Bible Answer Man Converts to Eastern Orthodox!

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Funny Drake. You LCers are always make strawmen on Christianity generally, yet you believe in a false gospel.

The first day in heaven jingle encapsulates popular gospel concepts , Kevin. There's your false gospel.

Drake

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Drake

The first day in heaven jingle encapsulates popular gospel concepts , Kevin. There's your false gospel.

Drake

I'm not impressed with the likes of you.

More strawman

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'm not impressed with the likes of you.

More strawman

The strawman people are throwing around here is that Lee taught we become God's being/person/member of the Trinity/Godhead. There is pages of material on the web and numerous quotes by Lee to qualify his statements. The attitude towards Lee therefore is called "unrighteous judgement".

[Evangelical]

Here are a few quotes from CS Lewis about becoming God:

He said (in the Bible) that we were 'gods' and He is going to make good His words. If we let Him—for we can prevent Him, if we choose—He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a God

"It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship… There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations - these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit.”

Many Christians are fine with CS Lewis and don't regard him as a heretic. Here is some praise heaped upon him by gotquestions:

https://www.gotquestions.org/C-S-Lewis.html

"C. S. Lewis is often described as one of the greatest Christian apologists of the twentieth century."

"C. S. Lewis stands as a shining example of the influence a Christian can have in both the university and popular culture. "

"As an apologist and writer, C. S. Lewis was exemplary, and his books are among the most useful ever written"

Yet he never qualified well his statements about being God (capital G too) and most evangelicals forget or ignore he believed or wrote that at all, because evangelicals don't really care about heresy, they care about being popular and relevant.

Yet Lee is treated with disdain despite many pages of material qualifying his statements, and flat out denials that deification means we become God Himself. If this is not hypocrisy I don't know what is. It is also hypocritical to give John Piper a free pass when it is clear that he wrote a prayer of thanks to the most graceful Saint Athanasius, and forgot to thank Jesus at all - "Thank you, Athanasius. And thank you, Father. And thank you, Holy Spirit. In Jesus’ name, Amen."

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The strawman people are throwing around here is that Lee taught we become God's being/person/member of the Trinity/Godhead.

Mr. E.,
Please tell us about the God who we become "in life and nature". I really would like to know about this God. Seriously. This particular life and nature is apparently apart from his "being and person". According to you and Witness Lee, God has two lifes and two natures - one life and nature that we become, and one life and nature that we do not become. If this nonsense sounds familiar, it's because Witness Lee made a habit out of teaching unbiblical and illogical stuff. Lee also had at least two Jesus(es)....One that rose from the dead and is at the right hand of the Father, and one that "became the life-giving Spirit". Oh, and let's not forget about the two Fathers - One Jesus who is called the Father, and another Father that was on the cross with Jesus.

As far as using the writings of C.S. Lewis to confirm the orthodoxy of Witness Lee's unbiblical/heretical teachings...well let's just go to another genuine, bonafide theologian, Dr. John Piper, for some assistance, shall we?
"Lewis is not a writer to which we should turn for growth in a careful biblical understanding of Christian doctrine. There is almost no passage of Scripture on which I would turn to Lewis for exegetical illumination. … His value is not in his biblical exegesis. Lewis is not the kind of writer who provides substance for a pastor’s sermons."
excerpt from http://equip.sbts.edu

Actually Mr E., you are missing something very crucial when it comes to considering whether a teaching is biblical or unbiblical, orthodox or heretical. What you don't seem to understand is that an unbiblical/heretical statement/declaration/teaching is unbiblical/heretical no matter who states it, declares it or teaches it. Orthodoxy does not ultimately reside with the teacher(s), it always resides with God himself and his living and abiding Word. I understand that this might be a difficult concept for you to grasp, for you are used to your guru being referred to as "the acting god", "the deputy authority", "even if he's wrong, he's right!" "The One Minister with The One Ministry for the Age"...etc, etc..
-

[Nell]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Actually Mr E., you are missing something very crucial when it comes to considering whether a teaching is biblical or unbiblical, orthodox or heretical. What you don't seem to understand is that an unbiblical/heretical statement/declaration/teaching is unbiblical/heretical no matter who states it, declares it or teaches it. Orthodoxy does not ultimately reside with the teacher(s), it always resides with God himself and his living and abiding Word. I understand that this might be a difficult concept for you to grasp, for you are used to your guru being referred to as "the acting god", "the deputy authority", "even if he's wrong, he's right!" "The One Minister with The One Ministry for the Age"...etc, etc.. -

UntoHim,

Don't forget this post by the E-man which should be considered as the bedrock of whatever is put forth by the E:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

.... Straw-man's are part and parcel of this sort of discussion - grow up and get over it. I'm not asking for respect, I'm questioning why ... .

