Major Errors of Witness Lee’s Teaching

[Boxjobox]

I would say the chief major error in his teaching was the "the processed triune God". Through bits and pieces of verses, he created a god of the local church, which was not the God of our Lord Jesus. One would think, if the truth was "the processed triune God", that Jesus and the apostles, and writers of the NT would have been preaching and teaching this, and using the same vocabulary as WL to convey this marvelous wonder to the Jews, Gentiles, and the Church. WL's ability to create messages through the use of verse fragments was amazing, and created a dazzling creed that captured many (and sold a lot of material)- what was wrong with us, that no one stood up and said " this is not what I read in my Bible"?

[Drake]

Unreg "The woman in Rev 12:1-5, is Israel. If you say that this woman is the church, you have a BIG problem, because the church is a VIRGIN BRIDE (2Cor 11:2) and this woman in Rev. is “pregnant”. Rev 12, is a “summary of Israel” that started in Gen 3:15, where we see the term: “her seed” or “seed of the woman”, meaning the woman has seed or gives birth. A “mother-Son” relationship and NOT a “Bridegroom-bride” relationship, because Israel gives birth to the child who is Jesus which is confirmed in Rev 12: 2,5 (read verses). The male child in verse 5, is Jesus and NOT “the stronger part of the church” which is W. Lee’s wrong interpretation.

Your argument here about the VIRGIN BRIDE giving birth is not a problem unless you also think Mary being a virgin and giving birth to Jesus is a problem. Your argument is a moral one not a biblically based one.

Unreg "Why is W. Lee’s interpretation wrong? Because as I explained in detail in my original post, W. Lee’s teaching does NOT have Israelology in his teaching (83% of the Bible is related to Israel), as a result of that, his Eschatology (33% is Prophecy in the Bible) is wrong and as a result of that, his Ecclesiology (result of NOT knowing Israeology) is also wrong. When you lack understanding or completely ignore, Israelology you will do exactly what W. Lee did in his teaching: "

When you put on the "83% of the Bible is related to Israel" glasses they become filters in your understanding and hermeneutics. Your starting point will then lead you into other misunderstandings and errors. For instance, if you believe that the woman of Revelation 12 is Israel and only Israel then you will have to conclude that the man child is Jesus and only Jesus. However, in so doing you will also have great difficulty with the timeline. To start off with Revelation 1:1 says clearly that the signs show the things that must take place. Revelation 12:1 shows the woman is a great sign, therefore it is a future event based from the time of the writing in the latter half of the first century, not before Christ was born as you assert. This is an error on your part because you have donned Israelology glasses that filter the complete biblical revelation.

If the man child is only Jesus then then you will also have trouble reconciling the Dragon being cast to the earth to devour the baby Jesus in the manger, the reason for the Dragon and one third of the angels being cast to earth, and why it takes Satan and one third of his angels to engage in infanticide in a failed attempt to wipe out Jesus. Also, you would have to violate the timeline of the future war in heaven v7-9 while leaving the obvious future event of the woman fleeing to the wilderness in v6 in place unless you want to bring that forward too prior to the birth of Jesus in which case you will have to explain where in history Israel fled into the wilderness and was nourished by God for a thousand two hundred and sixty days.

A third example of the trouble you will have reconciling the woman as Israel only and the man child as Jesus only is found in verse 5. To maintain the position you hold will require you to ignore the meaning of the word used for "caught up" which roots are based in selection and to pluck. Jesus resurrection and ascension do not use this word.

Unreg "it does NOT differentiate Israel from the church, it applies what is for Israel to the church (read his Life Studies, ex.Jer 31:31), making a big salad with Israel and the church."

I am not aware of anywhere where Brother Lee teaches replacement theology. However, in reference to Jerusalem 31:31 speaking of the new covenant of course the church is living in the new covenant. That was for Israel too but they obviously are not living in it unless they become believers like any other christian in this age of grace. As a nation, they will live in the new covenant in the coming Kingdom once the Lord returns and establishes it in the future and the nation repents and receives Him as the Messiah on that glorious day (Revelation 1:7).

In summary Unreg. First, let me say I appreciate your posts. They are focused on the teachings and you challenge them forcefully. That is commendable and a welcome addition to this forum.

Having said that your teachings on Revelation 12 are lacking. Just saying the woman is Israel because 83% of the Bible is related to Israel......even if that were proven valid perhaps this is part of the 17% that includes something more. The timeline in Revelation 12 (the birth of the manchild, the Dragon and one third of the angels cast to earth, the war in heaven, the plucking up of the man child, the wilderness experience of the woman, etc.) simply falls apart with your interpretation and the meaning of actual words must be ignored such as "caught up" when referring to the manchild.

