Does Proverbs 26:4 contradict verse 5?

[OBW]

Now, having said what I have concerning the meaning of the verses in Proverbs (which I am not certain is entirely correct) I do see something emerging from those verses that might not have been intended.

And it relates to how we speak concerning Lee, the BBs, the teachings of the LRC and the high-handedness of everything LSM.

We rightly accuse Lee of simply lashing out at everything that does not fall in line with his teachings. And there are clearly errors in his teachings, and serious problems in the unrighteous way the Lee acted and the BBs and LSM continue to act.

But do we too often simply gnash our teeth back at them in similar fashion? And do we over-correct when we realize that others are doing that, almost falling all over ourselves to be nice?

The answer, I believe, is in more rational discourse about any issue, whether theological or practical. Don't just say something is so. Take time to establish that it is so. Don't just say it isn't so. Show how it is not so.

I am probably as bad about this in some ways as anyone else. When I said that Lee limited the understanding of many words to only a single meaning throughout scripture, that is all I said. Ohio rightly pointed out that Lee probably spent more time doing some of the kind of open discussion of alternative meanings than most others preachers. They usually take only the time to give you the answers. Lee always took more time because for every one sermon by a preacher, Lee gave several messages in a conference. But after going through those variations, he too often settled on one definition to the exclusion of the others. In the case of "economy," it was to a very narrow, peculiar definition that he insisted was the only one. In the case of "one," he insisted that it was simply an organic union. (Interesting that those two definitions go together so well.)

But the real problem here is that we too often do just like him. We quickly conclude without real consideration and go on a rampage (answering the fool as in Proverbs 26:4). Or we reject those on the rampage and fight against their position with equal lack of consideration.

Emotional responses actually are kind of like the Dark Side. They cloud our judgment by limiting our desire to investigate, consider, contemplate.

This is a board for the discussion of Lee, Nee, and the LRC. We need to do a better job of discussing them, not merely ranting or defending with incredulity.

And I now find it interesting that someone is flooding the forum with posts yet is using a temporary moniker that will have to be changed after a short time. That smacks of motives inconsistent with the purpose of the forum. I still say that it should not be an option. Unto has more reason to question that one about motives because they have already indicated that they do not intend to be permanent — just flood us and disappear. Or return shortly with a new moniker and a new style and demeanor.

And all of the possible problems may not exist for this person. But it is strongly hinted. And some indication that it is coming true.

Unto. Time to require registration.

[77150]

I think I am operating on a different definition of "Wisdom and folly" than everyone else. To me the verse "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" is the key to my understanding. This takes the term "wisdom" out of a natural view of someone being "successful" and puts it into the view of eternity. In my understanding building up a "successful ministry" is folly if you are not subject to the Lord in all things. Much like the Lord's word "depart from me workers of iniquity, I never knew you".

In this same vein any work of iniquity is folly in the final analysis. So you could have a "brilliant" plan that deceives everyone but it is still folly because one day you have to appear before the Lord Jesus.

In this same vein anything that is out of pride is folly. How can you stand before the Lord in your "pride" and not feel like a total fool? Therefore any scorn directed at another person is also folly, the Lord created this person for a purpose.

My definition of folly -- anything that I do that I would be ashamed of at the Lord's coming.

Herein is the dilemma. Which is quite similar to Jesus becoming sin for us so that we could be saved from our sins. There is lots of scriptural justification to "expose the works of darkness" yet in doing so you will heap scorn on the heads of those who acted hypocritically and deceitfully. Yet the Lord has already promised that you will be judged with the same judgement with which you judge.

The way I understand this is that you have to take special care, much like a doctor who scrubs up before an operation. Every word you speak will be used to judge you.

[77150]

21:11 When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise: and when the wise is instructed, he receiveth knowledge.
21:12 The righteous man wisely considereth the house of the wicked: but God overthroweth the wicked for their wickedness.

