Andy Anderson on the "Overcomers"

[Cassidy]

"However, it's not a subject which I feel that I can treat with any sophistication. And although I can't buy Anderson's arguments whole cloth, his warnings on the possible effects of the "overcomer" teachings are sobering. I think it's a very difficult subject, and I appreciate his efforts on this regard. The whole "free will/predestination" discussion seems to have been going on, often heatedly, for centuries. I had felt that the Nee/Lee school found a fairly tenable middle ground.

Thoughts, anyone?"

Aron,

I thought the author was a bit judgmental and I did not agree that Witness Lee taught one side like the Pentecostals. There was and is a vast difference between the two both doctrinally and in the experiential.

I agreed with you that Witness Lee and Watchman Nee taught balanced on this topic.

That is what I liked, and still do, about both men and their teaching. The security of our eternal salvation once we believe and receive, but a loss of the kingdom reward, not the loss of eternal salvation, if we are unfaithful in our christian walk. The assurance and the warning.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

but a loss of the kingdom reward, not the loss of eternal salvation, if we are unfaithful in our christian walk. The assurance and the warning.

So Cassidy, my man! Good to hear from you!
In relation to the teachings of Witness Lee (hate to pin ya down this way..but this is a forum about Nee, Lee and the Local Church) in relation to to the teachings of Witness Lee...what do you consider as "unfaithful in our christian walk".
Watch this folks......

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So Cassidy, my man! Good to hear from you!
In relation to the teachings of Witness Lee (hate to pin ya down this way..but this is a forum about Nee, Lee and the Local Church) in relation to to the teachings of Witness Lee...what do you consider as "unfaithful in our christian walk".
Watch this folks......

Hi UntoHim,

Witness Lee taught very much about the inner life and following the leading of the Spirit. My takeaway from that aspect was this: That each believer should learn to follow the Lord in everyday personal matters, not only big things, but even in little things, matters that we often might think too small to pay any attention to. Sensing the Lord in your conversations and their manner, what you wear, relationships, etc.

Applying that to the topic of this thread means that if we are faithful to follow the Lord's leading in all aspects of our life, even in little things, fine matters, He will commend us at His judgement seat. If we are loose in our living, not following the Lord, then we will miss out on a reward. Nevertheless, though we may suffer loss, we are eternally saved by our believing and faith.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

That is what I liked, and still do, about [Witness Lee and Watchman Nee] and their teaching. The security of our eternal salvation once we believe and receive, but a loss of the kingdom reward, not the loss of eternal salvation, if we are unfaithful in our christian walk. The assurance and the warning.

This subject, incidentally, points out another weakness in the Protestant Reformation, which I wanted to address in discussion on Erasmus vs Luther. The main promulgators of the Protestant Reformation, I feel, were so horrified by the abuses of "works" (see, for example, the indulgences issue) that they over-reacted: "It is naught of works/'Tis all of grace". They downplayed the issue of "My reward is according to your works" until it was nearly non-existent in the consciousnesses of the Protestant faithful.

Thus, I posit, arose the Anabaptists. I spent some time with a group of them, post-LC, and was really impressed with their living. The children were a glaring contrast to LC children. Instead of fussy and agitated, they were calm and obedient. At the time I was still pretty strong for LSM teachings, even though I'd gone "back to christianity". But I realized that to introduce these young Anabaptist children to the LC young people would be like introducing them to the plague. So it was part of my journey: the realization that teachings, terminology and doctrine don't equal the kingdom. I somewhat heard about the kingdom in the local churches of Nee and Lee, but I saw more clearly it in the intentional communities of the anabaptists, and elsewhere.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Aron,

I agreed with you that Witness Lee and Watchman Nee taught balanced on this topic.

That is what I liked, and still do, about both men and their teaching. The security of our eternal salvation once we believe and receive, but a loss of the kingdom reward, not the loss of eternal salvation, if we are unfaithful in our christian walk. The assurance and the warning.

I still prefer the "balanced" approach of Nee & Lee. However, I find it rather crude. The topic deserves a more thorough teaching than they provided (to me, anyway; perhaps you have gotten more than I). And it deserves a better rebuttal than Mr. Anderson gave.

The "overcomers" is a topic raised in scriptures so it ought to command our attention. If we wave "overcomers" off as being tantamount to "believers" we do it disservice, I believe. But I have in the past characterized Lee's teaching on the topic as equivalent to spreading butter with the head of an axe. It works, after a fashion, but it is neither as fine nor nuanced as the subject deserves.

