiritual body, and Jesus is the one through whom we have eternal life, and Jesus is the life, He is therefore a "life-giving spirit" (not the Holy Spirit).

It's really that simple.

God is Spirit. Jesus resurrected with a spiritual body. We have the Holy Spirit. There's a lot of spiritual things going on in the unseen, spiritual realm. We can speak of a spirit and not be bound to mean the Holy Spirit every time.

So God did not become Jesus who became the life-giving Spirit. Lee was wrong here too. Shocker.

Hopefully that helps address some of the confusion you initially posted about.

Trapped

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by GraceAlone

I came across this article recently and thought it might be pertinent to the discussion of eisegesis vs. exegesis, taking verses out of context, etc.

“Never Read a Bible Verse.”

https://www.str.org/w/never-read-a-b...nd%20uplifting.

Great article. Thanks for sharing!

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I need to admit that "I am not good a hitter when facing breaking balls."

Dear Bible-believer,

I would characterize my pitches as more of a slow motion lob that drifts and floats toward home plate with frequent pauses along the way to consider whether the pitch is still heading in the right direction.

I know that can be frustrating to some but it is merely an artifact of the way I think about matters like this and therefore how I converse.

I don't think we have really touched this matter thoroughly in our brief conversation. However, I wish you well in your search for truth according to scripture not only for this important subject but for so many other wonderful and great truths revealed to us by of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Be safe!

Drake

[Drake]

Trapped> "So God did not become Jesus who became the life-giving Spirit"

Trapped, this comment goes to the heart of the Christian faith and I propose to continue it in a new thread since this is about to be shut down. Through lack of skills on my part I only saw how to open a new thread in Introductions and Testimonies but this conversation fits neither of those definitions

I propose a frank and respectful conversation between us... by frank I mean we speak straightforwardly our agreements or disagreements without attributing motive, objecting to style differences, and allowing some liberty to bring in relevant aspects without the concern about wandering "off-topic" (it will happen but we can manage the thread together on that aspect). By respectful, I mean understanding that we each hold points of view, and some with conviction, and that we allow the expression of the viewpoint without disparaging each other with an agreed objective to present scriptural and reasoned arguments with a view to benefiting the understanding of each other and the reader... whether we ever come to agreement in this life.

I believe this meets with the original intent and spirit of the forum. However, I might have missed a change that occurred along the way since then.

Let me know if you are willing.

Thanks
Drake

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

Trapped> "So God did not become Jesus who became the life-giving Spirit"

Trapped, this comment goes to the heart of the Christian faith and I propose to continue it in a new thread since this is about to be shut down. Through lack of skills on my part I only saw how to open a new thread in Introductions and Testimonies but this conversation fits neither of those definitions

I propose a frank and respectful conversation between us... by frank I mean we speak straightforwardly our agreements or disagreements without attributing motive, objecting to style differences, and allowing some liberty to bring in relevant aspects without the concern about wandering "off-topic" (it will happen but we can manage the thread together on that aspect). By respectful, I mean understanding that we each hold points of view, and some with conviction, and that we allow the expression of the viewpoint without disparaging each other with an agreed objective to present scriptural and reasoned arguments with a view to benefiting the understanding of each other and the reader... whether we ever come to agreement in this life.

I believe this meets with the original intent and spirit of the forum. However, I might have missed a change that occurred along the way since then.

Let me know if you are willing.

Thanks
Drake

Drake,

You are a member of this forum and are welcome to start a new thread with my comment as the topic. To be honest, there may be another thread on it already. I don't have the time to commit to full participation or to managing a thread with you; I can only post as I have the inclination to do so, like on any other thread. Others should also be able to have the full ability to participate, just like any other thread too. I guess I'm saying....do what you want and I or anyone else will participate if or when I/they feel to do so.

Trapped

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Drake,

You are a member of this forum and are welcome to start a new thread with my comment as the topic. To be honest, there may be another thread on it already. I don't have the time to commit to full participation or to managing a thread with you; I can only post as I have the inclination to do so, like on any other thread. Others should also be able to have the full ability to participate, just like any other thread too. I guess I'm saying....do what you want and I or anyone else will participate if or when I/they feel to do so.

Trapped

Yes. That’s the way it works. Members are free to post, or not.

Nell

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Drake,

You are a member of this forum and are welcome to start a new thread with my comment as the topic. To be honest, there may be another thread on it already. I don't have the time to commit to full participation or to managing a thread with you; I can only post as I have the inclination to do so, like on any other thread. Others should also be able to have the full ability to participate, just like any other thread too. I guess I'm saying....do what you want and I or anyone else will participate if or when I/they feel to do so.

Trapped

That was a genius answer to a baited request!

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Hopefully I can squeeze this post in before the thread is closed. I had intended to circle back to your sentence that "It's like in this process is Jesus, the Triune God-man becoming the Spirit" but hadn't gotten the chance to yet.

My first thought is about the first excerpt you included from Lee's Our Unchanging, Processed God. Notice that Lee deftly says that God is "unchanging" and also "processed".

This doesn't work. To process something by definition means it undergoes a change. Lee gets around it by saying God is unchanging in His essence but processed in His economy......but.......huh? To me, this is like saying I'm faithfully married when my eyes are open, but commit adultery when my eyes are closed, and yet try to claim that I'm faithfully married the whole time. It's an irreconcilable contradiction.

God is God. He just is. Inside of time, outside of time, in His essence, in His economy. He is unchanging. He cannot be unchanging in His essence while be changing in His economy and still be said to be the God who does not change.

So that's my first thought about Lee's assertion that God became Jesus who became the life-giving Spirit. The Bible is false if Lee's assertion is true. "Become" means change. But God is unchanging.

