Nigel Tomes - LSM's Unorthodox Satanology

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by KSA

This sin distorted human nature, and now by birth we inherit the inclination to sin. However, sin is not some other nature that was added to human nature.

KSA,

So if it's just the "inclination" to sin that we inherit, is that a physical inheritance? Is it encoded in my DNA somewhere? If so, are we to understand the Garden tale as pure allegory, that is, as not having literally happened at all?


SC

[KSA]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

KSA,

So if it's just the "inclination" to sin that we inherit, is that a physical inheritance? Is it encoded in my DNA somewhere? If so, are we to understand the Garden tale as pure allegory, that is, as not having literally happened at all?


SC

I do not know about DNA, the Bible does not talk about DNA. And, of course, we inherit much more than inclination.

I do not understand your question about Garden tale being an allegory, what's the connection? Garden tale was a real thing.

My bottom line was that at the fall no foreign nature was added to man. The fall was the corruption of human nature. It affected whole human being - spirit, soul and body. It was spiritual, soulish and physical.

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

My bottom line was that at the fall no foreign nature was added to man. The fall was the corruption of human nature. It affected whole human being - spirit, soul and body. It was spiritual, soulish and physical.

The newly cooked food is fresh but when exposed to air for some time the food gets spoiled. If I can remember it correctly there are some germs or bacteria that are added in the food and this is the reason the food is no longer fresh but spoiled.

Man's whole being (body, soul, and spirit) was corrupted because of their sin of disobedience which was fully illustrated by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil which signifies death or Satan. Man's act of disobedience manifested upon eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil. Again, this is fully illustrated in the Epistles of James --

James 1:13-15
13 When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

Should man has eaten the fruit from the Tree of Life that would be a glorious story! Before man's fall, the uncreated life of God which is signified by the Tree of Life was outside of man. Likewise, before man's fall, "death" or "Satan" which is signified by the Tree of Knowledge was outside of man. However, after the fall of man, "death" has affected the human being. His body was transmuted into flesh; his soul was transmuted into self; and his spirit was deadened.

[KSA]

Originally Posted by Paul Miletus

The newly cooked food is fresh but when exposed to air for some time the food gets spoiled. If I can remember it correctly there are some germs or bacteria that are added in the food and this is the reason the food is no longer fresh but spoiled.

Man's whole being (body, soul, and spirit) was corrupted because of their sin of disobedience which was fully illustrated by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil which signifies death or Satan.

Dear Paul, we can play with different metaphors, but metaphors are useful only when they are based on the Word. Now let's see at the biblical picture of the fall. You know the law of the first occurrence that establishes a principle. The first one to fall was Lucifer. Now can you tell me what kind of bacteria did he catch? Or who injected sinful nature into him? What does the Word say about his fall? "You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you... you became filled with violence within, and you sinned... Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty... You corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor...(Ez. 28:15-17). Satan fell because iniquity was found in him, it did not come from outside. It was not injected into him. No sinful nature was added to him. He corrupted his own nature.

The same happened to man. God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes (Eccl. 7:29). The verse from James that you cited confirms my point. James 1:13-15: When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. Satan can entice us. He can tempt us with something that appeals to our desires, but there is not foreign nature that makes us sin. So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable... (Gen. 3:6). What cause the fall of Eve was her own desire! It was stirred up by Satan, but it was her own desire.

Another thing: you say that when man ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, satanic nature entered man. But notice: Eve sinned before the fruit actually got into her. She looked at the fruit, desired it and and stretched her hand to get the fruit - it was already an act of sinning - desire was conceived and gave birth to sin - and it was before she actually ate the fruit.

Now you have to prove that the tree of knowledge is Satan. I have two reasons to doubt it: 1) If the tree of knowledge was Satan, then there were two Satans in the Garden - serpent and tree; 2) tree of knowledge was planted by God (Gen. 2:9).

And, Paul, if you wish to reply to my post, please do it with the Bible and point by point. God bless you!

[Cal]

Well stated, KSA. I agree 100%. The part about Eve sinning before she ate the fruit is a very strong point. And you are right, we can play with metaphors all day long and it means little. Lee's satanology is totally based on a metaphor, on the word "dwell," when Paul said that nothing good dwells in his flesh, implying something personified. That's pretty weak gruel, to use another metaphor.

And again, as Ohio said, Lee is probably, with his accounting mind, trying to "balance" the account. God lives in us, so Satan must also. Pleasingly symmetrical, but the Bible does not tell us to find symmetry wherever we can.

