The Psalms are the word of Christ

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Instead of supporting a narrative, the text becomes a set of disjointed aphorisms, to be mined for today's theology.

What are today's texts were once oral narratives(1). They were stories, songs, poems. So each narrative had a theme. It wasn't a set of disjointed aphorisms. (Perhaps Proverbs or Ecclesiasticus were, but typically texts were initially narratives.) "Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water": it's how we remember things. The characters, the going, the landscape (a hill), the fetching, the pail and the water are all remembered for their place in the narrative.

So I suggest that "not one of His bones were broken" and "Zeal of Thy house has eaten Me up" were originally formed as part of a narrative; actually a set of narratives which made up a larger narrative (Psalms), a meta-narrative if you will. And this was set with and looked to "the Law" and "the Prophets" as a still larger story - that of, "the scripture says".

"His disciples remembered that it was written...", and "These things were written concerning Me..." in the NT narratives were in a context which (I suspect) gradually lost meaning, and narrative thrust. A new context arose, meet for today's need of Reformation or Recovery or True Remnant Church or whatever, and a new meta-narrative came forth, and then the text was only useful to support "God's New Testament Economy" or whatever they're pitching today.

So if you review their product, and the salesman (sorry, Bible expositor) says, "natural, natural, natural - eureka! A revelation of Christ! - natural, natural, natural", as they cover the text, and you wonder how far we've gone off-course, perhaps this is an initial clue, or signpost.

But the good news is that the text is still there, preserved largely in toto, waiting to speak. The story is still there. But ignoring the text as "natural" won't bring you the story.

1. Remember that Peter and the rest were called "unlettered" in Acts 4:13. Even then, the texts were known primarily orally, by the uneducated masses. Thus the narrative structure was crucial.

I propose that the Psalms are given less attention because there are powerful chapters in that book that can be used against demons and witchcraft.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I propose that the Psalms are given less attention because there are powerful chapters in that book that can be used against demons and witchcraft.

Which ones are those and how does one use them. The reason I ask is that I might have a relative who is believing demonic lies.

[aron]

Originally Posted by unreg

I propose that the Psalms are given less attention because there are powerful chapters in that book that can be used against demons and witchcraft.

Originally Posted by HERn

Which ones are those and how does one use them. The reason I ask is that I might have a relative who is believing demonic lies.

The Jews long believed that David was communing intimately with God, and the words of Psalmic poetry allowed them special access. So they use David's words to pray to God. And certain specific Psalms, over time, became known as poems for, say, protection, or healing, or freedom from demonic oppression

The Lubavicher Jews seem to display this tendency most prominently. Just google "psalms protection prayer" and you'll pull up a host of websites giving particulars.

The Psalms were oral texts, recited, sung and prayed, often in communal setting. As such they became the basis of social understanding of who God was, what His will was, and what were relations between Godly persons. These inspired poems were also a window into the "mystical" unseen world. The psalmist was inspired, in oracular spirit, and by this same spirit the initiate could also enter the experience. (Not too different from Lee's ideas, except Lee panned these texts as "low", "fallen" and "natural".)

What follows an idea of why the Psalms were "given less attention" under Lee, as the unregistered poster above has noted.

Originally Posted by aron

Witness Lee clearly had control issues. When the saints actually began to take the apostle Paul at his word and sing the Psalms, "As the hart panteth after the water brooks/so panteth my soul after Thee, O God", then Lee got worried because they were enjoying the Word outside his ministry and this to him was most dangerous. Lee wanted to be the sole mediator of man's revelatory experience in the Word of God. So Lee told the fellowships in the Lord's Recovery to stop singing the Psalms, because they were too low. I have heard this verbally from several people who were there.

He didn't, of course, say "Stop singing the Psalms"; he said, "It would be better if you sang verses from Ephesians than from Psalms". Then he imitated in a mocking way the saints as they praised God using the words of the psalmist. His "shaming" actions were enough to discourage the saints.