Many people inside and out of the church have tried to take Lee or the ministry to task about that teaching because it's clearly modalistic, but Lee would just speak out of the other side of his mouth and claim the that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are ever co-existing and eternal even though he also taught they successively became each other.....both of which can't be true.......and that is not the sign of someone speaking the truth of God.

My other thought was about last part of that excerpt about becoming the life-giving Spirit. This has been discussed in detail very well in several other threads somewhere on the forum, but we have to look at 1 Corinthians 15 to see how badly Lee bungled this teaching.

Of course, 1 Corinthians 15:45 is, So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being” ; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

Witness Lee tried to say that there is only one Spirit that gives life - the Holy Spirit, and so the life-giving spirit in this verse could only be the Holy Spirit.

If I remember right, He called everyone else heretical for even thinking that the life-giving Spirit could be something other than the Holy Spirit. Two Spirits! How absurd! he said.

But as you said earlier in this thread, a text without context is a pretext (as well as oftentimes a prooftext), and the context of 1 Corinthians 15 is about what kind of resurrected body we will have. The chapter very clearly contrasts our current natural bodies with our future resurrected spiritual bodies. Since Jesus was the first one to resurrect with a spiritual body, and Jesus is the one through whom we have eternal life, and Jesus is the life, He is therefore a "life-giving spirit" (not the Holy Spirit).

It's really that simple.

God is Spirit. Jesus resurrected with a spiritual body. We have the Holy Spirit. There's a lot of spiritual things going on in the unseen, spiritual realm. We can speak of a spirit and not be bound to mean the Holy Spirit every time.

So God did not become Jesus who became the life-giving Spirit. Lee was wrong here too. Shocker.

Hopefully that helps address some of the confusion you initially posted about.

Trapped

Thank you. It's clear.

Regarding my question, I consulted a brother. He said that Lee had his own set of expositions, but that set of expositions often lacked biblical facts and logic and were often crude conclusions and self-righteous opinions. Lee had created many "terms" and many "adjectives" to illustrate his point of view. That repetitive and lengthy vocabulary often makes people fall into his frame before they have a chance to figure it out.
Therefore, the best way is to get out of Lee's frame and hold on to the Bible itself. I agree with him.

As you said, "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible.

As simple as that.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Thank you. It's clear.

As you said, "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible.

As simple as that.

Bible-believer, is it that simple according to the scriptures?

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

If "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible then how do you interpret this verse?

Thanks,
Drake

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bible-believer, is it that simple according to the scriptures?

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

If "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible then how do you interpret this verse?

Thanks,
Drake

Drake,

It’s your verse. What is your interpretation? You go first.

Nell

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

Drake,

It’s your verse. What is your interpretation? You go first.

Nell

Sure. Nell.

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

The unchanging eternal Word, who is God, and the Creator (1:1-3) became a man in time with flesh (a sinless human life, human nature, human body, human soul, and human spirit).

Through this process, for the very first time, a Wonderful and Unique Person, with two natures (divine and human) began in time over 2100 years ago.. Jesus, our Lord and Savior.

Drake

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bible-believer, is it that simple according to the scriptures?

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

If "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible then how do you interpret this verse?

Thanks,
Drake

Hey Drake, what would Witness Lee say about the “four-in-one” statement of God’s nature if he was on earth today? That is the topic of this sub-forum, right?

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bible-believer, is it that simple according to the scriptures?

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

If "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible then how do you interpret this verse?

Thanks,
Drake

Hey Drake, for the sake of argument let’s assume that the Word becoming flesh means that God can change and was processed. Now, please take us to the destination you would like to arrive. And please tell us why this is important to you? Just wondering.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

Sure. Nell.

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

The unchanging eternal Word, who is God, and the Creator (1:1-3)....

This is a misleadingly incomplete description.

John 1:1-3
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made.

Colossians 1:16
For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.

Hebrews 1:1-2
1 On many past occasions and in many different ways, God spoke to our fathers through the prophets.
2 But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe.

1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.

You speak of the Son of God and say "the Word, who is God, and is the Creator". But that's not accurate.

The Bible says, repeatedly, God created everything in, through, and for the Son of God.

All things came FROM God the Father, and we exist FOR God the Father. But all things came THROUGH Jesus, and we exist THROUGH Jesus.

By collapsing distinctions you bring in confusion.

Originally Posted by Drake

...became a man in time with flesh (a sinless human life, human nature, human body, human soul, and human spirit).

But John 1 says the Word was WITH God and the Word was God. So God was with God? And both of those times "God" has to mean the same thing? This makes no sense.

Notice that the Word being "with" God is stated twice.

John 1:1-3
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made.

This is why I am bound to question what the right translation for "the Word was God" means, or if "God" there is different from the "God" the Word was with. Jesus Himself said He had glory WITH the Father before anything was created (John 17:5). Jesus didn't say He WAS God in glory, but that He was WITH God in glory. He was WITH God, like John 1 says.

To me, this is why there has to be distinction between what "God" Jesus is and what "God" the Father God is. Otherwise we get "God became a man", when the Biblical record is actually:

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

God didn't become a man. The Son of God became a man. The Word, the SON of God, became flesh.

Not God. God is the one who sent His Son. God is the one who sacrificed His Son for us. God did not send Himself. God gave His only begotten Son.

Lee's ministry put God and the Son of God in a vice grip together and smushed them to the point where the necessary distinctions between the two were obliterated. And in so doing, Lee merrily skipped down the deviated path towards his self-created "four in one God".

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bible-believer, is it that simple according to the scriptures?

John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

If "Unchanged" and "Processed" are incompatible then how do you interpret this verse?

Thanks,
Drake

Hi, Drake,
Here are some verses sharing with you.

