LSM’s Contradictary Rapture Teaching

[OBW]

In response to the question about Lee predicting a date, Tomes article does not indicate that. But it does indicate the year for the Second Coming. And since the first fruits rapture would have had to be s certain time before, there was a new scheme proposed when that time had clearly passed. The original was said to be in 1997. Now they are saying something like 2070.

And this was discussed in a previous thread (and possibly on the old Berean forum) in which Lee somewhat subscribed to a particular date in 1997 based on the writer Tomes mentioned (Ussher or something like that). I think it was late summer or early-mid fall.

In any case, we are now 15 years beyond that date in 1997.

It seems to me that if it were simply 2,000 years from some event in the first century AD, Jesus was fairly cavalier to suggest that he did not know and put everyone to watching for the day back then. It truly needs to be unknown for his statement to stand as anything but either a ruse or a fabrication by the writer.

It is most interesting that in many generations there have been groups that have "found the clues" and it is always within months or a very few years. They see the signs "clearly" and abandon normal life to go to a mountaintop. I'm not dismissing the reality of the Second Coming. I'm dismissing our ability to actually figure it out when Jesus said he didn't know. If all it took as a good mind, then it would seem that Jesus was playing word games because he had the best mind.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by OBW

In response to the question about Lee predicting a date, Tomes article does not indicate that. But it does indicate the year for the Second Coming. And since the first fruits rapture would have had to be s certain time before, there was a new scheme proposed when that time had clearly passed. The original was said to be in 1997. Now they are saying something like 2070.

And this was discussed in a previous thread (and possibly on the old Berean forum) in which Lee somewhat subscribed to a particular date in 1997 based on the writer Tomes mentioned (Ussher or something like that). I think it was late summer or early-mid fall.

In any case, we are now 15 years beyond that date in 1997.

It seems to me that if it were simply 2,000 years from some event in the first century AD, Jesus was fairly cavalier to suggest that he did not know and put everyone to watching for the day back then. It truly needs to be unknown for his statement to stand as anything but either a ruse or a fabrication by the writer.

It is most interesting that in many generations there have been groups that have "found the clues" and it is always within months or a very few years. They see the signs "clearly" and abandon normal life to go to a mountaintop. I'm not dismissing the reality of the Second Coming. I'm dismissing our ability to actually figure it out when Jesus said he didn't know. If all it took as a good mind, then it would seem that Jesus was playing word games because he had the best mind.

In any case, I am hoping this is the year the dead in Christ will rise first and we who are alive and remain will be caught with them in the clouds to meet aJesus in the air in our Glorious new bodies. Come Lord Jesus.

[Cassidy]

"The original was said to be in 1997"

Wait. Something just occurred to me when reading your post. What do you mean "was said to be", OBW?

There must be a direct quote from Witness Lee stating that the Lord's return would be in the year 1997.

Did he? If so, where is that "1997" quote?

Cassidy

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

"The original was said to be in 1997"

Wait. Something just occurred to me when reading your post. What do you mean "was said to be", OBW?

There must be a direct quote from Witness Lee stating that the Lord's return would be in the year 1997.

Did he? If so, where is that "1997" quote?

What I'm saying is that this particular write-up is not the first discussion on the topic. I recall that when this was mentioned before, there was some kind of reference to the 1997 date. There was also a particular day given, although that might have been from the guy Lee was basing on and not Lee.

What I'm telling you is that there is somewhere to look. It is not just this one write-up by Tomes and these few comments by this forum.

This particular write-up by Tomes asserts that LSM (which prior to 1997 was Lee) pushed 1997, then changed it to 2070 when it was obvious that 1997 could not be true because certain events should already have been going on.

I think I remember noting that if it was considered a "prophecy" then under the old covenant, Lee would have been subject to stoning. (Not trying to be serious.) But it was noted that he did die in 1996 — after the necessary events were clearly not happening.

Again. Please do not think that I am asserting some kind of divine retribution. It is probably just an interesting combination of events. (And Lee was quite old.) Just like every generation thinks that the signs in their time are ripe for the Second Coming. The fact is that if it were so clearly obvious, then those who were not in that time would have cause to dilly-dally around. If we could know that 1997, or 2070, was the date, then some would have reason to toe the line while others could put it off. Do one of those "death bed" confessions.

And all of that kind of thinking misses so much of the point of salvation and following. It is at least as much about our returning to our righteous and rightful place as God's image-bearers in this life as it is getting some better place in the next life. This may be one of the reasons that LRC leadership has been so short on righteousness. They don't think that this age matters other than being "on the ground" and following the "minister of the age" into the next age. They don't care about this age.