I respect the Lubavitcher, and others, and hope to learn from them, as they've had great familiarity with these words and how they've been received over millennia. (The Lubavitcher are a prominent sect in Judaism today, similar to our Baptist or Anglican). But for we the Christians, these mystical texts allow us access to the heart of Christ. The reciprocal delight between Christ and His Father becomes our new reality. When Jesus said, "These things were written concerning Me" this was his explicit assent, even encouragement, to this notion. And the epistles' repeated psalmic usage confirms the gospel record.

"Mysticism is a technical term for a cluster of religious phenomena that relates to religious practice within a specific religious system (Judaism, Christianity), that takes as its goal the experience of union or communion with a transcendent reality that is ultimately beyond intellectual comprehension and that has concrete social function within the life of a particular community"

So these often vague pronouncements - "Behold He comes, with ten thousands of saints" - aren't merely to be analyzed objectively (Coming where? From behind Mount Seir? (Deut 33). Why did Jude cite Enoch and not Moses? And before or after the secret rapture; and with 'holy ones' or 'holy angels' [MT v. LXX] or both?) but are to be entered as experiential doors. At some point our mind also finds meaning, but primarily we "enjoy" it as the LC folk say. And we enjoy because Christ enjoyed.

"He rescued Me because He delighted in Me" (cf Psa 18); God doesn't delight in me the sinner. He delights in His Beloved Son. But by faith I see the His Beloved Son, the Christ who is our Lord, and by faith and confession am transferred "into Christ", and by faith I pursue Christ in the sacred texts. This is my salvation.

And the LC saints were entering into this: for example, a Jewish believer from dreaded "Christianity" had put Psalm 51 to music, and the saints were entering into mystical union - "take not Thy Holy Spirit from me" - and this bothered Lee. Control was slipping away, and forbidden doors were being opened. Songs were spontaneously pouring forth. Salvation was not a dry term but a deepening stream of experience, an emergent, communal performance - so he shut it down.

(Please note that I don't consider Psalms as superior writings to those of, say, Isaiah or Moses; rather I'm protesting the outright rejection of inspired scripture, both explicitly in footnote, and implicitly by non-coverage [the RecV psalms have page after blank page without footnote, and few cross-references].)

The LC have what, a dozen or fifteen psalms among their 1100 hymns, often merely a line or two? What about the other hundred and thirty five? Too low to bother with? What kind of gospel are we preaching, here? And why is our hermeneutic, our "enjoyment", taking us away from the text?

[aron]

Rom 3:22 (KJV) Even the righteousness of God with is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Gal 3:22 But the scripture hat concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Notice that it doesn't say faith 'in' Christ but faith 'of' Christ. "He trusts in God; let Him (the Father) save Him (the Son) now" (Matt 27:43; Psa 22:8) -- Jesus Christ believed and trusted in the Father. So when He came to the scripture, "I'll obey Your word" (Psalm 119) wasn't the vain imaginations of the sinner but rather the framework and vehicle for His faith, the faith of Jesus Christ, to come and redeem sinful humanity. This is explicitly confirmed by the Hebrews 10:9 citation of Psalm 40 - "I come to do Your will, Oh God" etc. The faithful obedience of the Son becomes the gateway to salvation to all who would believe.

And it is the faithful Spirit of this Son who comes into our hearts, crying "Abba, Father!" It is the faith of Christ that inflames our hearts, not our own. Remember that it's no longer we who live but the Spirit of the Son who lives in us, who's guiding us home through repentance and obedience.

Safe to say that Witness Lee looked at the Psalms and missed all this, even though NT usage gave a clear invitation to do so. He had his "God's economy" metric to protect. I argue that by distracting people from God's Christ, and discouraging them from finding the faith of Christ in its pages, Witness Lee's RecV Bible isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Of course that's merely my view at present, and it may change over time, as my views often do. And the real truth here may be that I'm a vain, quarrelsome person, looking to pick a fight somewhere. If so, and to what extent this is true, I apologize for a wrong spirit.