John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
1Tim.3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by HERn

Hey Drake, for the sake of argument let’s assume that the Word becoming flesh means that God can change and was processed. Now, please take us to the destination you would like to arrive. And please tell us why this is important to you? Just wondering.

So he can take us to that verse we used to sing,

"God is processed, this we know,
For the Bible tells us so."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So he can take us to that verse we used to sing,

"God is processed, this we know,
For the Bible tells us so."

I don't remember singing that in any locality I was in. Not saying it wasn't sung or that I didn't sing it . . . I just don't remember it. (I have a waiver in such remembrances as I'm over 65 )

Gosh, but isn't hindsight so clear about these things? So many things we wouldn't tolerate now, that we just swallowed and ignored before!

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Hi, Drake,
Here are some verses sharing with you.

John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
1Tim.3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Hi Bible-believer,

Great verses... thanks for sharing. How do you apply these verses to the "Unchanged" and "Processed" statement you made? And do you agree or disagree with my interpretation (#102) on John 1:14? If not, what Bible verses contradict my interpretation and how?

Thanks
Drake

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Trapped

This is why I am bound to question what the right translation for "the Word was God" means, or if "God" there is different from the "God" the Word was with.....

To me, this is why there has to be distinction between what "God" Jesus is and what "God" the Father God is.....

God didn't become a man. The Son of God became a man. The Word, the SON of God, became flesh.

Not God. God is the one who sent His Son. God is the one who sacrificed His Son for us. God did not send Himself. God gave His only begotten Son.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Trapped,

John 1:1 shows distinction but not difference. The distinction is that two are mentioned -God and the Word. However, there is not a difference because the Word and God are God. This phrase "and the Word was God" states the proper Godhead of the Second of the Trinity.

Verse 14 also reveals that the Word was the Son.

John 1:14
"And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only Begotten from the Father) full of grace and reality"

This also confirms v1 that the Word, the Second in the Divine Trinity, is the Son, as does v18.

John 1:18
"No one has ever seen God, the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him"

There is an abundance of additional scripture that also shows clearly that the Son is equal to the Father in the Godhead and is fully God and really man. Here's one that Bible-believer just posted:

"1Tim.3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

This confirms the meaning of John 1:14 "and the Word became flesh"... The Word, the Son, was with God, and was God, the second of the Trinity, and became a man (flesh).

Drake

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Trapped,

John 1:1 shows distinction but not difference. The distinction is that two are mentioned -God and the Word. However, there is not a difference because the Word and God are God. This phrase "and the Word was God" states the proper Godhead of the Second of the Trinity.

Verse 14 also reveals that the Word was the Son.

John 1:14
"And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only Begotten from the Father) full of grace and reality"

This also confirms v1 that the Word is the Son, the Second in the Divine Trinity, as does v18.

John 1:18
"No one has ever seen God, the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him"

There is an abundance of additional scripture that also shows clearly that the Son is equal to the Father and is fully God and really man. Here's one that Bible-believer just posted:

"1Tim.3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

This confirms the meaning of John 1:14 "and the Word became flesh"... The Word, the Son, was with God, and was God, the second of the Trinity, and became a man (flesh).

Drake

How does this address this topic:
Re: Is the Processed, Four-in-One God a sound doctrine?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

How does this address this topic:
Re: Is the Processed, Four-in-One God a sound doctrine?

Trapped linked them:

"Lee's ministry put God and the Son of God in a vice grip together and smushed them to the point where the necessary distinctions between the two were obliterated. And in so doing, Lee merrily skipped down the deviated path towards his self-created "four in one God""

We are talking about the "smushed" part of his allegation.

The Bible is clear from the scriptures provided that the Word, the Son, is God... no smushing going on. However, Trapped was right to link the two thoughts....If there is no clarity on the Word as God becoming flesh then the "four-in-one God" will be misunderstood. This thread demonstrates that. I am here to provide my view on why the "four-in-one God" is not only sound doctrine but has a solid foundation in scripture.

Drake

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hi Bible-believer,

Great verses... thanks for sharing. How do you apply these verses to the "Unchanged" and "Processed" statement you made? And do you agree or disagree with my interpretation (#102) on John 1:14? If not, what Bible verses contradict my interpretation and how?

Thanks
Drake

May I ask you a question?
Is Jehovah Jesus?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

The Bible is clear from the scriptures provided that the Word, the Son, is God... no smushing going on. However, Trapped was right to link the two thoughts....If there is no clarity on the Word as God becoming flesh then the "four-in-one God" will be misunderstood. This thread demonstrates that. I am here to provide my view on why the "four-in-one God" is not only sound doctrine but has a solid foundation in scripture.

Seriously? Have you also forgotten that Mary is the Mother of God?

The Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God.

Lee's error was to teach the Son is the Father, and the Son is the Spirit.

Then Lee furthered his system of error by saying the redeemed become God also.

[Trapped]

This post can go to the "Is God a Trinity?" thread if it better belongs there. I could easily post it in both locations. This four-in-one thread was the catalyst for my creating the Trinity thread anyway.

=================

As far as I can tell, what is going on here is directly related to the Trinity teaching. And this is why the Trinity teaching is so important to get right, or to correctly get that it is wrong (I'm still on the fence, but leaning one way that is probably obvious from what I've written on the other Trinity thread).

To call Jesus "God" without distinction of what "God" He is leads to unavoidable logical conclusions like Mary is the mother of God. But she wasn't. She was the human mother of the Son of God, who is Himself "god" but not "THE GOD".

The Trinity teaching conflates what "God" each person of the Trinity is into saying they are somehow the same God, and produces aberrant results like the one Drake is trying to lead us to.