[Arizona]

KSA -

Thank you for the further discussion. Forgive me if this post seems to take us further afield from the original topic but it is leading me to some deeper, maybe more philosophical, questions that I have been wrestling with because of some things I am hearing in fellowship with other believers.

The first is the question of the origination, or originator, of evil itself. Some say that ultimately God Himself must be the creator of evil because Satan is a created being. And, was he created having a free will. If I am understanding you correctly Satan is himself the creator of evil and man followed him after temptation by himself (man) reproducing in himself that which Satan had previously created, and thus producing the sin in human nature, not by taking Satan into his (man) being but by reproduction, which was possible because of man's God-given free will. (sorry for that long sentence).

All of this, to me, leads to the question of ultimate responsibility for sin. If man created his own condition then he is obviously responsible for the consequences. If "the devil made me do it!!", then that is something different. And if God did it, then that is really something different.

The NT tells us the Lord Jesus saying that Satan "had nothing in me" which seems to say that the temptation from outside, with Satan as the source, had no corresponding sin in Christ that would respond to it. No doubt we can all agree that our own personal experience matches this understanding, with the opposite results.

I am tending to agree with your thoughts on this subject but striving for further clarification on my own part. I hope you would continue.

Grace.

Arizona

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

Dear Paul, we can play with different metaphors, but metaphors are useful only when they are based on the Word. Now let's see at the biblical picture of the fall. You know the law of the first occurrence that establishes a principle. The first one to fall was Lucifer. Now can you tell me what kind of bacteria did he catch? Or who injected sinful nature into him? What does the Word say about his fall? "You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you... you became filled with violence within, and you sinned... Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty... You corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor...(Ez. 28:15-17). Satan fell because iniquity was found in him, it did not come from outside. It was not injected into him. No sinful nature was added to him. He corrupted his own nature.

Though man and Lucifer are both creatures of God, however they are totally different. When God created man he had body, soul, and spirit and the "uncreated life of God" as signified by the Tree of Life was outside of man, as well as "sin" or "sinful nature" or "death" or "personified Satan" as signified by the Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil.

Now, please take note that Satan is "spirit" and has no body nor soul.

For a clear mind, we would be able to reason out that nothing can be injected to Satan since he did not possess any body in the first place. You said that "Satan fell because iniquity was found in him, it did not come from outside." I can agree with this statement. However, Satan was not privileged by God to choose from any tree, only man was given this high privilege.

The Bible is so illustrative that you cannot miss what God is telling us. The tenet of the Bible is for God, as the Triune God, to dispense Himself into man. God cannot dispense Himself to any other creatures because only man is perfectly matched and compatible with God. The Word says, whatever is born of flesh is flesh, whatever is born of Spirit is spirit. Please pray-read Zechariah 12:1 and you will see for yourself how important man is to God. God created the universe for the earth to exist. God created the earth for man to exist. God formed the spirit within the man to make man His habitation. God is Spirit and only the spirit of man can receive and communicate with God alone.

Unfortunately, Satan frustrated God's plan for man to take Him as man's life as signified by the Tree of Life by deceiving and persuading man to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, thus death reigned through the first Adam. Death is of the Devil, who is Satan. After the fall, the body was no longer a "body" but transmuted into "flesh".

Praise the Lord! The Bible is full of illustrations because the Tree of Life that was missed by the first Adam is now available through the Lord Jesus Christ who Himself declared that He is the True Vine. The Tree of Life is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself! (I hope you will agree with me that the Tree of Life is signfied by the Lord Jesus.)

Christ is within you the hope of glory! Does this Word ring a bell? If the first Adam had eaten the fruit of the Tree of Life, I believe you are in agreement within that something was "injected" or received by man, Who is Christ within us. In like manner, why can't we understand that through the mistake of the first Adam by eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil something was "injected" or received by man. After man's fall, the human being was corrupted: the body was transmuted into flesh; the soul into self; and the spirit was deadened. Death reigned in man's body which used to be but now, after man's fall, was corrupted by Satan.

Grace be with you.

[KSA]

Originally Posted by Paul Miletus

Though man and Lucifer are both creatures of God, however they are totally different.

You have to prove from the Word that this difference - Lucifer being angel and Adam being a man - is significant in our understanding of the fall. The fall is primary a corruption of will - both Lucifer and Adam had a free will, in this way they were no different.

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

You have to prove from the Word that this difference - Lucifer being angel and Adam being a man - is significant in our understanding of the fall. The fall is primary a corruption of will - both Lucifer and Adam had a free will, in this way they were no different.