I think reading more details about WL, “the scorner”, helped me “the simple” to be made wise. I imagine this is the experience of many who were in or are in the LRC.

I would hope that we are “the righteous men wisely considering the house of the wicked”, but in the end it is God that overthrows the wicked for their wickedness. However, we are coworkers of God. Why would God punish the scorner in a way where the simple are not made wise? Therefore this site is critical because when God does overthrow the wicked for their wickedness everyone will know why He did it.

Finally:

21:13 Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard.

This verse reminds me of post #26 by Nell in “Mark them which cause divisions” thread.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by 77150

I think I am operating on a different definition of "Wisdom and folly" than everyone else. To me the verse "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" is the key to my understanding.

My definition of folly -- anything that I do that I would be ashamed of at the Lord's coming.

77150, I for one appreciate the perspective you bring to the forum. I think it is a great addition to the mix, and don't understand the comments about posting in "bad-faith." Hopefully you can work out this apparent misunderstanding.

Having had little personal study into the book of Proverbs, I find your comments a welcome insight indeed when compared to the stale comments I usually post. I daresay that no one has yet brought this ancient book of wisdom into the context of LSM and the LC's. All "good" followers of the teachings of WL have mostly avoided this book because it was apparently "short of Christ," or so we were told.

[77150]

Originally Posted by Ohio

77150, I daresay that no one has yet brought this ancient book of wisdom into the context of LSM and the LC's. All "good" followers of the teachings of WL have mostly avoided this book because it was apparently "short of Christ," or so we were told.

28:4 They that forsake the law praise the wicked: but such as keep the law contend with them.

Would this explain a little about how RG and BP were able to work with PL and push the MOTA teaching whereas JI and others contended with WL about PL?

28:5 Evil men understand not judgment: but they that seek the LORD understand all things.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by 77150

28:4 They that forsake the law praise the wicked: but such as keep the law contend with them.

Would this explain a little about how RG and BP were able to work with PL and push the MOTA teaching whereas JI and others contended with WL about PL?

28:5 Evil men understand not judgment: but they that seek the LORD understand all things.

Yep, that explains it.

[77150]

If we agree that the verse "they that forsake the law praise the wicked, but such as keep the law contend with them" is an apt description of how RG and BP praised PL and pushed the MOTA teaching while JI etal contended with them. Then wouldn't the word in Jude warning us about men who had men's person in admiration because of advantage apply to RG, BP, EM, and RK?

[77150]

Originally Posted by Ohio

77150, All "good" followers of the teachings of WL have mostly avoided this book because it was apparently "short of Christ," or so we were told.

A lot of books talk about Christ, provide prophecies, types, figures, etc. This book seems to give voice to Christ talking about the things that would cause us to veer from the path.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by 77150

A lot of books talk about Christ, provide prophecies, types, figures, etc. This book seems to give voice to Christ talking about the things that would cause us to veer from the path.

Yeah, kind of like the book of James.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Having had little personal study into the book of Proverbs, I find your comments a welcome insight indeed when compared to the stale comments I usually post. I daresay that no one has yet brought this ancient book of wisdom into the context of LSM and the LC's. All "good" followers of the teachings of WL have mostly avoided this book because it was apparently "short of Christ," or so we were told.

Ohio, not just in Proverbs but you could make the case for James, Luke chapter 6, Matthew 23, Jeremiah 23, 1 Corinthians 13, Isaiah 5, etc. Portions of the Bible that touch our conscience and cause us to be introspective. If you recall the Song of Songs training, one of the points I recall was against being introspective. Why is that? What is wrong with introspection? Is it because with introspection there is the consideration "you could be wrong"? With these portions of the Bible I've mentioned, it's not a positive or an affirming word you and I have been used to hearing from the ministry.
Which brings me to my next point.
As I see from "the ministry"
A positive word = Christ
An adjusting word = short of Christ

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Ohio, not just in Proverbs but you could make the case for James, Luke chapter 6, Matthew 23, Jeremiah 23, 1 Corinthians 13, Isaiah 5, etc. Portions of the Bible that touch our conscience and cause us to be introspective. If you recall the Song of Songs training, one of the points I recall was against being introspective. Why is that?