Thanks
Drake

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Boxjobox

I would say the chief major error in his teaching was the "the processed triune God". Through bits and pieces of verses, he created a god of the local church, which was not the God of our Lord Jesus. One would think, if the truth was "the processed triune God", that Jesus and the apostles, and writers of the NT would have been preaching and teaching this, and using the same vocabulary as WL to convey this marvelous wonder to the Jews, Gentiles, and the Church. WL's ability to create messages through the use of verse fragments was amazing, and created a dazzling creed that captured many (and sold a lot of material)- what was wrong with us, that no one stood up and said " this is not what I read in my Bible"?

This is probably the clearest, most concise short form description of the "major error of Witness Lee's teaching" ever posted on our forum. If there's one better, please bring it to my attention and you will receive the grand prize of.......my eternal gratitude.
-

Originally Posted by Drake

Unreg "The woman in Rev 12:1-5, is Israel. If you say that this woman is the church, you have a BIG problem, because the church is a VIRGIN BRIDE (2Cor 11:2) and this woman in Rev. is “pregnant”. Rev 12, is a “summary of Israel” that started in Gen 3:15, where we see the term: “her seed” or “seed of the woman”, meaning the woman has seed or gives birth. A “mother-Son” relationship and NOT a “Bridegroom-bride” relationship, because Israel gives birth to the child who is Jesus which is confirmed in Rev 12: 2,5 (read verses). The male child in verse 5, is Jesus and NOT “the stronger part of the church” which is W. Lee’s wrong interpretation.

Your argument here about the VIRGIN BRIDE giving birth is not a problem unless you also think Mary being a virgin and giving birth to Jesus is a problem. Your argument is a moral one not a biblically based one.

Unreg "Why is W. Lee’s interpretation wrong? Because as I explained in detail in my original post, W. Lee’s teaching does NOT have Israelology in his teaching (83% of the Bible is related to Israel), as a result of that, his Eschatology (33% is Prophecy in the Bible) is wrong and as a result of that, his Ecclesiology (result of NOT knowing Israeology) is also wrong. When you lack understanding or completely ignore, Israelology you will do exactly what W. Lee did in his teaching: "

When you put on the "83% of the Bible is related to Israel" glasses they become filters in your understanding and hermeneutics. Your starting point will then lead you into other misunderstandings and errors. For instance, if you believe that the woman of Revelation 12 is Israel and only Israel then you will have to conclude that the man child is Jesus and only Jesus. However, in so doing you will also have great difficulty with the timeline. To start off with Revelation 1:1 says clearly that the signs show the things that must take place. Revelation 12:1 shows the woman is a great sign, therefore it is a future event based from the time of the writing in the latter half of the first century, not before Christ was born as you assert. This is an error on your part because you have donned Israelology glasses that filter the complete biblical revelation.

If the man child is only Jesus then then you will also have trouble reconciling the Dragon being cast to the earth to devour the baby Jesus in the manger, the reason for the Dragon and one third of the angels being cast to earth, and why it takes Satan and one third of his angels to engage in infanticide in a failed attempt to wipe out Jesus. Also, you would have to violate the timeline of the future war in heaven v7-9 while leaving the obvious future event of the woman fleeing to the wilderness in v6 in place unless you want to bring that forward too prior to the birth of Jesus in which case you will have to explain where in history Israel fled into the wilderness and was nourished by God for a thousand two hundred and sixty days.

A third example of the trouble you will have reconciling the woman as Israel only and the man child as Jesus only is found in verse 5. To maintain the position you hold will require you to ignore the meaning of the word used for "caught up" which roots are based in selection and to pluck. Jesus resurrection and ascension do not use this word.

Unreg "it does NOT differentiate Israel from the church, it applies what is for Israel to the church (read his Life Studies, ex.Jer 31:31), making a big salad with Israel and the church."

I am not aware of anywhere where Brother Lee teaches replacement theology. However, in reference to Jerusalem 31:31 speaking of the new covenant of course the church is living in the new covenant. That was for Israel too but they obviously are not living in it unless they become believers like any other christian in this age of grace. As a nation, they will live in the new covenant in the coming Kingdom once the Lord returns and establishes it in the future and the nation repents and receives Him as the Messiah on that glorious day (Revelation 1:7).

In summary Unreg. First, let me say I appreciate your posts. They are focused on the teachings and you challenge them forcefully. That is commendable and a welcome addition to this forum.