And so much talk about eschatology is mostly so we can pine for the future and escape the present. If (and I believe it is true) Jesus is coming again, then he is coming again. I have yet to figure out what it is about knowing details about it that makes us better off for it. If it is uncertain, I have cause to consider my living at all times. If I can narrow it down to some particular year, then I might not be so careful. (Not saying that I always do a good job anyway.) I do not see that there is anything I can do about any of it outside of salvation, and living according to his teachings in God's righteousness. There is much more scriptural ink on how to do that. And it matters. Ignoring that to do anything else that you think is preparing for the rapture, or just the Second Coming (without a rapture theology), is probably a worthless endeavor because it will not be those who are waiting on the mountain top, but those who are living day-to-day according to God's righteousness that will be "prepared." Jesus didn't warn them so they would be weird, but so they would take their living seriously.

[OBW]

I just read parts of the Life Study of Hebrews, messages 18 and 22, which Tomes references. He is correct to say that Lee does not say that the 6,000 years followed by the 1,000 year millennium is entirely true. Lee adds nuances about the “church” and the Sabbath rest. But he does not contradict the 6,000 years, even continually repeating it as “approximately 6,000 years.”

But if there is this literal 6,000 years because of the day=1,000 years statement in scripture, then we must presume that the genealogies are accurate, and they put Adam’s creation at about 4,000 years BC. According to some, 4,004 BC. And Jesus was born approximately 4 BC. A nice, neat 4,000 years of OT era. Then there is only 2,000 years to go. And it is looking like the number of years is pretty precise. So you put that in the caldron and out comes this “calf” of 1997. And since that means that, with a 7 year tribulation, the rapture is either 1990 or 1993-ish, they had to start rethinking it by about 1995. So put the destruction of Jerusalem into the caldron and the calf changes to about 2070. (I guess we can be a little less precise now since the final 2,000 years does not start precisely at the end of the first 4,000 years.)

My main point is that this is all malarkey. Even if Lee never predicted a precise date, or even the precise year (but only the general period for the year) he is missing the point. If Jesus told his disciples to be watching, then “now” was always possible. If scripture was very soon going to provide enough information to ignore “now” for almost 2,000 years, then what was Jesus doing?

Why is everything always in the next life? Why is our Sabbath rest simply the millennium? Or even the church life? Why is right-living in this life so marginalized? Yes, there are always sermons on it (even in the LRC manner). Spending any time thinking about why some future date is probably it is an invitation to slack-off now.

Why should I concern myself with the end times? Because it is evident that there are consequences for our decisions now. Now is the time for salvation. Now is the time for sanctification. Now is the time for righteousness. Now is the time to walk according to the Spirit (and not some false “spirit”).

And if I truly believe in Jesus, then I would do what he commands. And he commands much more than spiritual living. More than plans about the rapture. More than having a great “church life.” He commands much more obedience. He commands righteousness beyond the simple 10-commandments. (And suggesting that we should just ignore them because “we can’t do it anyway” is to capitulate from the outset. And is subject to a kind of censure by Jesus.)

[Cassidy]

-1

Ok, I will welcome a direct quote from Witness Lee on 1997 if anyone can produce it..... but lacking that it now appears that not only did Witness Lee not "prophesy" the "day" of the Lord's return, he did not "prophesy" the year 1997 either.

From the article the person who calculated 1997 was Nigel Tomes. Using the framework of the teaching of 6000 years and 1 day=1000 years it is the author (Tomes) who derives 1997 mathematically then attributes this to Witness Lee as a prophecy and a prediction.

Furthermore, as OBW has confirmed in his reading, even Witness Lee was not fully convinced of the 6000 years = 6 days, etc. framework.

So we have a scenario where using a teaching that Witness Lee was not fully convinced of, Nigel Tomes has engaged in date setting the Lord's return at 1997 then attributing that as a prophecy by Witness Lee and then he (Tomes) declares it as a failed prophecy!

I find this very disturbing.

Cassidy

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

I find this very disturbing.

Cassidy

It is disturbing Cassidy.

During the Heyday of the New Way in Taipei, which WL considered the consummation of his life's work, the major focus of the work of his ministry, in which he considered himself the Minister of the Age and the Commander-in-Chief of the army of the Most High, a gospel chart was developed and displayed to all the trainees from around the globe. By the year 2,000, the gospel of the kingdom was to be preached to the whole inhabited earth and then the end would come!