You know, if Moses was a true and faithful peacemaker, when he saw the Egyptian beating the Hebrew slave, he'd have run up and embraced them both, and healed them, and they'd all sing "Kumbaya" together. Unfortunately it wasn't to be so, at that time. But the faith of Christ is coming, folks. Be embraced and love your neighbor as yourself, even the one who's currently suffering under bad ideas, and causing others to suffer. Because we all fail. "Who has sinned, and I don't burn?"

It seems fitting to leave you with a song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvhWTWpNWL0

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hi aron, The massive quantity of messages given by Brother Lee showing Christ as the fulfillment and reality of all the types, shadows, prophecies, etc. in the Old Testament speak to his great love, honor, labor, and devotion to the Old Testament. Your accusations to the contrary have no merit. If you didn't toss those Life Studies, which Stuttgart considered good inspired stuff up until a certain date, then dust them off, read them for yourself, and refresh your understanding about what he taught.
Then, I will be happy to discuss, engage, or debate any topic concerning what Witness Lee actually taught. It is pointless to discuss teachings he never taught! No one benefits from that no matter what side they are on.
Gott gebe euch Verständnis,
Drake

Christ was the fulfillment of the types of the OT. Witness Lee taught this, true. This was in accord with the NT reception of the Psalms.

My question is, where in the NT reception of the Psalms do we see them say, "Christ is the fulfillment of Psalm 2, 8, 16, and 22, but not Psalm 1,3,4,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14 etc etc?"

Did Paul give some private fellowship to the saints that only some texts were indicative of the coming Messiah, who was now revealed to the world as Jesus the Nazarene? And this private fellowship was lost for 1,900 years until Lee by his God's Economy metric was alble to pry the truth from the text?

How do we know that the Blessed Man who meditated on the word day and night, whose leaf never withered, wasn't also the enthroned King of Psalm 2? Jesus was the Obedient Lamb of God in Psalm 1 who was thus uniquely qualified to be our Good Shepherd in Psalm 2. Then in Psalm 3 you have rebellion: "I lay me down and slept/I awaked for the LORD sustained me" is akin to "I have the power to lay My life down, and the power to take it up again", etc etc. There is possibly indication of the experience of Christ in the text.

And so forth. "The unfolding of Your Word brings life/It brings understanding to the simple."

But to my recollection Lee never considered Christ. He gave two options: either the psalmist spoke truly and was the blessed man, or the "NT believers" somehow fulfilled this. He could see neither, and dismissed the text as low, fallen, natural concepts of sinful man. Why was this not considered as a revelation of Christ, as was Psalm 8 or Psalm 22 or Psalm 110 or Psalm 69?

When in Acts 2 Peter considered the failure of the psalmist to fulfill his declarations in Psalm 16 "You will not let my flesh see corruption" he didn't say it was merely vain, fallen natural concepts of a sinner, but rather the revelatory indication of the coming Christ. Why then did Lee instead take the former tack in handling the OT text? What NT precedent did he have for this kind of reception of the psalmic text?

When one looks, one can see NT echoes in the OT text, even in the most unlikely places. The psalm of David's confession, Psalm 51, would seem unrelated to Christ. Yet in the restoration line, "Then I will teach transgressors Your ways/And sinners will turn back to You" I can hear faint echoes of Jesus saying to Peter, "I have prayed for you, and when you turn, you will strengthen the brothers."

There is life in the text. Its unfolding brings life. I don't claim revelation, but rather object strenuously to Lee dismissing the text so cavalierly, and creating a system in which if he dismissed it, nobody could find life either. "You neither enter into life, nor allow your disciples to do so."

[Evangelical]

We do not find life in the Bible. Life is only to be found in Christ. The moment we seek life in the Bible we do as the pharisees did:
John 5:39 You pore over the Scriptures because you think you have eternal life in them, yet they testify about Me.

The Bible gives us the knowledge of life. Some Bible verses give us knowledge of life, but others give us knowledge of death.