We are talking about the writing of Nigel Tomes where he was contending that the local church and specifically Brother Witness Lee erred when he wrote that something was injected in man after the fall. This something has to do with the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil which signifies "sin", "death", even "Satan" himself that entered into man and corrupted him, whereby his body was transmuted into flesh, his soul was transmuted into self, and his spirit was deadened.

The book of Genesis chapter 3 is so vivid illustrating that the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil entered into man after man ate the fruit. Thus, "sin" or "death" reigned in man after the fall of man. The Old Testament are full of illustrations that cannot be found in the New Testament. The New Testament deals mostly with spiritual things which nobody can see them clearly except we go back to the Old Testament for us to see them accurately.

The point we are making is that whether Nigel Tomes had made a mistake in assessing the teachings of the local church or Brother Witness Lee. Discussing about Lucifer is a tangent in this subject. You must accept the reality that Lucifer does not have a "body" to be compared with "man". Therefore, you must go back to man's being having body, soul, and spirit to defend the writings of Nigel Tomes.

I can see clearly that Nigel Tomes lacks the understanding of the vast difference between "flesh" and "body". I can also perceive that he must have neglected the difference of the status or condition of man between "man's prior fall" and "man's after fall". Sorry to say, but this statement also applies to you.

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

The same happened to man. God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes (Eccl. 7:29). The verse from James that you cited confirms my point. James 1:13-15: When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. Satan can entice us. He can tempt us with something that appeals to our desires, but there is not foreign nature that makes us sin. So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable... (Gen. 3:6). What cause the fall of Eve was her own desire! It was stirred up by Satan, but it was her own desire.

I totally disagree with you on this one.

The "man" being discussed in James 1:13-15 is a corrupted man, the "man" after the fall of the first Adam. This man being discussed by James is a "fallen man" or "soulish man" where "sin" reigns in him, the "body of sin" is totally in connivance with the "old man", and the "old man" which is our "self" is always in agreement with "sin" to make sins. Please pray-read Romans 6:6.

Eve's mistake would not result in "death reigning in man" should she had not eaten the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. God's command to man was not to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. And we know all, that the consequence of disobeying God's command "you will surely die". The New Testament tells us that the penalty or wages of sin is death. Prior to Eve's eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, death was not yet present in man's body. It was the very act of Eve when she ate the fruit from the Tree of Knoweldge of Good and Evil that death totally manifested in man's being; and thereby, transmuting the body into flesh, the soul into self, and the spirit was deadened.

The Bible is so illustrative using the "fruit" and the act of man eating the fruit to show us that something was received by man that caused his fall and corrupted man's body, soul, and spirit.

[KSA]

Originally Posted by Paul Miletus

I totally disagree with you on this one.

The "man" being discussed in James 1:13-15 is a corrupted man, the "man" after the fall of the first Adam. This man being discussed by James is a "fallen man" or "soulish man" where "sin" reigns in him, the "body of sin" is totally in connivance with the "old man", and the "old man" which is our "self" is always in agreement with "sin" to make sins. Please pray-read Romans 6:6.

Eve's mistake would not result in "death reigning in man" should she had not eaten the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Before Eve ate from the fruit, she 1) had doubted God's word, 2) believed Satan, 3) decided to break God's commandment, 4) and acted upon here decision. It was sin! Look how Paul described the fall: as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds be corrupted... (2 Cor. 11:3). So the fall here is described as the corruption of mind through deceit. In her act we see lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes and the pride of life (1 John. 2:16).

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

Before Eve ate from the fruit, she 1) had doubted God's word, 2) believed Satan, 3) decided to break God's commandment, 4) and acted upon here decision. It was sin! Look how Paul described the fall: as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds be corrupted... (2 Cor. 11:3). So the fall here is described as the corruption of mind through deceit. In her act we see lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes and the pride of life (1 John. 2:16).

Again, you are discussing a "fallen man" or "soulish man" in this respect. We are talking about the first Adam or Eve who had not been fallen yet at the time when the serpent approached the woman. Just ask yourself, when did the first Adam die? As a hint, he died when "sin" entered into him as "death".

If the fall of man has to do with the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, then, the rise of man has to do with the Tree of Life. What would you do with the Tree of Life for man to rise? I believe you will agree with me that we must eat the fruit from the Tree of Life because it signifies the very uncreated life of God. If man has not been disobedient and did not eat the fruit from Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, would you consider man as "righteous" at that particular moment while the fruit, either from Tree of Life or Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, are still outside of man or has not been eaten yet?