To try to explain what I mean, look at Psalm 82. (It's not too long).

https://biblehub.com/bsb/psalms/82.htm#

Psalm 82:1 says:
God presides in the divine assembly; He renders judgment among the gods:

This is clearly a divine gathering. Not a human gathering. And it's not a meeting of the Trinity because the Trinity says each person is co-equal and in this passage God is clearly lighting into the other gods and is angry with them. A member of the Trinity, being God, does not fit with the accusations leveled at them rest of the chapter either. This is a divine gathering of gods with our one true God (and by this I do not mean the Triune God....I mean the Father, El, the one true God) over it all.

Verse one contains a reference to "God" (what we all think of when we say "God") and it contains a reference to "the gods".

If you look at the Hebrew for verse 1 (here: https://biblehub.com/text/psalms/82-1.htm), it is the exact same Hebrew word for both.

elohim

So when we see "elohim" it does not always have to mean the Most High God.

There was a divine assembly with a plurality of gods. elohim. There is a hierarchy, however, and God - our God - presided in this divine assembly. Our God is over all the gods in the spiritual realm.

This is why the Bible calls Him the "Most High", or "the one true". And "besides me there is no other like me". The God who is jealous over us is surrounded by non-pareil gods in the immaterial spiritual realm. This is why, in the OT, God was always trying to get His people to turn back from the other gods to Him, the one true God, the preeminent.

The letters G-O-D do not always have to mean the one true unique Creator God.

Jesus can therefore be "God" but NOT BE THE SAME GOD AS THE FATHER. As far as I can tell, this makes the Trinity construct, as well as pretty much all of the confusing, illogical aspects of it, fall apart. Jesus can be elohim, but the Father is the most high elohim.....God above all gods.

And as far as I can tell this leaves nothing left for Lee to create a four-in-one doctrine from either.

[awareness]

Great post Trapped.

[UntoHim]

Maybe this thread should be merged with the Is God A Trinity thread?
-

[Nell]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Maybe this thread should be merged with the Is God A Trinity thread?
-

Agreed. Bible-believer? What say ye?

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Drake

Trapped linked them:

"Lee's ministry put God and the Son of God in a vice grip together and smushed them to the point where the necessary distinctions between the two were obliterated. And in so doing, Lee merrily skipped down the deviated path towards his self-created "four in one God""

We are talking about the "smushed" part of his allegation.

The Bible is clear from the scriptures provided that the Word, the Son, is God... no smushing going on. However, Trapped was right to link the two thoughts....If there is no clarity on the Word as God becoming flesh then the "four-in-one God" will be misunderstood. This thread demonstrates that. I am here to provide my view on why the "four-in-one God" is not only sound doctrine but has a solid foundation in scripture.

Drake

Why is the “four-in-one God” teaching important?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Maybe this thread should be merged with the Is God A Trinity thread?
-

UntoHim, can you please clarify your theological position here?

You are now allowing discussions to proceed which may undermine classic trinity dogma. In the past you have regularly intervened to limit or to place such discussions in Alt-Views.

[UntoHim]

Well, first of all, since Alt-Views doesn't exist anymore, Nell and I have decided to give those with alternative understandings and interpretations a little latitude, so long as it is done "in the right spirit". Trapped came to us and asked us about starting such a thread. The main thing is that Trapped still believes that the Bible is the Word of God, so we do have a foundational base from which to make our arguments.
-

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

The Bible is clear from the scriptures provided that the Word, the Son, is God... no smushing going on. However, Trapped was right to link the two thoughts....If there is no clarity on the Word as God becoming flesh then the "four-in-one God" will be misunderstood. This thread demonstrates that. I am here to provide my view on why the "four-in-one God" is not only sound doctrine but has a solid foundation in scripture.

Drake

Drake,

We're not interested in your "view" or your "interpretation" of scripture. Give us the scripture and we will decide for ourselves how sound and solid Witness Lee's teaching is. On the face, the "four in one God" teaching is heresy.

Nell

[Drake]

Originally Posted by HERn

Why is the “four-in-one God” teaching important?

Eph 4:1-3, 12-16

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Eph 4:1-3, 12-16

Ephesians 4:1-3
King James Version
4 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
…
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

v. 14 is particularly revealing. Needs no interpretation.

Nell

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

Ephesians 4:1-3
King James Version
4 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
…
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

v. 14 is particularly revealing. Needs no interpretation.

Nell

Nell, once again, apparently the rest of us are supposed to believe that Drake sees things here that no one else can see.

I see the beautiful operation of love in the body of Christ under the Headship of Christ our Lord, the Son of God.

With all lowliness and meekness, the Apostles ministered and served God to this end.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nell, once again, apparently the rest of us are supposed to believe that Drake sees things here that no one else can see.

I see the beautiful operation of love in the body of Christ under the Headship of Christ our Lord, the Son of God.

With all lowliness and meekness, the Apostles ministered and served God to this end.

Me too. But…but…but…how do you ‘spose Drake spins v. 14?

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

[
John 1: 14a: "And the Word became flesh..."

Allow me to use this example,
The process of baking a cake: Mix eggs, flour, yeast, and water well, and then bake it. You have a cake. It's no longer flour, eggs, yeast, and water.
Lee's "processed God" is similar to the process above. He mixed the Triune God with man to form a four-in-one god. When he did that, he changed the attributes of God. God is omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent, but man is not. Lee's processed god is no longer the God in the Bible. To balance his radical statement, he said that God wants man to become "god" in life and in nature, but not in the Godhead. Without Godhead, it’s not God. So, what’s the point for him to come up with his terminology in the first place since he knows it's going to cause problems？ Why would he rather waste so much time expounding his "terminology?" Why wouldn't he save the precious time preaching the Gospel to win souls to God? I don't know. But I know why Lucifer falls. “Wise in his own conceit.”