So, he relies on "Straw-man's" (?), if you don't like it it's your own immaturity, respect is not important to him..." So, we really can't expect much from such a one, can we?

Nell

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Nell

UntoHim, Don't forget this post by the E-man which should be considered as the bedrock of whatever is put forth by the E: So, he relies on "Straw-man's" (?), if you don't like it it's your own immaturity, respect is not important to him..." So, we really can't expect much from such a one, can we?

Well respect is earned, not given, especially since others in this forum have said similar things to me, for example Igzy wrote in this thread:

"As for your weird and unbiblical obsession with names, whatever. Grow up. Get a life. Do something that shows you have some sense. "

And people were mocking my testimony, calling it a joke, and you did call me a troll, numerous times. So don't talk to me about "mutual respect" if you can't show respect yourself.


This only proves what Drake wrote:

Evangelical is making a very compelling case and I am reading his explanation with great interest. Anytime you see those personal insults toward him then it is apparent they have lost the argument, or are losing it quickly, so they resort to ad hominem attacks to supplement weak arguments. Then it’s time to pause and consider what he is saying that has left them flummoxed.

I was being pragmatic, that straw-mans are expected in this sort of discussion, they are everywhere, in the media, and even in formal debates. I try to address the straw man argument with facts and move on rather than worry about who said what to whom.

However as this post shows some people just want to make it personal.

The "bedrock" I have put forth is credible bible scholars and theologians.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Mr. E.,
Please tell us about the God who we become "in life and nature". I really would like to know about this God. Seriously. This particular life and nature is apparently apart from his "being and person". According to you and Witness Lee, God has two lifes and two natures - one life and nature that we become, and one life and nature that we do not become. If this nonsense sounds familiar, it's because Witness Lee made a habit out of teaching unbiblical and illogical stuff. Lee also had at least two Jesus(es)....One that rose from the dead and is at the right hand of the Father, and one that "became the life-giving Spirit". Oh, and let's not forget about the two Fathers - One Jesus who is called the Father, and another Father that was on the cross with Jesus.

As far as using the writings of C.S. Lewis to confirm the orthodoxy of Witness Lee's unbiblical/heretical teachings...well let's just go to another genuine, bonafide theologian, Dr. John Piper, for some assistance, shall we?
"Lewis is not a writer to which we should turn for growth in a careful biblical understanding of Christian doctrine. There is almost no passage of Scripture on which I would turn to Lewis for exegetical illumination. … His value is not in his biblical exegesis. Lewis is not the kind of writer who provides substance for a pastor’s sermons."
excerpt from http://equip.sbts.edu

Actually Mr E., you are missing something very crucial when it comes to considering whether a teaching is biblical or unbiblical, orthodox or heretical. What you don't seem to understand is that an unbiblical/heretical statement/declaration/teaching is unbiblical/heretical no matter who states it, declares it or teaches it. Orthodoxy does not ultimately reside with the teacher(s), it always resides with God himself and his living and abiding Word. I understand that this might be a difficult concept for you to grasp, for you are used to your guru being referred to as "the acting god", "the deputy authority", "even if he's wrong, he's right!" "The One Minister with The One Ministry for the Age"...etc, etc..
-

You are forgetting that I used John Piper to support Lee in my earlier post. So trying to discredit CS Lewis does not work. Piper, Blackwell, CS Lewis, all match with Lee's doctrine, I could quote any of them.

To some CS Lewis is the greatest theologian ever and to others, like Piper I guess he is not. But like CS Lewis, Piper is supportive of the doctrine of theosis, and explains how evangelicals/protestants indeed do believe in it, they just call it by another name "glorification". With that, Blackwell seems to disagree, mentioning how it is virtually unknown. I see Piper's point about glorification but in essence the doctrine is different - evangelicals see it as a legal contract and something we get because of that contract, and even see it as the end goal of sanctification/holiness - but the actual doctrine of theosis is about a process involving the person of God Himself (as the Spirit) and being transformed into His image. So Piper is just trying to be friendly to Orthodox beliefs in my view, and make evangelicalism match up with Orthodoxy. But it is notable how Piper does not flat out reject the doctrine, or the historical orthodoxy of it. He is so smitten by it that he throws in a prayer to St Athanasius as well.