Having said that your teachings on Revelation 12 are lacking. Just saying the woman is Israel because 83% of the Bible is related to Israel......even if that were proven valid perhaps this is part of the 17% that includes something more. The timeline in Revelation 12 (the birth of the manchild, the Dragon and one third of the angels cast to earth, the war in heaven, the plucking up of the man child, the wilderness experience of the woman, etc.) simply falls apart with your interpretation and the meaning of actual words must be ignored such as "caught up" when referring to the manchild.

Thanks
Drake

Answer: I can see that you are not understanding why I mention Israelology? It is because Israelology plays a big role (83%) in the Bible, since the Bible is a Judeo-Christian Book. Not because everything is Israel, just to be aware of that BIG point that we should consider when studying the Bible. Otherwise you come up with “free” allegories that you find in the Life Studies of W. Lee.

Another point you are misunderstanding is that the book of Revelation itself gives you an outline of the whole book in Rev 1:19. 19“Therefore write the things which you have seen (past, about Christ, chp 1), and the things which are (present, chp 2,3, the 7 churches), and the things which will take place (future, chp 4-22) after these things. Notice that the book of Revelation is the conclusion of the whole Bible plus is a prophetic book, meaning telling us things that will happen in the FUTURE, but still tells us things from the PAST and PRESENT (read verse Rev 1:19). You mention the conflict with the “time line”, this verse answers your question. Verse 19 is a general outline of Revelation with MANY INSERTIONS. (For further explanation see the paragraph about heptadic structure of Revelation below).

Also, you mention the confusion in Rev 12:5. By the way that verse is very controversial even among very good scholars. 5And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and to His throne.

The Son is Christ. The second half of verse 5, says “caught up” which is the same Greek word for “rapture” as in 1Thes 4:17. G.H. Pember is the first one that brought up that the “child” could ALSO INCLUDE the Body of Christ. Remember that we are talking already about Eschatology, the conclusion of Israel and the conclusion of the whole Bible. Additionally, please notice in order to understand properly the book of Revelation, you have to study the book of Daniel (these 2 books go together) because in this particular case, in between verses 5 and 6 of Rev 12, there is a gap or interval of time; which is the same gap in between verses 25 and 27 of Dan 9. This gap is verse 26. Putting these pieces together you can see the complete picture for this section. It is helpful to keep in mind that the church appeared miraculously in Acts 2 and will disappear (VERY SOON!!) also miraculously through the rapture (1Thes 4:16, 17; 1Cor 15:52), this is why Paul in 1Thes 4:18 says: “comfort one another with these words”, these are good news for the church!! In these Eschatological topics, you have to increase the resolution of your magnifying glass, otherwise you will miss what the Bible is showing us. This is the reason why the Lord Jesus Himself said Mt 5:17,18. W. Lee in his Life Studies teaches to focus on “main points only”, but Mt 5:17,18 says exactly the opposite.

Going back to Rev 12:1-5, verse 1 is explained for us by Jacob in Gen 37:9-11, confirming again that the woman is Israel. Further confirmation that the woman is Israel and NOT the church: Micah 4:9; 5:2; Isa 9:6; Gal 3:16; Jer 31:31; Gen 3:15 (the beginning). Please read carefully each one of the references.

Another helpful thing to be aware when studying the book of Revelation, is to realize the “heptadic structure” For the 7 seals, in between the 6th and the 7th seal there is an insertion which is chp 7. For the 7 trumpets, in between the 6th and the 7th trumpets there is an insertion which are chps 10-14. For the 7 bowls, in between the 6th and the 7th bowls there is an insertion which is chp 16. That means that Rev 12 is an insertion in the sequence of events happening in the book of Revelation (related to timeline).

Finally, a little historical background. The confusion of trying to make the woman, the church in Rev 12; comes from Origen: he started with allegorical interpretations. Then Augustine: he developed Amillennial Eschatology. Then the Medieval church with the quest for power, this led to the Holocaust in Germany and it will happen again in the Great Tribulation.

Interesting, several years ago, Rev 12 is what triggered my search for the Truth including several theologians in addition to the teachings of W. Nee and W. Lee; since both teachings were contradicting each other. Here is the portion of my testimony: I finished reading all the conclusion messages and other books of W. Lee; since I needed to continue studying, I continued with the collected works of W. Nee. Interestingly, I started to see differences in between W. Nee's and W. Lee's ministry. Additionally, since we live in these "last years" or apocalyptic age, I started to study Eschatology or the study of the "end times" ( 33% of the Bible is Prophecy and I knew almost nothing!). It became even more interesting when I was studying Rev 12:1-5 about the great sign of the woman in heaven... W. Lee says that the woman is the church (which is wrong), and W. Nee says the woman is Israel (which is correct). These are two different interpretations, so I wanted to find out which interpretation was correct, according to the whole Bible. (for the rest of my testimony you can see my original post).