You are stuck with Lee’s terminology inextricably. I wonder if you read the verses I shared with you.
John 1:1, In the beginning, was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
1Tim.3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

You asked me how to explain “John 1: 14a:”

Read through the verses:
“In the beginning was the Word… and the Word was God, and the Word was made flesh,” that is "the mystery of godliness": "God was manifest in the flesh…”.
It's not "PROCESS".

I have no opinion of Brother Lee; however, I am against Brother Lee's teachings become the focus of LR.

Nobody compares verses with verses anymore (I don't know your locality, but mine is.) Lee's explanation, remarks, and writings become the only standard. We can't "freely" share what we learn from reading and studying the Bible.
We can't say the seventh trumpet is not the trump of God because Br. Lee said it is. We can't say when a saint dies, his soul is with the Lord in heaven, for Br. Lee said it's not... We are not allowed to say anything against Lee's teachings or we are accused of "ambitious", "dividing the Body". We are facing a "my way or the high way" monarchy.

I asked, “Is the processed, four-in-one God a sound doctrine?” And my answer is NO. I will not participate in this discussion from now on since I know the answer for sure.

2Tim. 4:3 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;”

Btw, You didn’t answer my question, “Is Jehovah Jesus?” It might be the question is too simple and doesn't deserve an answer, or it’s too difficult that you don't have an answer. Look up your Recovery Version Bible, or the Life-study of John to see what Br. Lee said. The remark he wrote in the book of John chapter 1 is probably from Gerhard Kittel. He had no clue. He didn't even know 1John 5:7.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Btw, You didn’t answer my question, “Is Jehovah Jesus?” It might be the question is too simple and doesn't deserve an answer, or it’s too difficult that you don't have an answer.

Sorry Bible-believer, I overlooked this question. Thanks for calling my attention to it.

The answer is Yes! Jesus is Jehovah.

Jehovah means I Am. I Am that I Am.
Exodus 3:14-15
"And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. And He said Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you. And God also said to Moses, Thus you shall say to the children, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is My memorial from generation to generation."

Jesus said He was the I Am.... three times in John 8. John 8:24, 28, 58

John 8:24 "Therefore, I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins."

v28 "Jesus therefore said to them, When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am, and that I do nothing from Myself, but as my Father has taught Me, I speak these things."

v58 "Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am"

In John 8:24 the Lord gives a solemn warning; anyone who does not believe that the Lord Jesus is this very God, the I Am, will die in his sins.

Thanks
Drake

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

Lee's "processed God" is similar to the process above. He mixed the Triune God with man to form a four-in-one god. When he did that, he changed the attributes of God. God is omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent, but man is not. Lee's processed god is no longer the God in the Bible.

Bible-believer,

No.

Brother Lee never taught that and if you think he did then please provide the exact quote.

Omnipresence, Omniscience, and Omnipotence are attributes of God that are NOT communicable. God's life and nature are communicable in the same way that the life and nature of your father is communicated to you. You are a son but you do not become your father and his fatherhood.

Brother Lee made this distinction clear. Anyone who actually reads and represents what he actually said would be clear, fair, and honest on this point. For example:

"The Body of Christ is composed first of the redeemed ones, who were born by the Spirit to be the children of the Father. They are the God-men, and they are the very Body of Christ, the framework. Built within them are the Spirit, the Lord, and the Father. All three of the Divine Trinity have been built into the redeemed, regenerated believers. So there is such a building, such a structure, constituted with humanity and divinity in the Divine Trinity. Man, the Spirit, the Lord, and the Father are built together. This is not just three-in-one. This is four-in-one. God became a man so that we, His redeemed, might become God. With Him there is the Godhead. But regardless of how much divine life and divine nature we have to be the same as God, we do not have the Godhead.

(Practical Points concerning Blending, Chapter 3)

The "omni" attributes are those of the Godhead. We do not share in those ....ever. Those are unchangeable and incommunicable and belong to God in His Godhead alone.

Drake

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

Sorry Bible-believer, I overlooked this question. Thanks for calling my attention to it.

The answer is Yes! Jesus is Jehovah.

Jehovah means I Am. I Am that I Am.
Exodus 3:14-15
"And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. And He said Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you. And God also said to Moses, Thus you shall say to the children, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is My memorial from generation to generation."

Jesus said He was the I Am.... three times in John 8. John 8:24, 28, 58

John 8:24 "Therefore, I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins."

v28 "Jesus therefore said to them, When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am, and that I do nothing from Myself, but as my Father has taught Me, I speak these things."

v58 "Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am"

In John 8:24 the Lord gives a solemn warning; anyone who does not believe that the Lord Jesus is this very God, the I Am, will die in his sins.

Thanks
Drake

Drake,

Regarding the "I am" connection......the blind beggar in the next chapter, John 9, said the same thing:

John 9:9
Some were saying, "It is he," but others, were saying, "No, but he is like him." He kept saying, "I am he."

It's the same Greek word - eimi.

Was the blind beggar claiming to be Jehovah? Nope. "I am" or "I am he" or "I am the one" is a legitimate and common phrase in any language. It's presence does not mean a God-claim unless the context is there for it.

In fact, in that same chapter, Jesus says explicitly He and the Father are as two completely different people.

John 8:17-18
17 Even in your own Law it is written that the testimony of two men is valid.
18 I am One who testifies about Myself, and the Father, who sent Me, also testifies about Me.”

He tells them that He "tells [them] the truth that [He] heard from God." He doesn't say "I tell you the truth because I am God."

You bring up verse 58, which says:

“Truly, truly, I tell you,” Jesus declared, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

...and say that's Jesus claiming to be Jehovah, for which they picked up stones to stone Him. But don't forget, two chapters later in chapter 10, Jesus asks the Jews explicitly what they are stoning Him for. They respond because He declares Himself to be God. But Jesus responds not affirming their claim that He declares Himself to be God, but correcting them that He states that He is God's SON.