What is wrong with introspection? Is it because with introspection there is the consideration "you could be wrong"? With these portions of the Bible I've mentioned, it's not a positive or an affirming word you and I have been used to hearing from the ministry.

Introspection is a "reflective looking inward, an examination of one's own thoughts and feelings." Apparently this was quite dangerous for those who became adherents of the ministry in the LC's. I personally was publicly told by TC that I was too "introspective." Many others were too. What does that even mean? In an environment which revered TC and WL as being able to "see what the rest of us cannot see," this kind of diagnosis can hold great power over people.

Which brings us back to a point I have repeatedly made. Real shepherds, having a word from the Lord, will fellowship privately for the edification and profit of the hearer. Controlling and abusive leaders, however, will use public gatherings to discredit the members in front of their peers. The judgment of "introspection" was used to undermine one's own sense of perspective and place it into the hands of another. Thus great power is wielded by those who supposedly are able to provide recondite diagnoses upon their followers.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by 77150

To me the verse "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" is the key to my understanding. This takes the term "wisdom" out of a natural view of someone being "successful" and puts it into the view of eternity.

Who suggested that any kind of wisdom is related to being successful? I do not consider success when I consider wisdom. Wisdom is a clear understanding of what is ─ correct, moral, righteous, Godly, as well as those things that are not. Wisdom is found outside of religious circles without being associated with success. It is rather associated with experience and tempering. Surely the best wisdom is from a view beyond the temporal and the here-and-now. Therefore in consideration of what is wise without regard to culture, popularity, even sect or creed.

Your definition is not faulty. But it is limiting. Wisdom is wisdom. And none can be considered all-wise, therefore we all find ourselves in places of folly at times. This is true for the Christian and the heathen alike. I will agree that wisdom from a Christian base is more consistently sound. But we view wisdom from our own perspective. So however far off we are will determine how well re recognize it when it is in front of us.

I like your verse concerning the praise of the wicked by those who forsake the law. And the teachings of Lee are pretty consistently to ignore the law. Even despise it. Only do right to the extent that it falls on you due to sufficient "dispensing." That applies to virtually everyone who follows Lee's teachings, although likely in no more egregious manner than the vehement defense of PL by WL, BP, RG, RK, etc.

On the other hand, I find that discovering verses that fit everything too often is as far as many people will take it. In other words, they show their superiority by correctly identifying the verse, but eventually do little or nothing about it. Like applauding when you hear the beginning of a favorite song at a concert. Most people are actually demonstrating (showing off) that they have figured out which song it is more than showing appreciation for the performance. In fact, better to listen and appreciate, then applaud at the end when it is artfully performed.

Don't just say they did it. Describe how they did it. To just say it, even if true, does not make the case that the verse fits.

And virtually all of the discussion and proof about anything is getting old. Someone needs to resurrect posts with Ingals' accounts. And John So's. And many others. Post some snippets from the Fermentation booklet to show how much Lee lied.

And dig through the theological faults in Lee's teachings. And Nee's for that matter.

And when all is said and done, I think I missed the reason that this thread was opened with respect to the forum's purposes. I was looking back and couldn't find anything but a brain teaser. It is probably there, but it is getting a little lengthy to read through now. Can someone make a concise description of the purpose for me? Why are we discussing it?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Who suggested that any kind of wisdom is related to being successful?

I think that might have been me.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

On the other hand, I find that discovering verses that fit everything too often is as far as many people will take it. In other words, they show their superiority by correctly identifying the verse, but eventually do little or nothing about it. Like applauding when you hear the beginning of a favorite song at a concert. Most people are actually demonstrating (showing off) that they have figured out which song it is more than showing appreciation for the performance. In fact, better to listen and appreciate, then applaud at the end when it is artfully performed.