I hope this explanation helps some. The proper way to study the Bible and to avoid to be deceived by following the wrong teaching or interpretation is: First to have prayer and relationship with the Author (God) of the Bible (Jn 5:39,40), then we need to take notes as we read and study the Bible (God’s Word), lastly we can check with the commentaries of the theologians; NOT just ONE author, but 3 or 4. And try to understand why the interpretations differ. We need to do our homework and NOT to blindly believe the commentaries, learn from the Berean believers (Act 17:10,11).

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Answer: I can see that you are not understanding why I mention Israelology? It is because Israelology plays a big role (83%) in the Bible, since the Bible is a Judeo-Christian Book. Not because everything is Israel, just to be aware of that BIG point that we should consider when studying the Bible. Otherwise you come up with “free” allegories that you find in the Life Studies of W. Lee......

....I hope this explanation helps some. The proper way to study the Bible and to avoid to be deceived by following the wrong teaching or interpretation is: First to have prayer and relationship with the Author (God) of the Bible (Jn 5:39,40), then we need to take notes as we read and study the Bible (God’s Word), lastly we can check with the commentaries of the theologians; NOT just ONE author, but 3 or 4. And try to understand why the interpretations differ. We need to do our homework and NOT to blindly believe the commentaries, learn from the Berean believers (Act 17:10,11).

Unreg,

Thanks for your post. I'm going to respond in three parts. Otherwise a single post to cover different lines of thought will become too unwieldy. The three parts will be Israelology, interpretation of Revelation 12, and what Witness Lee actually taught concerning Israel. A fourth part concerning "allegory" has already been addressed in post #14. If you care to respond to that then please do so otherwise it stands as is.

Israelology: you have made the point several times that "83% of the Bible is related to Israel". At first I thought this was just a statistic you found interesting but since you are repeating it and placing so much value on it I see that it is central to your belief system. Let's have a closer look at that.

No matter how you calculate the 83% the way that you use it is a fallacy in argumentation. It is an Argumentum Ad Numerum and like the Tiny Percentage Fallacy that states "an action that is quite significant in and of itself somehow becomes insignificant simply because it's a tiny percentage of something much larger." Your argument is a Large Percentage Fallacy. By frequently referring to "83% of the Bible is about Israel" you are inflating it's significance based on statistics. For example, the word "law" is mentioned over twice as many times as the word "grace" in the Bible. What does that tell you? Nothing of significance because an argument needs to pivot on something that is relevant not on statistics or numbers.

Secondly, the church was the mystery hid from ages. Colossians 1:26 says "the mystery which has been hidden from the ages and from the generations but now has been manifested to His saints". There would be less references in the Bible about the church for that reason alone. Is the church any less significant to God or to us if it were mentioned only 17% of the time in the Bible? Of course not.

I agree on the points you made on how to approach the Bible through prayer study and multiple references. Yet, I think you miss something that is also extremely important. We should not come to the Bible with filters on our glasses. When you approach the Bible thinking that "83% of the Bible is about Israel" you will be looking for confirmation in all that you read. That will cause a bias in your understanding. I believe that you are reading into the scriptures references to Israel any and every chance you get. By taking that approach you will get to 83% whether it is really there or not because your mind directs you to confirm it.

If you believe Israel is the dominant topic in the thought of God, and therefore should be in ours, you should justify this based on the scripture not on statistics and numbers.

Drake

Originally Posted by Drake

Unreg,

Thanks for your post. I'm going to respond in three parts. Otherwise a single post to cover different lines of thought will become too unwieldy. The three parts will be Israelology, interpretation of Revelation 12, and what Witness Lee actually taught concerning Israel. A fourth part concerning "allegory" has already been addressed in post #14. If you care to respond to that then please do so otherwise it stands as is.

Israelology: you have made the point several times that "83% of the Bible is related to Israel". At first I thought this was just a statistic you found interesting but since you are repeating it and placing so much value on it I see that it is central to your belief system. Let's have a closer look at that.

No matter how you calculate the 83% the way that you use it is a fallacy in argumentation. It is an Argumentum Ad Numerum and like the Tiny Percentage Fallacy that states "an action that is quite significant in and of itself somehow becomes insignificant simply because it's a tiny percentage of something much larger." Your argument is a Large Percentage Fallacy. By frequently referring to "83% of the Bible is about Israel" you are inflating it's significance based on statistics. For example, the word "law" is mentioned over twice as many times as the word "grace" in the Bible. What does that tell you? Nothing of significance because an argument needs to pivot on something that is relevant not on statistics or numbers.

