Melodyland and the Trinity

[aron]

A STATEMENT BY WITNESS LEE


It is very sad and shameful that Christian brothers have been continually fighting one against another through the centuries. It is mainly because their understanding of the Bible differs; they have different views and are on different levels. The reasons for this are three.

1.The Bible, being the revelation of God, is extremely profound. On its surface are the plain doctrines, but in its depth are the deep and vital truths. It is easy to know the doctrines of the Bible, but more grace is required to realize the deeper truths revealed in the Bible concerning God’s eternal purpose. For example, John 1:29 tells us that the Lord Jesus died on the cross as the Lamb of God to bear our sins that we may be redeemed. All real Christians know this. But the same Gospel, chapter twelve, verse 24, reveals that the Lord died also as a grain of wheat, falling into the ground to release His life, that He might be multiplied into many grains for the formation of His Body, which is the church. It seems that the speaker at Melodyland has not seen this truth, because he has accused us of being heretical concerning this matter. Actually, it is not that we are heretical, but that he has not seen this deep thing of God (1 Cor. 2:10).

Another example: First Timothy 3:15 says that the church is the house of the living God and the pillar and ground of the truth. But the very next verse, verse 16, reveals that the church is also the mystery of godliness, that is, God was manifest in the flesh. The church is not only the house of God, the pillar and ground of the truth, but also the manifestation of God in the flesh. The context of this verse confirms this. This is also a deep truth, for which we are condemned by the speaker. Again, it seems that he is short of sight in this matter.

2.The truths in the Bible are often of two aspects, the objective and the subjective. The subjective aspect is mainly for our experience. For example, on one hand Christ today is in the heavens, but on the other hand Christ today is also in us, and His being in us is that we may experience Him as life and the life supply. Since He is the very embodiment of God, and since we have Him within us as our life, we partake of the divine nature of God. This subjective truth was also objected to by the speaker, because he simply did not see it.

Another example: The Holy Trinity not only has the side of three, but also the side of one. On one hand our Triune God is three, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, but on the other hand He is one, the unique God. This is clearly and fully revealed in the Holy Word. But sorry to say, the speaker, standing unbalanced on the side of three, fights against the side of one. Although he says that God is one, the oneness in his concept is a corporate oneness, not the individual oneness of our unique God, because he does not believe the pure word in Isaiah 9:6 and 1 Corinthians 15:45.

3.The divine revelation was fully completed when the book of Revelation was written to the churches. But not long after that, the church began to lose sight of God’s open revelation and deviate from the central line of His perfect Word. Thus, the Bible became a veiled book until the time of reformation, when Martin Luther was raised up by the Lord to begin the recovery of the lost truths. Luther, by returning to the Bible from the deviated historic church, discovered the truth of justification by faith among the lost truths. However, that was just the beginning of the Lord’s recovery. Thence, through the past five centuries, the Lord has continually carried on His recovery through many different channels. How we thank the Lord for those channels! But there has always been a sad story accompanying each step of the Lord’s recovery. Nearly every time a lost truth was recovered by some new channels, the old channels fought against the newly discovered truth, and even fought against the channels used by the Lord to recover that truth. In principle, it is the same today.

I was born, raised up, and educated in Christianity. From my youth I have been taught with Bible stories and many teachings of the Bible. After I was saved, I sat at the feet of the great Brethren teachers, listening to hundreds of their messages concerning the Bible. Later I was helped by reading the inner-life books, such as the books by Madame Guyon, Andrew Murray, and Mrs. Jessie Penn-Lewis. After that, I was also involved in the Pentecostal movement. Then the Lord showed us from His Word a number of lost truths, such as the multiplication, the enlargement, of the unlimited Christ, the corporate Christ, the church being the manifestation of God in the flesh, the proper unity of the Body of Christ, the practical expression of the church, and other items.

Because these truths are new to some dear Christian brothers, they consider them as heresies, as teachings which are not according to the Bible. Then they fight against these newly recovered truths under the excuse of contending for the faith once delivered to the saints. Sometimes these Christian brothers have gone so far that they have even fought their battle by building up false accusations according to their erroneous or inadequate understanding of the Bible. Actually, these newly recovered truths are absolutely scriptural. To see these truths requires that the veil of traditional concepts held by the so-called historic church be taken away, and that the Lord’s people come back to the pure Word of God in His Holy Writings. We, in the Lord’s recovery, following the footsteps of Martin Luther, only care for the pure Word, not for any traditional concept of the historic church. These three reasons are just brief principles.