Wow! What set you off? Someone finds a helpful verse, and you go off about the last concert you went to. Better stay home and listen to the Moodies on your iPod.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Wow! What set you off? Someone finds a helpful verse, and you go off about the last concert you went to. Better stay home and listen to the Moodies on your iPod.

This was not about being "set off." It is an observation. A very calm one. And not making a condemnation of the particular verses being brought up.

It was a statement of a general consideration of mine that is always around. Is there any inkling of doubt that it is contrary to God's righteous law to defend a sexual predator as the organizational leader of a Christian ministry that is for all intents and purposes running a denomination? Do you need a verse to tell you that it is so? Do you feel better because someone found the verse?

Now if we were looking for the verse that would help to convince someone who knew of PL's sin yet thought that the defense of his was right, then I would hope it would help to change their mind. To bring their thinking to "wisdom" in the matter.

But the wise don't need Proverbs to make this particular judgment. If we are simply getting wowed that we found a verse that says exactly what we are facing, what is it to the wise? And I think that many of us here are at least somewhat wise. Including 77150. We didn't need a verse to get our emotions or will stirred up about PL, WL, the BBs, etc.

And we weren't bringing it to those who need to see it. Proverbs would appear to be, for all intents and purposes, a book of instruction for a somewhat young son to study and take to heart as he begins to face the world on his own. It is much more robust than "don't touch the stove! It's hot!" yet despite its length and coverage, much less that the totality of everything that will be faced. It gives wise counsel for reference until the wisdom of it is ingrained and more wisdom is gained. So, among other things, it tells him to be careful how he answers a fool. And to note that unlawful people too often defend even more unrighteousness (unlawfulness).

Our reading of it should be to learn something of wisdom that we do not already know. Picking through it to find evidence of what we already know to be true is not really helpful. Unless we are trying to find evidence of what someone else does not seem to agree to and finding a more authoritative source (scripture is hopefully considered more authoritative) is needed.

And an observation that I find in certain people who constantly quote verses in response to virtually everything. They too often are more satisfied that they have found a verse than they are desirous of being the mentor, comfort, encourager, etc., that is needed.

Once again, I am not saying that 77150 is one of those people. I actually don't see it that way. But at the same time, are we just having a Bible study centered around scriptural evidence of the errors of the LSM leadership in defending PL, or are we trying to find a way to confront those who were unlawful?

It is what I consider a legitimate "point of order" in the discussion. Where is it going? Why is it going there? Do we really care? If, so, why do we care? Is it because it is important to go there? Or is it a distraction — intentional or not?

You really need to consider that much of what I think about and post about is not about being "set off." It is simply my observations. If they do not seem to be consistent with what you think is right, take it on. Let's discuss it. Try not to let the emotions of being questioned create the presumption that I or any one else has been "set off."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

But the wise don't need Proverbs to make this particular judgment. If we are simply getting wowed that we found a verse that says exactly what we are facing, what is it to the wise?

And we weren't bringing it to those who need to see it.

OBW, I find it difficult to grasp your logic. 77150, obviously a former member, studies Proverbs and finds helpful scripture to apply to our discussions. I think it's great, and it has stirred my interest in further study. You, however, are piqued into critical action. I appreciate his study and perspective. You, however, are disturbed that someone might be "wowed?" If he/she is, is that so bad?

"What is that to the wise?" Are you now so "wise" that scripture no longer benefits you? I hope I never get that wise. Are you only referring to yourself here?

And your next complaint is that the poster brought it to this forum, but not "to those who need to see it." Are you serious? Do you know every reader here, and who needs what? Could not the same thing be said about your posts? How do you know the poster has not taken this verse to others "who need to see it."