Secondly, the church was the mystery hid from ages. Colossians 1:26 says "the mystery which has been hidden from the ages and from the generations but now has been manifested to His saints". There would be less references in the Bible about the church for that reason alone. Is the church any less significant to God or to us if it were mentioned only 17% of the time in the Bible? Of course not.

I agree on the points you made on how to approach the Bible through prayer study and multiple references. Yet, I think you miss something that is also extremely important. We should not come to the Bible with filters on our glasses. When you approach the Bible thinking that "83% of the Bible is about Israel" you will be looking for confirmation in all that you read. That will cause a bias in your understanding. I believe that you are reading into the scriptures references to Israel any and every chance you get. By taking that approach you will get to 83% whether it is really there or not because your mind directs you to confirm it.

If you believe Israel is the dominant topic in the thought of God, and therefore should be in ours, you should justify this based on the scripture not on statistics and numbers.

Drake

Answer:

I keep repeating Israelology because you keep asking and I think you are not understanding. Remember the title of my post and the development of the points.

Here I am repeating myself again, because you asked. Israelology: Making very simple math (there are more sophisticated detailed calculations, you should check them out).

OT books 39: 59 %
NT books 27: 41 %
Total books 66: 100 %

Since the NT has 27 books (41 % of the Bible)
But, 58 % of the NT is from the OT.

If you put together the 59 % of the OT and the 58 % of the OT that is in the NT (or the 58 % of the 41 %), you get approximately 83 %.

You can see in every book of the NT, how many quotations are from the OT. After doing this exercise, we will realize why we need to be clear about the customs, habits, culture, practices, etc, etc, …. of Israel, so we can understand correctly the OT and with that correct understanding of the OT, we can understand correctly the NT. If we “ignore Israelology” our understanding of the Scriptures will be wrong. The whole Bible is deliberately engineered and perfectly designed by God as a UNIT. Remember the 66 books constitute the Bible.

The point here is that we should be AWARE of the big role that Israel plays (Rom 9:4; Eph 2:11, 12) in the Bible, why? Because, this very point (absence of Israelology), is one of the reasons why W. Lee’s teachings have errors. W. Lee, applies to the church what is for Israel and also freely allegorizes the Scriptures. It is not a matter to try to say who is more important? Israel or the church? Similarly, Eschatology is 33 % of the Bible. Under W. Lee’s teaching I barely knew Eschatology because he did not teach much, and the little that I knew, all of it was wrong. Then the Bible also has Ecclesiology, and W. Lee’s Ecclesiology also is wrong, because he ignores Israelology and his Eschatology is wrong. All we have to do is to “honor and follow” what the Bible is showing to us. For this, we need to get very familiar with the text, context, structure, where different topics or words are mentioned, recognize what is a parable, a type, an allegory, a pun, a figure of speech (there are over 200 in the Bible), a simile, a metaphor, an analogy, an idiom (which there are many in the Jewish culture used in the Bible), a hypocatastasis, etc., etc., etc., …. There are over 200 in the Bible. If you read Rom 9, 10, 11; you will see how Israel and the church are related. By the way, the one (Paul, THE expert of Ecclesiology) who wrote about the church (Eph 3:3,4); is the same one who wrote 3 chapters (9-11) about Israel in Romans. Israel and the church have different roles in God’s plan (please read Rom 9, 10, 11). It is not a matter to try to say who is more important. But to understand what the Bible is telling us according to the whole counsel of God (Rev 1:1; 19:10; Jn 5:39; Ps 40:7; Mt 5:17, 18; Rom 15:4; Acts 20:27). By the way, Israel and the church belong to God, but please understand, their roles are different. It will be very helpful for yourself, if you check with some “respected” theologians this matter of “Israelology”. I did not come up on my own about this topic. I was ignorant in this respect (because I was studying ONLY W. Lee’s teachings), but thanks to God’s Mercy and Compassion I got to learn some and I am still learning.

The proper way to study the Bible and to avoid to be deceived by following the wrong teaching or interpretation is: First to have prayer and relationship with the Author (God) of the Bible (Jn 5:39,40), then we need to take notes as we read and study the Bible (God’s Word), lastly we can check with the commentaries of the theologians; NOT just ONE author, but 3 or 4. And try to understand why the interpretations differ. We need to do our homework and NOT to blindly believe the commentaries, learn from the Berean believers (Act 17:10,11).