Lastly, I would like to say a word from my heart. We Christian brothers may hold different opinions concerning certain truths and may argue over them one with another. But let us do it in a spirit and on a level that are worthy of a saint in Christ. The truths of the Bible are holy. We do not believe that any mocking, ridiculing, or despising is the way for a saint to contend for the holy truths of our Holy God. It is a solemn thing to deal with the Word of God. We may edify others; we may also destroy others. We must always remind ourselves that whatever we say and do will be judged at the judgment seat of Christ when He comes back. May the Lord’s grace be with us all!

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

A STATEMENT BY WITNESS LEE

It is very sad and shameful that Christian brothers have been continually fighting one against another through the centuries. It is mainly because their understanding of the Bible differs; they have different views and are on different levels... The Bible, being the revelation of God, is extremely profound. On its surface are the plain doctrines, but in its depth are the deep and vital truths. It is easy to know the doctrines of the Bible, but more grace is required to realize the deeper truths revealed in the Bible concerning God’s eternal purpose.

Okay, which "vital truths" are worth fighting each other over? Or, which "deep truths" necessitate rejecting the validity of portions of the Bible in order to preserve themselves? Is there some "deep level" of understanding in which we can then hold up one brief passage as the "pure word" and drop the rest? What kind of revelation is that?

Believe me, I love deep truths. Do I live them? Perhaps not. But without vision there is no chance to live anything. I love getting vision from the Scriptures. But Jesus taught "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." Not just the words which we can arrange into our current message, which is conveniently printed and for sale.

What kind of a truth, now packaged and sold, brings discord not only among men, but within the text itself?

Originally Posted by aron

The Holy Trinity not only has the side of three, but also the side of one. On one hand our Triune God is three, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, but on the other hand He is one, the unique God. This is clearly and fully revealed in the Holy Word. But sorry to say, the speaker, standing unbalanced on the side of three, fights against the side of one. Although he says that God is one, the oneness in his concept is a corporate oneness, not the individual oneness of our unique God, because he does not believe the pure word in Isaiah 9:6 and 1 Corinthians 15:45.

The scriptures used to support Lee's "recovered truths" are called "the pure word", but the scriptures that he can't line up are called "fallen" and "natural". I say that is wrong; dead wrong.

Originally Posted by aron

The divine revelation was fully completed when the book of Revelation was written to the churches. But not long after that, the church began to lose sight of God’s open revelation and deviate from the central line of His perfect Word. Thus, the Bible became a veiled book until the time of reformation, when Martin Luther was raised up by the Lord to begin the recovery of the lost truths. Luther, by returning to the Bible from the deviated historic church, discovered the truth of justification by faith among the lost truths. However, that was just the beginning of the Lord’s recovery. Thence, through the past five centuries, the Lord has continually carried on His recovery through many different channels. How we thank the Lord for those channels! But there has always been a sad story accompanying each step of the Lord’s recovery. Nearly every time a lost truth was recovered by some new channels, the old channels fought against the newly discovered truth, and even fought against the channels used by the Lord to recover that truth. In principle, it is the same today.

Whatever Lee does or says is in the "recovery of truth", and whatever anyone else does is "deviation from truth"... got it? You really do need a revelation, and a vision, to follow this ministry. Otherwise you might begin to think, and start to consider, and we all know where that leads, right? Tree of Knowledge. The serpent asked questions. Bad move. Don't question. Only Luther, Darby, Nee and Lee could ask questions.

If Luther or Nee or Lee asked questions that was a recovery of the truth. If you or I were to ask questions that was being independent, divisive, and deviant. This was an intrinsic and essential part of the message that Lee continually spoke to us. Whatever he was teaching, this point would be integrated into it.

Originally Posted by aron

The truths of the Bible are holy. We do not believe that any mocking, ridiculing, or despising is the way for a saint to contend for the holy truths of our Holy God. It is a solemn thing to deal with the Word of God. We may edify others; we may also destroy others. We must always remind ourselves that whatever we say and do will be judged at the judgment seat of Christ when He comes back. May the Lord’s grace be with us all!

If Lee does it then it is called correcting, rebuking, and edifying. If anyone else does it, then it is called mocking, ridiculing, and despising. Got that?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

A STATEMENT BY WITNESS LEE

Lastly, I would like to say a word from my heart. We Christian brothers may hold different opinions concerning certain truths and may argue over them one with another. But let us do it in a spirit and on a level that are worthy of a saint in Christ. The truths of the Bible are holy. We do not believe that any mocking, ridiculing, or despising is the way for a saint to contend for the holy truths of our Holy God. It is a solemn thing to deal with the Word of God. We may edify others; we may also destroy others. We must always remind ourselves that whatever we say and do will be judged at the judgment seat of Christ when He comes back. May the Lord’s grace be with us all!