I really think you unnecessarily nit-pick for reasons I'll never understand.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

OBW, I find it difficult to grasp your logic. 77150, obviously a former member, studies Proverbs and finds helpful scripture to apply to our discussions. I think it's great, and it has stirred my interest in further study. You, however, are piqued into critical action. I appreciate his study and perspective. You, however, are disturbed that someone might be "wowed?" If he/she is, is that so bad?

"What is that to the wise?" Are you now so "wise" that scripture no longer benefits you? I hope I never get that wise. Are you only referring to yourself here?

And your next complaint is that the poster brought it to this forum, but not "to those who need to see it." Are you serious? Do you know every reader here, and who needs what? Could not the same thing be said about your posts? How do you know the poster has not taken this verse to others "who need to see it."

I really think you unnecessarily nit-pick for reasons I'll never understand.

First, I think you will see that I was never specifically attacking any specific use of verses. And I went out of my way to say that I did not intend to declare that 77150 was simply doing this.

But at the same time, I was noting something that was once noted for my and others benefit (elsewhere) that sometimes displaying a lot of knowledge about something, such as being among the first to recognize a song, or always being able to bring a verse from memory, or at least quickly find it because you know it is there, or that you can do a concordance look-up on a topic, etc., that is not really helpful to a discussion. I would say that anyone who does not understand that defending the unrighteous is itself contrary to righteousness needs the verse. Those that do have no requirement for someone to find it in the rulebook for them. If that wasn't patently obvious without the verse, then you need it. And there are some in the LRC that need it. But do you really think that what they did is now more clearly wrong and against God's moral and righteous requirements on us from finding that verse? I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Now if someone is reading that has never considered that this verse directly opposes Lee's claim that right and wrong don't matter, then it is worthwhile. And surely there are always some who are lurking about.

But at the same time, we can easily be lulled into a sense of self-righteousness because we have the right verse at the right time. I wasn't trying to shut it off. But just offering a reason to think about why we do anything. Is it for the purpose of the forum, or for our own private building of esteem.

And if you read my post to 77150 about the purpose of the thread, you might understand that there seemed (to me) to be an almost constant dissonance between what was at any moment under discussion, the topic stated at the beginning (in the title), the lack of direction in the first post, and the purpose of the forum. His response did clarify. But until that clarification came, the constant jump from one set of verses to another had me wondering what was going on.

And in a few cases, a verse was quoted and the application to the errors/ways of Lee, the BBs and the LSM did not seem to fit. But I get attacked for nit-picking if I ask what it is about. Which starts to say to me that if you agree with me, then I am great. And if you do not, then I must be "set off" and "nit-picking." I'm much more even and middle-of-the-road than that. Read what I say. Don't assume emotions. Don't assume beyond what I write. I write this way about everything. And I don't have to be "set-off" to do it. Just see something that I think I have something to add for consideration. Consider it. Then accept or reject. Either is actually fine. Forget what you think are my motives. Consider what I said. When someone first suggested to me that clapping at the beginning of a song was more about me than the band, I thought it was ridiculous. But over time, as I considered it, I began to realize that it was at least too often true.

We learn nothing by rapid rejection of alternate considerations. And us old dogs can still learn new tricks.

[77150]

Originally Posted by OBW

Can someone make a concise description of the purpose for me? Why are we discussing it?

I consider this my first thread (the other thread was an answer to a question).

I registered for this forum because 21:11 When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise: and when the wise is instructed, he receiveth knowledge.
21:12 The righteous man wisely considereth the house of the wicked: but God overthroweth the wicked for their wickedness.

My first thought was “what is the worst thing that could happen as a result of posting on this forum?” I ruled out being ostracized and scorned because when I appear before the Lord will I be ashamed because I was ostracized and scorned for contending for righteousness? No, that would be a blessing and honor.

The worst thing would be something that causes me to become bankrupt in my Christian life, to be defeated as a Christian? Under what situation would I be better off just making peace with the LRC (Luke 14:28-33)? Because when I can figure out what that is I will know the enemies game plan. The answer was simple “becoming like unto them”. Romans 2:3 “And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?”