John 10:32-36
32 But Jesus responded, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone Me?”
33 “We are not stoning You for any good work,” said the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because You, who are a man, declare Yourself to be God.”
34 Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you are gods’?
35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken—
36 then what about the One whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world? How then can you accuse Me of blasphemy for stating that I am the Son of God?

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bible-believer,

No.

Brother Lee never taught that and if you think he did then please provide the exact quote.

Omnipresence, Omniscience, and Omnipotence are attributes of God that are NOT communicable. God's life and nature are communicable in the same way that the life and nature of your father is communicated to you. You are a son but you do not become your father and his fatherhood.

Brother Lee made this distinction clear. Anyone who actually reads and represents what he actually said would be clear, fair, and honest on this point. For example:

"The Body of Christ is composed first of the redeemed ones, who were born by the Spirit to be the children of the Father. They are the God-men, and they are the very Body of Christ, the framework. Built within them are the Spirit, the Lord, and the Father. All three of the Divine Trinity have been built into the redeemed, regenerated believers. So there is such a building, such a structure, constituted with humanity and divinity in the Divine Trinity. Man, the Spirit, the Lord, and the Father are built together. This is not just three-in-one. This is four-in-one. God became a man so that we, His redeemed, might become God. With Him there is the Godhead. But regardless of how much divine life and divine nature we have to be the same as God, we do not have the Godhead.

(Practical Points concerning Blending, Chapter 3)

The "omni" attributes are those of the Godhead. We do not share in those ....ever. Those are unchangeable and incommunicable and belong to God in His Godhead alone.

Drake

Wow! Thanks Drake.

Of course Lee didn’t teach “that”. Bible-believer wasn’t quoting Lee’s teaching. His was talking about the results of Lee’s teaching, or the implications of his teaching.

However, I will say, the text you provided is a real whopper….more heretical even than what Bible-believer pointed out. Thanks.

But I’m curious…Practical Points concerning Blending, Chapter 3…is this a book/message by Witness Lee? It doesn’t sound like Lee. To me, it sounds like a paraphrase by yet another anonymous LSM author. So. Are you quoting Lee or someone else?

The reason I ask, I was in Irving Tx when Lee was speaking in person when he dropped his “man becomes God” bombshell. When the message came out in print a few weeks later, the god-man stuff wasn’t even there. I wanted what I heard IN PRINT, but LSM strangely didn’t print it. That’s just wrong.

Nell

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Drake

Sorry Bible-believer, I overlooked this question. Thanks for calling my attention to it.

The answer is Yes! Jesus is Jehovah.

Jehovah means I Am. I Am that I Am.
Exodus 3:14-15
"And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. And He said Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you. And God also said to Moses, Thus you shall say to the children, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is My memorial from generation to generation."

Jesus said He was the I Am.... three times in John 8. John 8:24, 28, 58

John 8:24 "Therefore, I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins."

v28 "Jesus therefore said to them, When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am, and that I do nothing from Myself, but as my Father has taught Me, I speak these things."

v58 "Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am"

In John 8:24 the Lord gives a solemn warning; anyone who does not believe that the Lord Jesus is this very God, the I Am, will die in his sins.

Thanks
Drake

Also, the "I am" in verse 24 could easily be referencing to verse 12, where Jesus says "I am [eimi] the light of the world....."

He makes a claim, they doubt His claim and challenge it, and He then circles back in verse 24 to restate that unless they believe that "I am [the light of the world]" they will die in their sins. Jesus doesn't say "unless you believe that I am Jehovah" or "believe that I am God" or "the Father". Unless you believe that I am? I am what? The light of the world that He just stated He was.

Verse 28 doesn't make sense that Jesus is claiming to be Jehovah God by using the phrase "I am" because in the very next phrase He says "...I do nothing on My own..."

You're saying that Jesus is claiming outright to be Jehovah God, the Most High, the one True God from whom everything came......but He does nothing on His own? Uhhh.......

[Ohio]

BibleBeliever said it best: "A text without a context is a pretext."

Never is this so true as with the Greek word "eimi" translated literally as "I am" in John chapters 8 and 9.

John 8.57-58 "The Jews then said to Jesus, you are not yet 50 yo, and you have seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

John 9.8-9 "The neighbors therefore, and those who previously saw him as a beggar, said, is this not the one who used to sit and beg? Some said, It is he: others said, No, but he is like him. He said, I am."

The actual text within the contexts here tells us everything. In both situations here, the responders were asked very different questions.

The blind man said "eimi" to the question whether he was the blind beggar at the pool of Siloam. He said "I am."

Jesus, however, did not answer the question, "have you seen Abraham?" with, "yes, of course, I visited Abraham to announce the birth of Isaac," (Gen 18) rather He replied simply "I am." This absolutely shocked the Jews. They knew exactly what He meant. Jesus identified Himself with Moses at the burning bush in the wilderness. The Jews then immediately tried to stone Jesus for saying this.

"A text without a context is a pretext." Therefore, the same text in a different context yields a totally unique meaning and significance.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Ohio

BibleBeliever said it best: "A text without a context is a pretext."

Never is this so true as with the Greek word "eimi" translated literally as "I am" in John chapters 8 and 9.

John 8.57-58 "The Jews then said to Jesus, you are not yet 50 yo, and you have seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

John 9.8-9 "The neighbors therefore, and those who previously saw him as a beggar, said, is this not the one who used to sit and beg? Some said, It is he: others said, No, but he is like him. He said, I am."

The actual text within the contexts here tells us everything. In both situations here, the responders were asked very different questions.

The blind man said "eimi" to the question whether he was the blind beggar at the pool of Siloam. He said "I am."