You agree with the above paragraph about being the proper way to study, but in W. Lee’s group most of them when reading or studying the Bible, the first thing they do, is to look at what the footnotes are saying and even many of their leading ones, if there is a verse without a footnote, they say: “I cannot comment on this verse because there is no footnote”.

Again, I am not trying to convince you. All I want to do is to point out some things and show “why” I am saying what I am saying according to the Scriptures. Now everyone should do their homework and come to their own conclusions. Otherwise we will fall “again” in the same deception of W. Lee’s teaching and practices, where only one person knows everything and everyone follows blindly, and only they know everything, and only they are correct. This is all I can do for you at this point, again I am not trying to convince you, I am not claiming I know everything, you don’t have to believe what I say. You make your own conclusions.

[JesusLover]

Originally Posted by Drake

Unreg,

Thanks for your post. I'm going to respond in three parts. Otherwise a single post to cover different lines of thought will become too unwieldy. The three parts will be Israelology, interpretation of Revelation 12, and what Witness Lee actually taught concerning Israel. A fourth part concerning "allegory" has already been addressed in post #14. If you care to respond to that then please do so otherwise it stands as is.

Israelology: you have made the point several times that "83% of the Bible is related to Israel". At first I thought this was just a statistic you found interesting but since you are repeating it and placing so much value on it I see that it is central to your belief system. Let's have a closer look at that.

No matter how you calculate the 83% the way that you use it is a fallacy in argumentation. It is an Argumentum Ad Numerum and like the Tiny Percentage Fallacy that states "an action that is quite significant in and of itself somehow becomes insignificant simply because it's a tiny percentage of something much larger." Your argument is a Large Percentage Fallacy. By frequently referring to "83% of the Bible is about Israel" you are inflating it's significance based on statistics. For example, the word "law" is mentioned over twice as many times as the word "grace" in the Bible. What does that tell you? Nothing of significance because an argument needs to pivot on something that is relevant not on statistics or numbers.

Secondly, the church was the mystery hid from ages. Colossians 1:26 says "the mystery which has been hidden from the ages and from the generations but now has been manifested to His saints". There would be less references in the Bible about the church for that reason alone. Is the church any less significant to God or to us if it were mentioned only 17% of the time in the Bible? Of course not.

I agree on the points you made on how to approach the Bible through prayer study and multiple references. Yet, I think you miss something that is also extremely important. We should not come to the Bible with filters on our glasses. When you approach the Bible thinking that "83% of the Bible is about Israel" you will be looking for confirmation in all that you read. That will cause a bias in your understanding. I believe that you are reading into the scriptures references to Israel any and every chance you get. By taking that approach you will get to 83% whether it is really there or not because your mind directs you to confirm it.

If you believe Israel is the dominant topic in the thought of God, and therefore should be in ours, you should justify this based on the scripture not on statistics and numbers.

Drake

Finally I took the time to register.
My user name is : JesusLover. Hopefully this will make things easier.

Answer:
I keep repeating Israelology because you keep asking and I think you are not understanding. Remember the title of my post and the development of the points.

Here I am repeating myself again, because you asked. Israelology: Making very simple math (there are more sophisticated detailed calculations, you should check them out).
OT books 39: 59 %
NT books 27: 41 %
Total books 66: 100 %
[COLOR=black]Since the NT has 27 books (41 % of the Bible) [COLOR]

But, 58 % of the NT is from the OT.

If you put together the 59 % of the OT and the 58 % of the OT that is in the NT (or the 58 % of the 41 %), you get approximately 83 %.

You can see in every book of the NT, how many quotations are from the OT. After doing this exercise, we will realize why we need to be clear about the customs, habits, culture, practices, etc, etc, …. of Israel, so we can understand correctly the OT and with that correct understanding of the OT, we can understand correctly the NT. If we “ignore Israelology” our understanding of the Scriptures will be wrong. The whole Bible is deliberately engineered and perfectly designed by God as a UNIT. Remember the 66 books constitute the Bible.