Numerous Blended brothers, who were the key trainers designated by WL himself, made it abundantly clear that the chart was not theirs, no absolutely not. They proclaimed repeatedly that "this is Brother Lee's chart." The chart had projections from year 1986 through 2000 when the Lord would return. There was no data beyond y2k. They were emphatic about this.

They even discussed how wonderfully blessed it would be to be born into the Recovery in 1976, which would include all the eleven year old children when I heard this announcement while I was in Hall #3 during May of 1987. These eleven-year-olds would graduate in 1994 from HS, and 1998 from college, and then spend their last two years before His return preaching the gospel in the Full Time Training with brother Witness Lee!

Didn't you say this was "very disturbing," Cassidy?

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It is disturbing Cassidy.

During the Heyday of the New Way in Taipei, which WL considered the consummation of his life's work, the major focus of the work of his ministry, in which he considered himself the Minister of the Age and the Commander-in-Chief of the army of the Most High, a gospel chart was developed and displayed to all the trainees from around the globe. By the year 2,000, the gospel of the kingdom was to be preached to the whole inhabited earth and then the end would come!

Numerous Blended brothers, who were the key trainers designated by WL himself, made it abundantly clear that the chart was not theirs, no absolutely not. They proclaimed repeatedly that "this is Brother Lee's chart." The chart had projections from year 1986 through 2000 when the Lord would return. There was no data beyond y2k. They were emphatic about this.

They even discussed how wonderfully blessed it would be to be born into the Recovery in 1976, which would include all the eleven year old children when I heard this announcement while I was in Hall #3 during May of 1987. These eleven-year-olds would graduate in 1994 from HS, and 1998 from college, and then spend their last two years before His return preaching the gospel in the Full Time Training with brother Witness Lee!

Didn't you say this was "very disturbing," Cassidy?

It would seem, Ohio, from the article that Tomes was not content to base his argument on what Witness Lee actually said or did in context as you have done. Rather, he finds it necessary to resort to hyperbole of the worst kind, that is, literally taking something Witness Lee said and twisting it, bending it, and stretching it to mean something different thereby violating the integrity of article. Witness Lee did not predict 1997 nor a day within 1997 as Tomes states. It was Tomes who calculated the year 1997. Here is what I mean:

Tomes in his article claims that Witness Lee said certain things. I have put the quotes of Witness Lee in blue as Tomes articulated them and then added the actual missing quotes from Witness Lee in black.

Tomes' version of Witness Lee statements: “Based upon the fact that in the eyes of the Lord 1,000 years are the same as a day…6 days mean 6,000 years, and the 7th day will be the 7th thousand, the Sabbath rest during the millennium."“millennial kingdom, a period of 1,000 years, will be the 7th period of 1,000 years, the first 6,000 years being the period from the time of Adam’s creation until the time of the Lord’s coming back.” "from… Adam’s creation until the time of the Lord’s coming back”

What Witness Lee actually said in context and with the proper construct:

"Some say that the Sabbath rest in this chapter is the millennium. They say that the millennial kingdom, a period of a thousand years (Rev. 20:4), will be the seventh period of a thousand years, the first six thousand years being the period from the time of Adam’s creation until the time of the Lord’s coming back. This concept is based upon the fact that in the eyes of the Lord a thousand years are the same as a day (2 Pet. 3:8). According to those who hold this concept, six days mean six thousand years, and the seventh day will be the seventh thousand, the Sabbath rest during the millennium. This interpretation has never satisfied me. To say that the Sabbath rest in [Hebrews] 4:9 is simply the millennial kingdom is not altogether accurate; it is only partially correct.”

Now Ohio and fair-minded readers,

Read the above quotes a few times. The juxtaposition of these two quotes show that Tomes flipped the order of what Witness Lee said, then twisted Witness Lee's direct statements to make it sound as if Witness Lee embraced this concept fully, and then Tomes exhibiting the shoddiest research and scholarship claimed that Witness Lee built a prophecy to predict the year the Lord would return!!!