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

Another thing: you say that when man ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, satanic nature entered man. But notice: Eve sinned before the fruit actually got into her. She looked at the fruit, desired it and and stretched her hand to get the fruit - it was already an act of sinning - desire was conceived and gave birth to sin - and it was before she actually ate the fruit.

What you have said that "before she actually ate the fruit" "was already an act of sinning" is actually applicable to the "fallen man" or "soulish man" and NOT to the first Adam nor Eve, who had not known "sin" or "death" before.

Do you remember what the Word says? Their mind was opened after eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Their mind were not opened before eating the fruit! The effect of "sin" was not yet in them before eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; only after they have eaten the fruit. After the fruit had been received in their body, only then "sin" or "death" manifested in them.

The first Adam or Eve experience at the Garden of Eden is totally different with what you were citing in your above statement.

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

Now you have to prove that the tree of knowledge is Satan. I have two reasons to doubt it: 1) If the tree of knowledge was Satan, then there were two Satans in the Garden - serpent and tree; 2) tree of knowledge was planted by God (Gen. 2:9).

Although the tree of the knowledge of good and evil signifies Satan, it does not signify him directly. It firstly signifies everything apart from God and then it signifies Satan indirectly, because Satan is hidden at the back of the things that are apart from God. Satan likes to conceal himself. Thus, the tree of knowledge represents him indirectly.

The tree of knowledge firstly signifies everything utilized by Satan, regardless of whether it is good or evil. It does not signify Satan directly, because he likes to hide. When Satan first entered into man, he did not do it in a frank way. He came in the form of a serpent. At the beginning of the Bible, the serpent was very cunning and apparently was quite attractive (Gen. 3:1), unlike the ugly serpents under God's curse. As Eve conversed with the serpent, she did not realize that Satan was in it. Herein lies the principle of Satan's appearing: he never appears frankly, but subtly.

The nature and result of the tree of life are both life because it is a tree of life. But the nature and result of the tree of knowledge of good and evil are both death because knowledge, good, and evil are all of death and bring in death. Anything that is not life is of death and results in death. Actually, the tree of knowledge of good and evil is the tree of death; yet it is not called the tree of death, but the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Death is not only behind evil; it is also behind knowledge and good. The title of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is subtle because Satan always likes to conceal himself. Satan has the power of death (Heb. 2:14). Since the tree of knowledge of good and evil is actually the tree of death, it signifies Satan.

[KSA]

Originally Posted by Paul Miletus

The nature and result of the tree of life are both life because it is a tree of life. But the nature and result of the tree of knowledge of good and evil are both death because knowledge, good, and evil are all of death and bring in death. Anything that is not life is of death and results in death. Actually, the tree of knowledge of good and evil is the tree of death; yet it is not called the tree of death, but the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Death is not only behind evil; it is also behind knowledge and good. The title of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is subtle because Satan always likes to conceal himself. Satan has the power of death (Heb. 2:14). Since the tree of knowledge of good and evil is actually the tree of death, it signifies Satan.

Herein lies the problem: death is not the result of the tree - there is nothing that proves it. Death was the result of disobedience, and the Word is clear about this. For as by one's man's disobedience many were made sinners... (Rom. 5:19). Death cannot be the nature of the tree of knowledge, because 1) it was planted by God, and God is not a source of death, 2) the tree was good for food (Gen. 3:6).

[Paul Miletus]

Originally Posted by KSA

Herein lies the problem: death is not the result of the tree - there is nothing that proves it. Death was the result of disobedience, and the Word is clear about this. For as by one's man's disobedience many were made sinners... (Rom. 5:19). Death cannot be the nature of the tree of knowledge, because 1) it was planted by God, and God is not a source of death, 2) the tree was good for food (Gen. 3:6).

I believe you are confused here, KSA. God Himself told Adam and Eve that if they would ever eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil they will surely die. Did not God speak here about "death"? It's true that the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was placed by God, along with the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden, but you must have forgotten that God forbade man to eat the fruit thereof!

How can you say that "Death cannot be the nature of the tree of knowledge" wherein God Himself was telling Adam and Eve that they will SURELY DIE the moment they eat the fruit thereof? Are we having another Word coming from you now?

[KSA]

Well, Paul, I see that you stay convinced in your view which is ok. I have clearly presented my arguments and proofs, so readers of this forum can compare and judge for themselves.

As for flesh, I will leave this topic for a later time. I hope that other participants will join this discussion.