Good vs. Lee's Trees

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps God was hoping that the woman would help protect the man from the serpent.

I guess that didn't work out well.

Since we're "reading things" into the story, I thought I'd try too.

If we can't figure out what women are thinking how are we going to figure out what God was thinking when he made them?

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Igzy

If we can't figure out what women are thinking how are we going to figure out what God was thinking when he made them?

Reminds me of a line from the old "Camelot" movie. King Arthur, is singing "How to Handle a Woman". He breaks in with this little speech: "Merlin once told me...don't be too concerned when you don't know what a woman is thinking...they don't do it very often..."

Dontchalove it?

Nell

[Indiana]

This thread by the brother, John, is one of the more constructive for local church members. Of course we understand the positive side of eating of the tree of life; but when this becomes an excuse mechanism to override issues of legitimate concern....


No, I don't think everything said on this forum is true, but 75 % is well worth conscientious thought.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Indiana

This thread by the brother, John, is one of the more constructive for local church members. Of course we understand the positive side of eating of the tree of life; but when this becomes an excuse mechanism to override issues of legitimate concern....


No, I don't think everything said on this forum is true, but 75 % is well worth conscientious thought.

It's sad to see how so many LC teachings have been used. I do admit there may be truth to certain LC teachings, but the way they are used renders them useless. Long before I came to this forum, I subconsciously understood how the "two trees" teaching was really used. It never had much meaning besides my knowing that I wasn't supposed to talk about right and wrong.

Sometimes I have to wonder if these teachings were ever intended to be practiced in a positive way to begin with. When I really think about the "two trees" teaching, I can't say I've ever seen it practiced in a positive way. It always involves a negative context, such as when Ron spoke in Ecuador about discernment. He hypocritically used the "two trees" to avoid addressing material on the internet, even though he and Kerry once published a book claiming to discern the right and wrong of a previous "turmoil". So they didn't hold themselves to the standard of Lee's "two trees". Now, there is a third "tree" - a tree of lies.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Sometimes I have to wonder if these teachings were ever intended to be practiced in a positive way to begin with. When I really think about the "two trees" teaching, I can't say I've ever seen it practiced in a positive way. It always involves a negative context, such as when Ron spoke in Ecuador about discernment. He hypocritically used the "two trees" to avoid addressing material on the internet, even though he and Kerry once published a book claiming to discern the right and wrong of a previous "turmoil". So they didn't hold themselves to the standard of Lee's "two trees". Now, there is a third "tree" - a tree of lies.

By contrast an audio message of Stephen Kaung's I heard spoken on the two trees was in the positive sense. Quite the contrast of what's spoken in the local churches.
In my honest opinion, LSM's teaching on the two trees is to re-direct brothers and sisters from making issues of persons, matters, or things. As a result there's the concept of all things positive equals being on the Tree of Life. If you're addressing negative matters you're on the Tree of Knowledge. Come to think of it when Nathan confronted King David, how come David didn't tell Nathan, you're on the wrong tree?

One could say the LSM's teaching of the Two Trees is to prevent any cross-examination. The LSM view is compared to being on the Tree of Life and any cross-examining response is compared to the Tree of Knowledge by default.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

It's sad to see how so many LC teachings have been used. I do admit there may be truth to certain LC teachings, but the way they are used renders them useless. Long before I came to this forum, I subconsciously understood how the "two trees" teaching was really used. It never had much meaning besides my knowing that I wasn't supposed to talk about right and wrong.

40 years ago, when I first heard about the two trees, it was taught in context of Moses' exhortation to Israel to "choose life," and Jesus' word to the disciples that "my words are spirit and life." It was a helpful exhortation that we should not get overly occupied with the meany things in life.

It never meant that we should avoid and cover up unrighteous activities by those in leadership positions. But that is how it is now presented by the Blendeds.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It never meant that we should avoid and cover up unrighteous activities by those in leadership positions. But that is how it is now presented by the Blendeds.

Yup! Should one address unrighteous activities by those in leadership, you might be told "you're being negative" and "on the wrong tree".
As if negative matters = Tree of Knowledge and positive matters = Tree of Life.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Terry

Yup! Should one address unrighteous activities by those in leadership, you might be told "you're being negative" and "on the wrong tree".
As if negative matters = Tree of Knowledge and positive matters = Tree of Life.

It is impossible to exhaust the importance of this topic of "the two trees".

Especially to those seeking balance and reality in their Christian life.