Unfortunately, I can only offer my "homespun" reading as well. I am sure someone out there has addressed this more satisfactorily, but I have not yet come across them, or if I did I wasn't paying sufficient attention.

A few of my objections, in brief:

- Witness Lee taught that "raptured and martyred" folks got the thousand year "Wedding Feast" with the Lord. The rest, per John's "Revelation", were not raised until the thousand years were over. Witness taught us that "Watchman Nee was surely martyred" in China, thus was a Wedding Feast overcomer. But Lee wasn't, so I guess he's in torment for a thousand years.

Of course you'll reply, "No, not torment." But what, then? Silence. The Nee/Lee school has no idea, at least that came across my attention.

-- Jesus taught that if you do wrong, you'll get punished. If you do wrong and should know better, you'll get "many stripes", but if you do wrong ignorantly, you'll get "few stripes". Silence from Nee & Lee.

-- In the parable of the unrighteous steward, the steward and the creditors still are on the negative side of the ledger (the steward is still expelled, and th creditors still owe), but the relative positions have all improved. Silence from Nee and Lee.

I suspect, as a non-schooled laity, that these stories meant something to the hearers, as they meant to Jesus and the apostles. But what I don't know. It seems they meant nothing to Nee and Lee. They had their "Wedding Feast", and their "outer darkness", and that was sufficient for them.

[Cal]

I don't think Witness Lee was very balanced on this. For one thing, he kept tying overcoming to "growth," saying you had to be full-grown to be raptured (harvested), and equated rapture with overcoming. But this doesn't make much sense. Reward is about faithfulness, not growth. How about someone who is saved, then dies young? Or saved late in life without much time to grow? These people can't be overcomers? He never explained this kind of thing. He was just so enamored with "life" and "growth" he kept pushing it without tying the loose ends together.

Sorry, but there are a lot of problems with Lee's teaching on this subject. I would not suggest anyone just take it carte blanche.

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I don't think Witness Lee was very balanced on this. For one thing, he kept tying overcoming to "growth," saying you had to be full-grown to be raptured (harvested), and equated rapture with overcoming. But this doesn't make much sense. Reward is about faithfulness, not growth. How about someone who is saved, then dies young? Or saved late in life without much time to grow? These people can't be overcomers? He never explained this kind of thing. He was just so enamored with "life" and "growth" he kept pushing it without tying the loose ends together.

Sorry, but there are a lot of problems with Lee's teaching on this subject. I would not suggest anyone just take it carte blanche.

Igzy,

Witness Lee addressed the above scenario in blue in the teaching of the thief on the cross contrasting the thief's request (the Kingdom) with His promise (Paradise).

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy,

Witness Lee addressed the above scenario in blue in the teaching of the thief on the cross contrasting the thief's request (the Kingdom) with His promise (Paradise).

So what did the thief do to earn the kingdom reward?

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Igzy

So what did the thief do to earn the kingdom reward?

He didn't.

However, though the Lord did not grant the thief his request for the Kingdom, He did promise him the portion of every believer (Paradise)

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

He didn't.

However, though the Lord did not grant the thief his request for the Kingdom, He did promise him the portion of every believer (Paradise)

So, in other words you are saying that the way Lee addressed the issue was to say that those who die before getting a chance to grow will miss out on the kingdom reward? Is that your point?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I don't think Witness Lee was very balanced on this. For one thing, he kept tying overcoming to "growth," saying you had to be full-grown to be raptured (harvested), and equated rapture with overcoming. But this doesn't make much sense. Reward is about faithfulness, not growth. How about someone who is saved, then dies young? Or saved late in life without much time to grow? These people can't be overcomers? He never explained this kind of thing. He was just so enamored with "life" and "growth" he kept pushing it without tying the loose ends together.

Sorry, but there are a lot of problems with Lee's teaching on this subject. I would not suggest anyone just take it carte blanche.

The emphasis on growth over faithfulness established a hierarchy based on how many years in the LRC while deemphasizing the need to be faithful

[Cassidy]

"- Witness Lee taught that "raptured and martyred" folks got the thousand year "Wedding Feast" with the Lord. The rest, per John's "Revelation", were not raised until the thousand years were over. Witness taught us that "Watchman Nee was surely martyred" in China, thus was a Wedding Feast overcomer. But Lee wasn't, so I guess he's in torment for a thousand years."

Aron,

No. All born again christians are raptured before the 1000 year reign of Christ on the earth.

Just want to clarify that misunderstanding in your sentence above.