At this point in time Piper's credibility itself is in question as he has written a prayer to St Athanasius. I'm just interpreting the plain English words he wrote down as you are of Lee. To me there is no reason why one should thank a dead person as if they are standing in front of them and then follow it up by "in Jesus name, Amen". That's a prayer, you are just unwilling to see and admit that it is because of your anti-Lee bias. It's perfectly acceptable to say a respected theologian such as Piper made a mistake in writing a prayer of thanks to Athanasius. I can tell that Piper misspoke because I noticed no one has tried to defend him or qualify his statements for him. Even you didn't, you simply called into question my ability to read English.

I appreciate your take on Orthodoxy as "God Himself and His Word", I tend to agree, and have shown how God's divinity and the Psalm 82 support the doctrine of theosis, but I take a more pragmatic view what talking about particular doctrines. Orthodoxy in practice is defined relative to whichever group is making the claim of Orthodoxy or heresy. For this reason the teacher/person making the claim of Orthodoxy must be evaluated relative to other teachers. This is how the doctrine of the Trinity won over the doctrine of Arianism. It's why heresy to a Catholic and heresy to a Protestant are different things.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Piper is supportive of the doctrine of theosis, and explains how evangelicals/protestants indeed do believe in it, they just call it by another name "glorification".

So "theosis" = "gorification", Mr E.? Really? I hope you don't quit your day job for being a wanna-be-theologian (like your acting god Witness Lee) because you and yours are going to be homeless and starve to death if you do. Seriously, my man, you're clueless. You wouldn't know orthodox, evangelical theology if it came up and bit you on the nose. You only know what you google - and you're not very good at that...so hang on to your hat my brother.

But it is notable how Piper does not flat out reject the doctrine, or the historical orthodoxy of it. He is so smitten by it that he throws in a prayer to St Athanasius as well

If you admit that you you believe that Witness Lee was the only person on earth speaking as God's oracle (since 1945) and that he is "The One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age" and that "the process of sanctification is only taking place in the Local Church of Witness Lee" (per Benson Phillips, the president of LSM) then I will concede that John Piper was giving a prayer to "St. Athanasius".

Man Up or shut up. Or are you like most Local Churchers who are all bark and no bite? You play like you are a man of your convictions...but you always back away when it comes to showing your real convictions. Bring it on. Tell me..tell us, about who Witness Lee is to you. I'll tell you who John Piper, who Billy Graham, who any man on earth is to me. Don't be shy. Don't be coy. Tell us who Witness Lee is to you. If you won't tell us this then you have nothing to say to us. Your credibility is null and void. You are here claiming to be a member of the Local Church (and by extension a follower of the person and work of Witness Lee)...so tell us about your convictions regarding Witness Lee. Tell us about your convictions regarding his teachings. Was he lying or telling the truth when he swore under other in a legal deposition that "he does not consider himself to be an apostle, and he told others to not consider him an apostle"?
-

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So "theosis" = "gorification", Mr E.? Really? I hope you don't quit your day job for being a wanna-be-theologian (like your acting god Witness Lee) because you and yours are going to be homeless and starve to death if you do. Seriously, my man, you're clueless. You wouldn't know orthodox, evangelical theology if it came up and bit you on the nose. You only know what you google - and you're not very good at that...so hang on to your hat my brother.

I'm not trying to be a theologian, but at least I'm reading their articles and quoting them - I'm just paraphrasing the John Piper article where it says:

What becomes clear when all is taken into account is that Athanasius is pressing on a reality in the Scriptures that we today usually call “glorification”

Glorification (in Western terminology), or deification (according to the East)

He loves the doctrine of deification or theosis, who knew, that evangelicals have been teaching it all along! This is that ground-breaking moment when you realize John Piper is in "the recovery" and bringing back the early church beliefs.

You are talking as if you know what you are talking about and saying how John Piper is a real theologian and all, but you haven't even read his article. What is the use of knowing who the theologians are if you don't know what they are saying?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

If you admit that you you believe that Witness Lee was the only person on earth speaking as God's oracle (since 1945) and that he is "The One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age" and that "the process of sanctification is only taking place in the Local Church of Witness Lee" (per Benson Phillips, the president of LSM) then I will concede that John Piper was giving a prayer to "St. Athanasius".