The point here is that we should be AWARE of the big role that Israel plays (Rom 9:4; Eph 2:11, 12) in the Bible, why? Because, this very point (absence of Israelology), is one of the reasons why W. Lee’s teachings have errors. W. Lee, applies to the church what is for Israel and also freely allegorizes the Scriptures. It is not a matter to try to say who is more important? Israel or the church? Similarly, Eschatology is 33 % of the Bible. Under W. Lee’s teaching I barely knew Eschatology because he did not teach much, and the little that I knew, all of it was wrong. Then the Bible also has Ecclesiology, and W. Lee’s Ecclesiology also is wrong, because he ignores Israelology and his Eschatology is wrong. All we have to do is to “honor and follow” what the Bible is showing to us. For this, we need to get very familiar with the text, context, structure, where different topics or words are mentioned, recognize what is a parable, a type, an allegory, a pun, a figure of speech (there are over 200 in the Bible), a simile, a metaphor, an analogy, an idiom (which there are many in the Jewish culture used in the Bible), a hypocatastasis, etc., etc., etc., …. There are over 200 in the Bible. If you read Rom 9, 10, 11; you will see how Israel and the church are related. By the way, the one (Paul, THE expert of Ecclesiology) who wrote about the church (Eph 3:3,4); is the same one who wrote 3 chapters (9-11) about Israel in Romans. Israel and the church have different roles in God’s plan (please read Rom 9, 10, 11). It is not a matter to try to say who is more important. But to understand what the Bible is telling us according to the whole counsel of God (Rev 1:1; 19:10; Jn 5:39; Ps 40:7; Mt 5:17, 18; Rom 15:4; Acts 20:27). By the way, Israel and the church belong to God, but please understand, their roles are different. It will be very helpful for yourself, if you check with some “respected” theologians this matter of “Israelology”. I did not come up on my own about this topic. I was ignorant in this respect (because I was studying ONLY W. Lee’s teachings), but thanks to God’s Mercy and Compassion I got to learn some and I am still learning.

The proper way to study the Bible and to avoid to be deceived by following the wrong teaching or interpretation is: First to have prayer and relationship with the Author (God) of the Bible (Jn 5:39,40), then we need to take notes as we read and study the Bible (God’s Word), lastly we can check with the commentaries of the theologians; NOT just ONE author, but 3 or 4. And try to understand why the interpretations differ. We need to do our homework and NOT to blindly believe the commentaries, learn from the Berean believers (Act 17:10,11).

You agree with the above paragraph about being the proper way to study, but in W. Lee’s group most of them when reading or studying the Bible, the first thing they do, is to look at what the footnotes are saying and even many of their leading ones, if there is a verse without a footnote, they say: “I cannot comment on this verse because there is no footnote”.
Again, I am not trying to convince you. All I want to do is to point out some things and show “why” I am saying what I am saying according to the Scriptures. Now everyone should do their homework and come to their own conclusions. Otherwise we will fall “again” in the same deception of W. Lee’s teaching and practices, where only one person knows everything and everyone follows blindly, and only they know everything, and only they are correct. This is all I can do for you at this point, again I am not trying to convince you, I am not claiming I know everything, you don’t have to believe what I say. You make your own conclusions.

[aron]

Originally Posted by JesusLover

.. in W. Lee’s group most of them when reading or studying the Bible, the first thing they do, is to look at what the footnotes are saying and even many of their leading ones, if there is a verse without a footnote, they say: “I cannot comment on this verse because there is no footnote”.

Some years ago I was in discussion of the Christian experience with an LC elder and a rank-and-file LC brother. I mentioned something that had touched me deeply from a set of verses, which had no RecV footnote or commentary. The elder simply looked straight ahead, mouth closed. The LC brother also froze because the elder didn't give him an opening. We sat there, quiet and motionless, for some time.

They couldn't deny that the point I had made was from the "clear words" in front of us, as Witness Lee used to say. But Lee hadn't made my point, so they couldn't receive it. But they couldn't argue against it, either. So they sat there.

Eventually one of us spoke on something else, and the conversation continued. But it was rather subdued after that. The "mutuality" had been damaged. I was apparently an independent thinker, and not a program zealot.

What was strange to me, was that my point wasn't on something obscure, but was directly related to the very person of Christ and His journey on earth, and His heart of love, and subsequent return in triumph and glory to the Father's house. But Lee hadn't commented, so neither could we. It could hardly have been any more wonderful, but to them it couldn't exist. (Even though they couldn't say that it didn't exist).

[Drake]

Jesus Lover "Finally I took the time to register. My user name is : JesusLover. Hopefully this will make things easier."

It should. Thanks.

Concerning Israel = 83%.... this is totally irrelevant. It is a fallacy argument. You have not established that doing a word or subject count as a valid method of interpretation of the Bible.It is however an Argumentum Ad Numerum or a Large Percentage Fallacy and neither are valid. There are twice as many references to law in the Bible than there is to grace. And that means nothing either. The church was hid from ages so of course there is going to be less material on that topic in the Bible. Is Israel an important topic in the Bible? Yes of course! But you are trying to convince the reader that Israel is the dominant topic in the Bible because it is mentioned more frequently according to your math.