Here below are Tomes misrepresentations in bold after slicing and dicing of Witness Lee statements, putting words in Witness Lee's mouth, and forcing us to buy-in to his conclusions. I find this section of the article very disturbing:

What Tomes would have us believe:

"W. Lee claimed the 6 creation days portray the entire span of human history. He says,99 “Based upon the fact that in the eyes of the Lord 1,000 years are the same as a day…6 days mean 6,000 years, and the 7th day will be the 7th thousand, the Sabbath rest during the millennium.”100 The,101 “millennial kingdom, a period of 1,000 years, will be the 7th period of 1,000 years, the first 6,000 years being the period from the time of Adam’s creation until the time of the Lord’s coming back.” W. Lee asserts the span of human history—“from… Adam’s creation until the time of the Lord’s coming back”—is 6,000 years. This is implies when Christ will return—W. Lee predicts Christ’s 2nd coming will occur 6,000 years after man’s creation. LSM dated Adam’s creation at 4004 BC102 and Christ’s birth at 4 BC. Hence the interval from Adam to Christ was exactly 4,000 years. This leaves 2,000 years for the “age of grace,” which should have ended in 1997.103 Hence, W. Lee’s teaching implies Christ should have returned in AD 1997; He did not! This means Daniel’s 70th week ought to have started in 1990 with Antichrist’s 7-year pact with Israel. The overcomers’ rapture and the great tribulation should have begun in 1993. Plus, the majority’s rapture and Christ’s triumphant return to earth should have happened in 1997. They did not! None of these end-time events predicted by Witness Lee was actually fulfilled. This is a failed prophecy!


Cassidy

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

...it now appears that not only did Witness Lee not "prophesy" the "day" of the Lord's return, he did not "prophesy" the year 1997 either...

= Straining out an undersized, anemic gnat

Originally Posted by UntoHim

“Could the Bride be prepared in the…denominations, free groups or the charismatic movement? Certainly not!”— W. Lee

“If we…follow that person we would not…be in the Lord’s bride, turn the age, or bring the Lord back.”

“The Body equals the recovery…practically for us today, the recovery is the Body”--LSM’s Minoru Chen

“Brother Lee was the wise master builder…to do the work of building we need to…be one with him.”

“Other Christians are working, but they are not working the work of God”—LSM’s Benson Phillips

“Millions of genuine believers…will ironically find themselves left behind when the first-fruits are raptured…[because] the spiritual books they read never encouraged them to mature…”--LSM’s N. Betz

= Swallowing a big, fat, bloated camel

[OBW]

OK Cassidy,

You may never get your direct quote. Just like Lee almost never said that he was an apostle or other such related things. He just constantly put the one part of a teaching out there (as the LSM has said since Lee's death" out there with statements like "the one who brings you [thus and such] teaching is the apostle of the age" or "the delegated authority" or whatever), then separately stated that he was the one bringing such teachings and no one else was.

No. It is difficult to find Lee ever directly saying much of anything way other there like that. He just stated the parts independently of each other. He said "A=B" in one context then said "I am A" in another. But he never said he was B. Not in direct terms. He left that for others to assert for him. Then when challenged on it, he would say something like "I never said such a thing" or "I never encouraged such speaking." But he was caught at least one time saying that he kinda liked "being exalted." He liked being called such a person as an apostle or a unique minister of the age (I forget which it was).

You can try to assert that Lee was silent on the subject of date/year of the rapture, or Second Coming, but he spoke it in pieces without specifically pointing to the other pieces. He never considered that creating a private ministry empire would put his every word into print where we could dig through it. And his continuing minions are so proud of it that they put it online for us all to read free of charge. They never considered how much damage could be had when it was discovered that he left a bread trail from terms like "just a poor minister" to "apostle of the age" with the "ministry of the age."

And your insistence upon a single sentence or paragraph with everything in it can only be seen as an attempt to obfuscate the wealth of information concerning what he actually did say. And it includes indirect declarations about the year of the rapture. And his ascension to "Apostle of the age."

It has been suggested that your mannerisms hint at a previous advocate for Lee and the LSM. I really don't care. It is clear that, as UntoHim has said, you can choke on a gnat and swallow a camel. That is all that matters. Others will see through your ruse. Or you will wake up and see it yourself. Not sure which.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

In response to the question about Lee predicting a date, Tomes article does not indicate that. But it does indicate the year for the Second Coming. And since the first fruits rapture would have had to be s certain time before, there was a new scheme proposed when that time had clearly passed. The original was said to be in 1997. Now they are saying something like 2070.

It seems to me ... that is IIRC ... WL's prediction of the time of His return was based on a few prophecies, mainly in Revelation. The references were to "42 months ... 1260 days ... and the time, times, and half a time." His point was that once we come to know the trigger point of these times, and the death and resuscitation of the Beast comes to mind, then we will probably know the year and month of His return, though not the exact "day or hour," in fulfillment of the Lord's own words.

Besides this I don't remember a prophecy of the exact year.