Man Up or shut up. Or are you like most Local Churchers who are all bark and no bite? You play like you are a man of your convictions...but you always back away when it comes to showing your real convictions. Bring it on. Tell me..tell us, about who Witness Lee is to you. I'll tell you who John Piper, who Billy Graham, who any man on earth is to me. Don't be shy. Don't be coy. Tell us who Witness Lee is to you. If you won't tell us this then you have nothing to say to us. Your credibility is null and void. You are here claiming to be a member of the Local Church (and by extension a follower of the person and work of Witness Lee)...so tell us about your convictions regarding Witness Lee. Tell us about your convictions regarding his teachings. Was he lying or telling the truth when he swore under other in a legal deposition that "he does not consider himself to be an apostle, and he told others to not consider him an apostle"?
-

I've made my views on Lee clear in many posts. I think anyone who starts hundreds of churches would be an apostle to be able to do that.

But given that most of your post is ad hominem it is time to quote Drake again:

Evangelical is making a very compelling case and I am reading his explanation with great interest. Anytime you see those personal insults toward him then it is apparent they have lost the argument, or are losing it quickly, so they resort to ad hominem attacks to supplement weak arguments. Then it’s time to pause and consider what he is saying that has left them flummoxed.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So "theosis" = "gorification", Mr E.? Really? I hope you don't quit your day job for being a wanna-be-theologian (like your acting god Witness Lee) because you and yours are going to be homeless and starve to death if you do. Seriously, my man, you're clueless. You wouldn't know orthodox, evangelical theology if it came up and bit you on the nose. You only know what you google - and you're not very good at that...so hang on to your hat my brother.

No, UntoHim.
E is not a wanna-be-theologian.

Some one is a budding higher echelon LSM blended.
Wonder whether he has a day job.
Proving himself in this forum for his place and position among the 'gods'.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'm not impressed with the likes of you.

More strawman

Ran out of meaningful things to say? So unlike you Kevin, but understandable .

Let’s go back to where you jumped in. You murmured about the “higher gospel” and then quoted a song that explained the concept. I responded with the common gospel in Christianity and quoted a song that explained the concept. That is not a straw man, it is like for like. I quoted one song, but there are many many that convey the same concept. If you don’t like the format then you’ve only yourself to blame... it is yours.

Drake

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Drake

The first day in heaven jingle encapsulates popular gospel concepts

Really Drake? So you're like Witness Lee who had the pulse of EVERY CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND MINISTRY THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH? You get to tell us what "encapsulates popular gospel concepts"? Please tell us a little more about your omniscient, omnipresent super powers! Inquiring minds want to know!

Originally Posted by Drake

Ran out of meaningful things to say?

Well, at least he had something meaningful to say in the first place.

Let’s go back to where you jumped in. You murmured about the “higher gospel” and then quoted a song that explained the concept. I responded with the common gospel in Christianity and quoted a song that explained the concept.

"The common gospel in Christianity"? There you go again. Drake, how would you know what "the common gospel in Christianity" is? You are in the Local Church of Witness Lee...one of the most isolated and insular Christian sects around. Have you been cheating and going to meetings/services of those mooing cows in poor, poor Christianity? If you have, I'd suggest you avoid the ones who are not preaching/teaching a biblical Gospel.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Really Drake? So you're like Witness Lee who had the pulse of EVERY CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND MINISTRY THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH? You get to tell us what "encapsulates popular gospel concepts"? Please tell us a little more about your omniscient, omnipresent super powers! Inquiring minds want to know!

Lee and company constantly used the worst event or superstition in Christianity to characterize the whole. It's basic textbook prejudice.

But, wait. Drake then screams foul when I discuss actual leadership tactics at LSM -- including money scams, molesting the sisters, deceptive coverups, smear campaigns against whistle-blowers, unending lawsuits, quarantines, etc.

But when did I ever characterize the whole LCM (with all of the LC's and members) by these detailed corruptions inside the walls of LSM headquarters.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

[COLOR="Navy"]
"The common gospel in Christianity"? There you go again. Drake, how would you know what "the common gospel in Christianity" is? You are in the Local Church of Witness Lee...one of the most isolated and insular Christian sects around. Have you been cheating and going to meetings/services of those mooing cows in poor, poor Christianity? If you have, I'd suggest you avoid the ones who are not preaching/teaching a biblical Gospel.
-

UntoHim,

Are you really going to dispute that the common belief in Christianity is when you die you go to heaven and will live there forever?

Seriously, if you think it is something different then explain it.

And please stop ranting and raving about who I am supposed to avoid. That was your church life experience, not mine. If you are unclear about my experience then reread my testimony. You are trying to pigeonhole your opponent into your canned concept so you can frame your argument around that. You are doing the same with Evangelical. Also, you seem to be under the mistaken belief the being belligerent strengthens your argument. It really doesn’t.

If the church life you describe was my experience then I probably would have left too. It’s not. Once you accept that your blood pressure will become more manageable.