Jesus, however, did not answer the question, "have you seen Abraham?" with, "yes, of course, I visited Abraham to announce the birth of Isaac," (Gen 18) rather He replied simply "I am." This absolutely shocked the Jews. They knew exactly what He meant. Jesus identified Himself with Moses at the burning bush in the wilderness. The Jews then immediately tried to stone Jesus for saying this.

"A text without a context is a pretext." Therefore, the same text in a different context yields a totally unique meaning and significance.

I think you are saying "they knew exactly what He meant" to mean "they thought He claimed to be God", am I correct in understanding you? If I'm not reading accurately, please correct me.

That was their thought, as shown in John 10. But that was their wrong thought. They told Him they were stoning Him because He claimed to be God, and He responded that He stated He is the Son of God.

I do understand the link to Abraham and I AM, but Jesus stated explicitly two chapters later that His claim was to the Son of God, not to God.

Jesus isn't saying here that He was the God who told Abraham that His name is "I AM". Jesus is saying that before Abraham even existed, Jesus existed. And that's supported by other Scripture - God created everything through Jesus, so Jesus existed before creation.....which includes before Abraham.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I think you are saying "they knew exactly what He meant" to mean "they thought He claimed to be God", am I correct in understanding you? If I'm not reading accurately, please correct me.

That was their thought, as shown in John 10. But that was their wrong thought. They told Him they were stoning Him because He claimed to be God, and He responded that He stated He is the Son of God.

I do understand the link to Abraham and I AM, but Jesus stated explicitly two chapters later that His claim was to the Son of God, not to God.

Jesus isn't saying here that He was the God who told Abraham that His name is "I AM". Jesus is saying that before Abraham even existed, Jesus existed. And that's supported by other Scripture - God created everything through Jesus, so Jesus existed before creation.....which includes before Abraham.

Note that Jesus did not answer the Jews, "Yep I've seen Abraham," or "Of course I'm older than Abraham." Jesus responded very strangely, I believe, to make a striking statement. How could Abraham have "exulted to see My day, then saw it and rejoiced?" This was not the first time Jesus completely shocked and baffled the Jewish leaders in an attempt to make them reconsider their false conceptions.

I believe Jesus' answer was two-fold. First that He existed before Abraham. Second that He appeared to Moses in the burning bush as the "I am." Did that mean He claimed to be God? It was quite shocking to these Jews that Jesus identified with both Abraham and Moses. Later on Jesus also identified Himself with David, as both His son and His Lord.

And I also have a question. It seems many assume that references to Yahweh/Jehovah are to God the Father. But is that really so? Is Yahweh / Jehovah the son of God?

My conclusion is that God is knowable to us. In fact, that is part of the New Covenant. Yet, God is not understandable. The "theology of God" just does not exist in the Bible as we all wish it would. That's why people loved the creeds. Knowing a creed about God fools us into thinking that we can understand God. I have learned to believe each and every verse about God whether I understand them or not.

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by Drake

The answer is Yes! Jesus is Jehovah. Jehovah means I Am. I Am that I Am.
Exodus 3:14-15
"And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. And He said Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you. And God also said to Moses, Thus you shall say to the children, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is My memorial from generation to generation."
Jesus said He was the I Am.... three times in John 8. John 8:24, 28, 58
John 8:24 "Therefore, I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins."
v28 "Jesus therefore said to them, When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am, and that I do nothing from Myself, but as my Father has taught Me, I speak these things."
v58 "Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am"
In John 8:24 the Lord gives a solemn warning; anyone who does not believe that the Lord Jesus is this very God, the I Am, will die in his sins.

Hi, Drake,
Thanks.

Firstly, I apologize for I asked an ambiguous question.
When I asked this question, I meant the names, and your answer referred to God.
Is Jehovah Jesus? Yes, when referring to God himself. But as referring to the name, Jehovah is the name of God the Father, and Jesus is the name of God the Son.
I hope you understand my intention. Making the statement or question clear at the beginning to avoid confusion.

Brother Lee might be a little proud of his high-peak truth, but he didn't realize the consequence. In my locality, most saints---attending various meetings and training, don't know about the fundamentals, about the Gospel, about the meaning of "salvation by faith alone", and etc. Why? Because they are trained to repeat Br. Lee's high-peak truth.

Have you ever wondered why Brother Lee wouldn't send young people and saints to training or seminaries outside of LR? Besides the "poor, poor Christianity," there has to be reasons.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

.
When I asked this question, I meant the names, and your answer referred to God.
Is Jehovah Jesus? Yes, when referring to God himself. But as referring to the name, Jehovah is the name of God the Father, and Jesus is the name of God the Son.
I hope you understand my intention. Making the statement or question clear at the beginning to avoid confusion. "

Hi Bible-believer,

I have been considering your clarification since you wrote it. Upon further review of the names of God in both the Old and New Testament, I cannot find compelling evidence that Jehovah, a name of God used over 7000 times in the Old Testament, nor any of its ten derivatives (e.g. Jehovah-ro'i - Jehovah is my Shepherd; Jehovah-tsidqenu - Jehovah my Righteousness; etc.) refers only to God the Father.

What is your scriptural-based rationale for holding this point of view?

Thanks,
Drake

[Russian95]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hi Bible-believer,

You don't see how my argument relates to the topic of the post because of one very important reason........ I haven't done a very good job of explaining it! But be patient and maybe I'll get there.

I Corinthians 12:12 in and of itself does not explain the phrase "the Processed, Four-in-One God". It does however by way of analogy show how Christ has a Head and a Body just like our head and body. The phrase "...so also is..." confirms that. v12 does not use the words "life" but it is understood ...for the body without life is a corpse. Just as John 15 speaks about the Vine and branches, the word "life" is not mentioned but it is understood that the branches are organically one with the vine... it is a life union. So with the Christ - the Head and the Body.