I learned to mock, ridicule, and despise other Christians and their diverse practices by watching Witness Lee. Who is he to tell us not to do it?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

A STATEMENT BY WITNESS LEE

I was born, raised up, and educated in Christianity. From my youth I have been taught with Bible stories and many teachings of the Bible. After I was saved, I sat at the feet of the great Brethren teachers, listening to hundreds of their messages concerning the Bible. Later I was helped by reading the inner-life books, such as the books by Madame Guyon, Andrew Murray, and Mrs. Jessie Penn-Lewis. After that, I was also involved in the Pentecostal movement. Then the Lord showed us from His Word a number of lost truths, such as the multiplication, the enlargement, of the unlimited Christ, the corporate Christ, the church being the manifestation of God in the flesh, the proper unity of the Body of Christ, the practical expression of the church, and other items.

Now this I agree with!

In this age of calculators and computers, multiplication is a lost truth!

Quick test -- how much is 14 times 16?

If you didn't know the answer in 2.24 seconds, it just proves that multiplication is a lost truth!

Witness Lee was right!

We need a recovery of the lost truth of multiplication.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Now this I agree with!

In this age of calculators and computers, multiplication is a lost truth!

Quick test -- how much is 14 times 16?

If you didn't know the answer in 2.24 seconds, it just proves that multiplication is a lost truth!

Witness Lee was right!

We need a recovery of the lost truth of multiplication.

Forget multiplication. I can't even add : 3=1.

[awareness]

Aron,

I don't think it was Lee's teachings that were the problem (in general). What makes the LRC a cult is the practices ... such as deputy/delegated authority. So, Martin was looking in the wrong place to find a cult there.

[UntoHim]

Actually Dr. Martin, and other apologists and critics, could only look at what they could see - which at the time were the writings in the form of books, booklets and tracts etc. Obviously many people were also aware of the Local Church's aggressive attitude and behavior towards other Christian groups. Not many people were aware of, much less able to directly observe, so many of the aberrational teachings and practices that took place behind the closed doors of the LC meeting halls.

Around this time (circa 1978) the LC released a booklet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of the Local Churches". Much of what was presented in this booklet was a highly sanitized version of what was commonly taught and practiced in the movement. For example, under the Q & A section one of the posed questions was "Who is your leader?". The answer given:
"Our unique leader is Christ. We have no official, permanent, organized human leadership. Furthermore, there is no hierarchy of any kind and no worldwide leader. We regard no person as infallible, and we do not follow anyone blindly."

Not many years later...."even if Witness Lee is wrong he is right!" and bold claims from church leaders that entire churches "owed their existence to Witness Lee" and that Lee was an apostle of the first order, just like the apostle Paul. Even worse things were said.

[aron]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Around this time (circa 1978) the LC released a booklet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of the Local Churches". Much of what was presented in this booklet was a highly sanitized version: "Our unique leader is Christ... there is no hierarchy of any kind..."

Oh my Gawwwd... or as they say, "Oh Lord Jeeeeeezusss..."

No hierarchy? Whaaaaat? This is one of the most rigidly hierarchical groups I've ever seen. The Maximum Leader is "acting God", okay? Can you connect the dots here?

Wow. Mind-blowing.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by aron

Oh my Gawwwd... or as they say, "Oh Lord Jeeeeeezusss..."

No hierarchy? Whaaaaat? This is one of the most rigidly hierarchical groups I've ever seen. The Maximum Leader is "acting God", okay? Can you connect the dots here?

Wow. Mind-blowing.

When Watchman Nee told Witness Lee "Christians lie" methinks he was talking about Witness Lee.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

Oh my Gawwwd... or as they say, "Oh Lord Jeeeeeezusss..."

No hierarchy? Whaaaaat? This is one of the most rigidly hierarchical groups I've ever seen. The Maximum Leader is "acting God", okay? Can you connect the dots here?

Wow. Mind-blowing.

No hierarchy? Right! You won't find the term hierarchy being used, but you will hear the phrase "giving fellowship" which is hierarchy in action.

A question I did ask within the last 4-5 years ago to then responsible brother (who is now an elder) "Would brother _____ (a former elder) be received in our locality?"
His response is "the brothers need to fellowship with the blending brothers."

That's indicative of a hierarchy. Of a locality answering to a brother or brothers.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Around this time (circa 1978) the LC released a booklet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of the Local Churches". Much of what was presented in this booklet was a highly sanitized version of what was commonly taught and practiced in the movement.

Interestingly, the GLA re-released that booklet about the time of the Quarantine of TC to show the hypocrisy and aberrations of the Blendeds. Those who decided to open their eyes all the way happened to see hypocrisy and aberrations of Witness Lee too.

[OBW]

Reading through the opening posts by aron (thanks for them), I was immediately reminded of a comment from a couple of Bible and church historians in a podcast just a couple of days ago. They noted that Protestants (of whom they both were squarely a part) see themselves as linked to the time from Christ through about Augustine, then jumping over everything until Luther. The fact is that, even with the introduction of various significant problems in the church, heavily beginning with the crusades, and other things, on up to the indulgences that Luther fought against, the history of what we now call the RCC is our history. Significant amounts of our theology came from that gap.