Drake

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Drake

Are you really going to dispute that the common belief in Christianity is when you die you go to heaven and will live there forever?

First of all, I apologize for being belligerent. You're right, it doesn't help. So let me take a couple of deep breaths here....ah, that's better.

Again...once again Drake...Please explain how you know so much about "the common belief in Christianity." How many Christian churches (who could be considered at least nominally evangelical/orthodox) have you visited over the past few years? We already know that you are not the typical Local Churcher...you know that your hair won't catch on fire when you visit a non-Local Church fellowship...so take a few minutes and tell us about what is preached and taught in these churches.

Ok, another couple of deep breaths....

Since Mr. E., refuses to answer this most salient question, I'll try you.

Please explain to us about the two lives and two natures of God. Actually you really only need to tell us about the life and nature of God that is separate from his being, from his Godhead (that is, the life and nature that we become apart from his being and Godhead) It would be super cool if you could use some verses in the New Testament to clarify.

If the church life you describe was my experience then I probably would have left too. It’s not. Once you accept that your blood pressure will become more manageable.

Well Drake you have spent a lot of time telling us what was NOT your experience, but not very much about what was your experience. Of course one's experience is by definition subjective. I have almost never spoke about my personal experience, which was, for the most part, positive. I find it much more profitable for all concerned to stick to the concrete - the teachings of Witness Lee, the practices either established or promoted by Lee and the history of the LC movement...the good, the bad and the ugly.

For example, your "experience" may not have included running around a college campus and proclaiming "I'm a baby god!" But the fact is that is exactly what happened. Your experience may not have included "we're Witness Lee tape recorders!" But the fact is that is exactly what happened. Your experience may not have included telling some unbeliever that if he "calls Oh, Lord Jesus" several times he will be saved. But the fact is that is exactly what happened. I was in Orange County California back in the day when this nonsense happened on a regular basis. This was not thousands of miles away from Anaheim, away from the eyes and ears of Witness Lee. In fact, Lee promoted these kind of aberrational teachings.

So you can forget about subjective experience. It is actually not relevant to the facts of history. You have your experience. I have mine. But none of that changes what Witness Lee taught and the practices he promoted. Our personal experience doesn't change all the sordid history of promoting evil men, and placing innocent and vulnerable women in harms way. Our personal experience doesn't change the damage done to family relationships, marriages and young people.

So why do I bring all this up (again)? I bring it up because Witness Lee and his teachings and the practices he established and/or promoted are still being extolled as "God's move on earth" and "THE Lord's Recovery". Lee, to this very day, is still being extolled and promoted as "The One Minister with the One Ministry for The Age". To this very day, Lee is being extolled and promoted as the only person on earth who spoke as God's oracle. And the worse thing is that these are not "optional" beliefs for LC members. Those who disagree are shunned at best, and usually made so uncomfortable they simply disappear. Again, your experience, my experience is not relevant to the facts.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Please explain to us about the two lives and two natures of God. Actually you really only need to tell us about the life and nature of God that is separate from his being, from his Godhead (that is, the life and nature that we become apart from his being and Godhead) It would be super cool if you could use some verses in the New Testament to clarify.

Hi UntoHim,

I have been out of pocket since you posted this question. I read it and have been meaning to respond to it because I believe it is perhaps the most relevant and insightful question posed in this forum for a long time.

I am coming up for air soon and will respond shortly. Just wanted you to know I am not ignoring your question and look forward to a meaningful dialogue on it.

Thanks
Drake

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Drake

Hi UntoHim,

I have been out of pocket since you posted this question. I read it and have been meaning to respond to it because I believe it is perhaps the most relevant and insightful question posed in this forum for a long time.

I am coming up for air soon and will respond shortly. Just wanted you to know I am not ignoring your question and look forward to a meaningful dialogue on it.

Thanks
Drake

And, to all parties on this particular discussion, I hope it is simple enough for me to understand!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And, to all parties on this particular discussion, I hope it is simple enough for me to understand!

I'm keenly interested in the two lives and two natures of God too. But actually, if each of us become God in life and nature, there may be as many as a billion lives and natures, plus the life and nature of God. Lives and natures here. Lives and natures there. Lives and natures everywhere. Sounds sorta like pantheism. But add God and it's panentheism.

And I guess Evangelical is out of pocket too.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Drake

Just wanted you to know I am not ignoring your question and look forward to a meaningful dialogue on it.

That's great Drake, I'm looking forward to the meaningful dialogue. Maybe you could team up with Mr. E and you guys can make it a "tag team".
Three rounds...winner takes all!
-