You mentioned chapters 12-14 and said "That is individual members growing so that the Body will grow into “maturity” (in the sense of Christ-likeness)"


Okay, ... but how?

I Corinthians 12: 4-11

"But there are distinctions of gifts, but the same Spirit; And there a distinctions of ministries, yet the same Lord; and there are distinctions of operations, but the same God, who operates all things in all. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is profitable. For to one through the Spirit a word of wisdom is given, and to another a word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit; to a different one faith in the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing in the one Spirit, and to another operations of works of power, and to another prophecy, and to another discerning of spirits; to a different one various kinds of tongues, and to another interpretation of tongues. But the one and the same Spirit operates all these things, distributing to each one respectively even as He purposes."

The Body grows to maturity by the Spirit, carries out its ministries by the Lord, and it is God who operates all things in all. The Body of Christ functions through and according to the same Spirit in the one Spirit. It is the one and same Spirit that operates all these things by that operation becomes the Spirit is manifested.

By these verses it is clearly stated that the Spirit, the Lord, and God operate in His many believers in an organic union to bring the many members of the Body of Christ into their God-given functions (gifts). The "Christ-likeness" you mention is really a manifestation of the Spirit and not just an imitation. It's not just something outward but something that issues out from God's operation within.

Do you concur with that explanation, Bible-believer?

Thanks,
Drake

Sorry to butt in, but I just cannot understand this interpretation of Head/Body in organic union indicating they form a single whole just from a conceptual point of view. Can a head exist without the body? Didn't God exist before/and doesn't he still exit outside Creation? Also, just like with my concern about mingling, when you combine one thing, the Head, with another, the Body, by definition a hybrid, third thing is produced. Just like when you graft onto a root-stock, a compound plant is produced. I don't understand how you can say that the root-stock, which has existed for a long time before grafting, is now the same root-stock even after a branch was grafted onto it, to produce its own fruit? Also, mind you, this grafting happens within Creation, but we also have to concern ourselves with the ontological God, outside Creation. Is He also grafted and if so to what? If not, are you claiming that the Trinity within Creation is different from that outside Creation? Wouldn't that be heretical?

[Paul Vusik]

While doing some research into some copyright information, I found this interesting book that was copyrighted by LSM. After further research, I found this snippet out of it on their website. Someone maybe already posted this here before, but in any case, I thought it would be appropriate to make it available for people to see.

The Situation Today

We in the local churches hold that man may become God in God's salvation. We are persuaded by our study of the Word of God and by our understanding of God's economy. We are also confirmed by the ancient testimony of the church. But we are not alone today in our convictions, for great portions of the Christian community also believe and teach the same. Both the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church teach that man becomes God through Christian salvation. We offer the following quotations to document this. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, recently published by the Holy See of the Roman Catholic Church, presents the following:
ARTICLE 3
“HE WAS CONCEIVED BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND WAS BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY”
Paragraph 1. The Son of God Became Man
I. WHY DID THE WORD BECOME FLESH?
460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4): “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God” (St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 19, 1). “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God” (St. Athanasius, De inc. 54, 3). “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Opusc. 57:1-4). (Catechism of the Catholic Church, p. 116)
Timothy Ware in his book The Orthodox Church gives the view of the Orthodox Church:
The aim of the Christian life, which Seraphim described as the acquisition of the Holy Spirit of God, can equally be defined in terms of deification. Basil described man as a creature who has received the order to become a god [quoted above]; and Athanasius, as we know, said that God became man that man might become god. “In My kingdom, said Christ, I shall be God with you as gods” (Canon for Matins of Holy Thursday, Ode 4, Troparion 3). Such, according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church, is the final goal at which every Christian must aim: to become god, to attain theosis, ‘deification' or ‘divinization'. For Orthodoxy man's salvation and redemption mean his deification. (The Orthodox Church, p. 236)
Even evangelical Christianity is not without a positive comment concerning man's becoming God. Although evangelical Christianity certainly does not emphatically teach that man becomes God in God's salvation, the following quotation shows that with proper qualification it need not, in their view, be deemed heretical.
First, it should be pointed out that the phrase “little gods” may be unfortunate, but it is not necessarily heretical in and of itself, as long as it is not intended to convey that man is equal with, or a part of, God. The Eastern Orthodox Church, for example, teaches that Christians are deified in the sense that they are adopted as sons of God, indwelt by the Spirit of God, and brought into communion with God which ultimately leads to glorification. (Hank Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, pp. 110-111)
J. S.'s condemnation shows little knowledge of the history of this teaching, of the proper enunciation of this teaching, and of the acceptance of this teaching even today. Unfortunately, we suspect that the motive for the condemnation is laced with malice. If, however, there is a genuine ignorance, we hope that this presentation will serve to enlighten and direct each reader into the full knowledge of the truth. We eagerly await that day when indeed God will be “all in all.”
Kerry S. Robichaux
(The Truth Concerning the Ultimate Goal of God's Economy, Chapter 1, Section 10)


So I guess I was correct after all that this idea of “man becoming god”, wasn’t some kind of “recovered truth”, but just stolen from Greek/Eastern Orthodox Church to begin with. No wonder the “We were Wrong producer” at CRI went there, rather than just joining a group that takes ideologies from somewhere else and claims as their own. He probably has a lot of time of his hands to do more research, and probably at least has an idea where all the rest of the “recovered truths” came from.



Found this on:
https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pw...24121005&SID=1

Also,
https://www.ministrybooks.org/Search...?id=20290BDD9E


The book that it was originally taken from is called:
The divinization of the Christian, according to the Greek fathers / Jules Gross ; translated by Paul A. Onica ; introduced by Kerry S. Robichaux & Paul A. Onica.
Edition: 1st ed.