So, the purpose of this thread is to reduce the risk of this happening. I knew that if you all had the same fear of the Lord then we would balance one another, we would have each other’s back and we would protect one another.

[OBW]

The thread topic is "Does Proverbs 26:4 contradict verse 5?" I wondered where it was going. Reread the opening post. It made some statements about the verses. Then a few posts later, there was much discussion about what constituted folly in Lee and his sons. And unrighteousness on the part of those who defended them, even promoted them.

Yet the thread seems to be defined as about the interaction of these two verses. There was significant discussion attempted by some on the topic, but it was quickly turned elsewhere.

So I asked what was the purpose of the thread. I would like to know what we are trying to talk about. I asked if anyone could provide a summary. This is the response.

Originally Posted by 77150

I consider this my first thread (the other thread was an answer to a question).

I registered for this forum because 21:11 When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise: and when the wise is instructed, he receiveth knowledge.
21:12 The righteous man wisely considereth the house of the wicked: but God overthroweth the wicked for their wickedness.

My first thought was “what is the worst thing that could happen as a result of posting on this forum?” I ruled out being ostracized and scorned because when I appear before the Lord will I be ashamed because I was ostracized and scorned for contending for righteousness? No, that would be a blessing and honor.

The worst thing would be something that causes me to become bankrupt in my Christian life, to be defeated as a Christian? Under what situation would I be better off just making peace with the LRC (Luke 14:28-33)? Because when I can figure out what that is I will know the enemies game plan. The answer was simple “becoming like unto them”. Romans 2:3 “And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?”

So, the purpose of this thread is to reduce the risk of this happening. I knew that if you all had the same fear of the Lord then we would balance one another, we would have each other’s back and we would protect one another.

If this is the purpose, then I would suggest that a careful and detailed analysis of the "topic" verses might be the place to start, continue, and end. The real question is not whether Lee and the BBs were unrighteous and unlawful in defending the sinful PL. It is whether it is a righteous thing to even take on the analysis and speak against such unrighteousness.

And if that is correct, then the topic of the thread is not "do these two verses contradict" but "should I/we be doing this."

And for those who feel the need to consider that, it is fine. For the rest, either throw in your two cents worth (that's all mine is worth) if you feel to, or refrain. For me, I at least know what it is that I am trying to discuss. This is very helpful. It only took around 40 posts to define the purpose of the thread clearly. This is probably the reason that Unto was getting so irritated. The stated purpose and the early rhetoric did not seem to be consistent with later rhetoric. It was suggesting some kind of bait and switch. You probably did not intend it that way.

Much better to be straightforward and clear about your purposes. I would have titled the thread "Why Are We Here?" or "Should We Be Here?" Then I would lay out the two verses as a great example of how there are at least two ways to be involved in this kind of endeavor. Which one are we doing? Is it profitable for us? Then idiots like OBW wouldn't constantly be getting onto the wrong points and issues.

[77150]

Originally Posted by OBW

If this is the purpose, then I would suggest that a careful and detailed analysis of the "topic" verses might be the place to start, continue, and end. The real question is not whether Lee and the BBs were unrighteous and unlawful in defending the sinful PL. It is whether it is a righteous thing to even take on the analysis and speak against such unrighteousness.

And if that is correct, then the topic of the thread is not "do these two verses contradict" but "should I/we be doing this."

One post questioned the assertion that the term "folly" in the verses in question referred to the topics on this forum. The reason for Post #9 was to demonstrate that the term "folly" could reasonably be understood to refer to many of the topics, threads and posts on this forum. I provided 39 examples, but logically it is not necessary for you to agree with all 39, as long as you agreed that one verse was a valid reference you then agreed with the premise.

However, the response to that Post was that they were not willing to read the post because they disagreed with the validity of the first reference. Therefore I peppered verse references on a one on one basis. The purpose was merely to make the point that the term "folly" as applied to many of these actions and sins is valid.