Witness Lee and AW Tozer

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by testallthings

ZNPaaneah,

would you please clarify why at the beginning of your post you conceded that Lee "Every time he uses the term he makes it clear he is not teaching about believers becoming an object of worship", but at the end you seems to disagree with what you said earlier, "To say that believers are deified to become objects of worship is blasphemy. But then he does say that believers need to be deified, and the definition of deified is to become an object of worship."

Thanks

You can search Lee's use of the word "deification" and there is always a caveat in there that to make a person an object of worship is blasphemy and heresy.

Yet the definition of the word "deification" means the process of deifying an object or person.

So he is teaching that we are going through the process of "deification" yet it doesn't mean deification.

The argument put forth by Evangelical and Kerry Robicheaux and Witness Lee to defend this is that he is using a "limited definition" of the term deification. Yet when you look at credible dictionaries there is no such "limited definition". So then, why does he use a word that means "to make a person an object of worship" and which does not have another definition, and then say this isn't his intended definition? This is just deceitful. He could easily use the term "sanctification" which is the process by which we are made holy. Holiness refers to God's divine nature. Therefore, if your "limited" definition of deification is that we have God's nature but not his position, the correct term is sanctification. This is also the term used by the NT apostles and is within the "fellowship of the apostles". All Christian ministers should limit themselves by the fellowship of the apostles.

The response that I have read from Evangelical, Kerry and Witness Lee is essentially that "this is how we have defined the term, if you don't like it, tough luck". This attitude is a very cavalier attitude towards the potential for stumbling new believers, something that is severely rebuked by the Lord Jesus in Matt 18, and coincidentally an abusive attitude that is typical of false prophets.

So then, what is the harm? It is very clear in the Lord's Recovery practice that they view a "degree of sanctification" or a "degree of perfecting" or in this case a "degree of deification". We see this in Evangelical's use of the term "2nd class apostle" for James. It is the basis for "having the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons" which James tells us not to do, and it results in "partiality", a heinous evil which taken to its logical extreme was seen in Nazi Germany or the Jim Crow south.

[testallthings]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

You can search Lee's use of the word "deification" and there is always a caveat in there that to make a person an object of worship is blasphemy and heresy.

I agree with you that certain terms are in themselves cause of trouble, misunderstanding, blasphemy and so on.

Think for example about the word flesh and all its negative connotations. Nevertheless, John and Paul do not shy away in using it. Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us...Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.
But Paul was careful to specify what kind of flesh was that.

The word lion is used to “describe” Satan and the Lord Jesus.

The word thief comes to my mind. Rev 16:15 (Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.)

The Lord didn't say He was a thief, but that He will come as a thief.

Words can be extremely negative in their connotation and yet with some caveat (as you said) they can be used.

I did my little search on the word deification. This is what Lee said in the printed LS message,

“Certain early church fathers went so far as to speak of the “deification” of the believers in Christ. I would advise against the use of such a term. To say that the believers are deified to become objects of worship is blasphemy. But it is correct to say that the believers are deified in the sense of possessing the divine life and the divine nature. If at all possible, we should replace the word deification with a more suitable term to convey the fact that we have been born of God to become sons of God.” [emphasis added]
Witness Lee, Life-Study of Galatian, page 175, first edition May 1984 Living Stream Ministry

This part is different from the electronic text on the LSM website (why the difference? I don't know). From what I read, it is clear that he didn't like the term, either. Did he look for an alternative? Maybe. Did he find a more suitable term? No.

Would you say that all who believe deification are false prophets?

[ZNPaaneah]

Clearly Witness Lee's teaching changed from 1984 to 1994. By 1994 he had embraced the word "deification" as a "high peak truth". So I would imagine they went back and made changes to the electronic version, eliminating the "we should replace the word deification with a more suitable term". I agree with this and have said that "Sanctification" is the more suitable term.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

You can search Lee's use of the word "deification" and there is always a caveat in there that to make a person an object of worship is blasphemy and heresy.

Dictionaries also state a definition is to "obtain God-like qualities" or "one that embodies the qualities of a god". The NT shows that people considered Paul to be a god to be worshiped (see Acts 14:14) because Paul had God-like qualities.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Dictionaries also state a definition is to "obtain God-like qualities" or "one that embodies the qualities of a god". The NT shows that people considered Paul to be a god to be worshiped (see Acts 14:14) because Paul had God-like qualities.

Wow, you make these incendiary comments, and you do it so briefly. It is like tossing a lit Molatov cocktail into a meeting hall with a nonchalant attitude.

Acts 14:11 And when the multitude saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voice, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. 12 And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercury, because he was the chief speaker. 13 And the priest of Jupiter whose temple was before the city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the multitudes. 14 But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they rent their garments, and sprang forth among the multitude, crying out 15 and saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and bring you good tidings, that ye should turn from these vain things unto a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in them is:

The record in Acts and of the Apostles makes it very clear that this action by the pagan worshippers was horrifying to Paul and Barnabas and they did everything in their power to put a stop to it. You are correct in referencing this as an example of the doctrine of "deification" in the NT. But is your reference in support of the fact that this is blasphemy? That was not clear.

[Evangelical]

It's an example of a person being deified as in god-like but not to be worshiped as god.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It's an example of a person being deified as in god-like but not to be worshiped as god.

OK, so it is an example of the "Limited definition" of deification and shows very clearly that Paul completely rejected this. I am good with this reference. Does this change your position on the doctrine?

[Evangelical]

Like Paul Witness Lee never taught that we should be worshiped.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Like Paul Witness Lee never taught that we should be worshiped.

But unlike Paul he used a word that means he should be worshipped.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

OK, so it is an example of the "Limited definition" of deification and shows very clearly that Paul completely rejected this. I am good with this reference. Does this change your position on the doctrine?

Do you get the feeling that only a few Lycaonian pagans are willing to accept this teaching?

Or perhaps Witness Lee was supposed to prove his modern day apostleship by telling some lame man "to stand on his feet."

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Do you get the feeling that only a few Lycaonian pagans are willing to accept this teaching?

Or perhaps Witness Lee was supposed to prove his modern day apostleship by telling some lame man "to stand on his feet."

I don't understand?

[testallthings]

BLESSED BE THE CREATOR FOR EVER AND EVER. AMEN

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It's an example of a person being deified as in god-like but not to be worshiped as god.

I think it is just an example of how corrupted the mind of men can be when God gives them up.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19 because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse:
Rom 1:21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves:
Rom 1:25 for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.


BLESSED BE THE CREATOR FOR EVER AND EVER. AMEN

[least]

Originally Posted by testallthings

BLESSED BE THE CREATOR FOR EVER AND EVER. AMEN

I think it is just an example of how corrupted the mind of men can be when God gives them up.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19 because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse:
Rom 1:21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves:
Rom 1:25 for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

BLESSED BE THE CREATOR FOR EVER AND EVER. AMEN

hi testallthings
Can you explain what you are trying to say in the above post?
Thank you.

[testallthings]

Originally Posted by least

hi testallthings
Can you explain what you are trying to say in the above post?
Thank you.

It was an attempt to answer posts 154 and 155 and the biblical text of Act 14:11~15.
Sorry if that was not clear enough. My fault.