The point of this was not another plug for including the RCC in the Christian fold more firmly, but to note that despite the Protestant/Eastern/RCC rifts, there is a core of truth that is quite large. And it does not arrive at the place where a small, one-person-led group with novel theology is likely to be right while the 2,000 years of history has been wrong. No matter how fragmented we are on certain things, there is a large body of common ground that is traceable back through history to the source (the Bible). Some kind of "I've got the new and improved decoder ring" theology is just not worth its weight in raw sewage.

And, as I recall reading from sources outside the LRC, the fact that Martin and company went back to their warnings (attacks) is that this was just an early example of the times when the LRC/LSM confronted those who opposed them with agreements to play nice and give access, but there was actually no such access given, and since the evidence otherwise available left them (CRI and others) with what they had already discovered, they just went back to it. The LRC's claim that it was simply Martin who reneged is probably a bit of a falsehood. History is full of similar confrontations. The LSM publicly says "let's play nice" and then privately says "or we will sue." Since most of their opponents are not denominations, but much smaller non-profits that not much more than break even, just the process of discovery will cripple them while the LRC/LSM just keeps on grinding it out. That is how they "beat" Thomas Nelson and the guy that wrote The God Men.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Interestingly, the GLA re-released that booklet about the time of the Quarantine of TC to show the hypocrisy and aberrations of the Blendeds. Those who decided to open their eyes all the way happened to see hypocrisy and aberrations of Witness Lee too.

Wasn't it the same Beliefs and Practices book the now former Anaheim elders (John, Godfred, and Al) spoke on August 28, 1988 when the 16 points was delivered?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Witness Lee was right!

We need a recovery of the lost truth of multiplication.

I guess this is one of the benefits of "the recovered ground": when the Living Streamers have multiple meetings on one "locality" it is called multiplication. As in "Meeting Hall A" and "Meeting Hall B", or "the Chinese-speaking meeting" and "the college-age meeting" and "the Tuesday night vital home group meeting in Jon Smith's house". So that's good. But when someone not affiliated to LSM has multiple meetings in a locality that is called division. And that, of course, is bad.

So it's really simple. Just remember that when the LSM'ers do it they call it multiplication, and when anyone else does it they call it division. The nice thing about words is they can mean whatever people want them to mean.

[aron]

Over the last few years I began to see things in the Bible I never had considered before. Why does it say this here, or use this particular phraseology? Why did Jesus teach that there? Slowly, with occasional "revelations", a story began to emerge, a "meta-story" if you will, which began to make sense of it all. It was really amazing; it was like the Bible was "talking" to me. The Word actually was coming alive. It's like I began to perceive things on a deeper, unseen, 'spiritual' level. The physical was still there, but behind it was the world of the spirit(s), if you will.

And yesterday, for example, I was telling someone about how Jesus quoted Psalm 82, where it said, "I said, You are gods", to those who were confronting Him. Now, we all know that God is one, and that there are not multiple Gods. So why did Jesus quote that? I told my friend that there was likely a shared understanding of Psalm 82, and that Jesus expected some level of familiarity with it among the listening audience. There was a message there, beyond the snippet of "I said, you are gods". The Psalm 82 text can be interpreted several ways, on several levels, and depending on what level you see it will give different meaning to the story in John chapter 10. To my friend I was sharing one of the more physical levels, or readings, of this scene.

Okay, now on to my point. First, there is no guarantee my "meta-story", with its dependent reading of a fairly poetical or stylized narrative in Psalm 82, is objectively right. It is just something that I am currently reading into, or onto, the text. And there's no guarantee that even if my "vision" or "revelation" were correct on some objective level (i.e. 'many scholars take this position'), that I live anywhere near the spiritual reality of what I am beginning to see in these stories. And lastly, why should I fight with someone over my so-called "truths"? What kind of truth would that be if I began to call everyone else ignorant, blind, and dark who didn't agree with my vision? What kind of truth is that? Just exactly what would I have recovered, in that case?

[Elden1971]

This thread is giving me serious flashbacks as I not only attended the Melodyland meeting, but had met privately with Robert and Gretchen Passantino who were Dr. Martin's research associates the day before the meeting.
'

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

This thread is giving me serious flashbacks as I not only attended the Melodyland meeting, but had met privately with Robert and Gretchen Passantino who were Dr. Martin's research associates the day before the meeting.
'

Elden1971, do you have any insight in regard to Gretchen Passantino's turn in support of the local churches? Meaning the research she did with her husband, was it a product of thorough research or was it based on assumptions and incomplete information?