JesusLover " You can see in every book of the NT, how many quotations are from the OT. After doing this exercise, we will realize why we need to be clear about the customs, habits, culture, practices, etc, etc, …. of Israel, so we can understand correctly the OT and with that correct understanding of the OT, we can understand correctly the NT. If we “ignore Israelology” our understanding of the Scriptures will be wrong. The whole Bible is deliberately engineered and perfectly designed by God as a UNIT. Remember the 66 books constitute the Bible.

Thanks for the reminder that there are 66 books in the Bible.

I probably agree with most of what you are saying in the above. I will leave it to you to explain to the group which customs, habits, culture, practices of Israel we need to understand to correctly understand the New Testament at the appropriate moments. However, I and certainly Witness Lee never ignored Israel. It's one thing to ignore Israel in the Bible it's quite another to place it as the most important topic of the Bible. You apparently are doing the latter.


JesusLover "The point here is that we should be AWARE of the big role that Israel plays (Rom 9:4; Eph 2:11, 12) in the Bible, why? Because, this very point (absence of Israelology), is one of the reasons why W. Lee’s teachings have errors. W. Lee, applies to the church what is for Israel..."

Ok, we are AWARE. Please be more specific about the absence of Israel in Witness Lee's teachings that have errors. I looked at the verses you cited above in Romans and Ephesians and Witness Lee addresses the points about Israel in their proper context. When you say that Witness Lee applies to the church what is for Israel what exactly are you referring to? Chapter and verse please.

JesusLover " By the way, Israel and the church belong to God, but please understand, their roles are different. It will be very helpful for yourself, if you check with some “respected” theologians this matter of “Israelology”. I did not come up on my own about this topic"

Yes, the "roles" of the Church and Israel are different and their times are apportioned by God. The times apportioned for Israel are articulated in the framework of Daniels 70 weeks. This is all covered in Witness Lee's teachings . If you think he left something out or misapplied something to the church that exclusively belongs to Israel then you will need to point that out specifically instead of just using generalizations . And yes I have read some of Fruchtenbaum's material and listened to him speak.

JesusLover "Again, I am not trying to convince you. All I want to do is to point out some things and show “why” I am saying what I am saying according to the Scriptures"

You have not yet shown specific examples from the Scriptures showing the errors in the writings of Witness Lee concerning Israel. If you have specific examples where Witness Lee appropriated things that were just for Israel and applied them to the church then feel free to list them here now. What are they?

Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by JesusLover

Here I am repeating myself again, because you asked. Israelology: Making very simple math (there are more sophisticated detailed calculations, you should check them out).
OT books 39: 59 %
NT books 27: 41 %
Total books 66: 100 %
[COLOR=black]Since the NT has 27 books (41 % of the Bible) [COLOR]

But, 58 % of the NT is from the OT.

If you put together the 59 % of the OT and the 58 % of the OT that is in the NT (or the 58 % of the 41 %), you get approximately 83 %.

Yes, I understand your math and it is fatally flawed. What is this 58% of the OT that is in the NT? Is it the genealogy of Jesus showing us that Jesus is the Messiah, the one we should listen to, the one that the OT was pointing to? That doesn't weight the Bible towards the OT, it tilts it toward the NT.

Or is it all the verses where the Pharisees quoted OT laws about stoning sinners only to be rebuffed by Jesus. Once again, this does not tilt the NT towards an OT understanding, rather it tilts the Bible to seeing the OT through the eyes of Jesus.

Or is it the reference to Jesus as the lamb of God. All of the verses that demonstrate that Jesus is the fulfillment of the OT promises. Once again, this doesn't tilt the Bible towards Israelogy, rather it shows the NT was a type and shadow of the coming Jesus and the Church.

Your % of verses may be correct, but your interpretation of this tilting the understanding of the Bible to Israelogy and the OT is fatally flawed.

[Boxjobox]

Hi JesusLover,
You say "The proper way to study the Bible and to avoid to be deceived by following the wrong teaching or interpretation is: First to have prayer and relationship with the Author (God) of the Bible (Jn 5:39,40), then we need to take notes as we read and study the Bible (God’s Word), lastly we can check with the commentaries of the theologians; NOT just ONE author, but 3 or 4. And try to understand why the interpretations differ. We need to do our homework and NOT to blindly believe the commentaries, learn from the Berean believers (Act 17:10,11)."

In reading Ephesians 3, it seems the major thing on God's and the apostle Paul's heart, is not Israel, but the church. There is a lot I can find fault with in WL's ministry, but his tenacity to speak about the church was not one of them. Granted, the content he may have filled the church container with grew increasingly off key, but I would be hard pressed to find any commentator or preacher who cared as much about bringing out the scriptural grandness of the church, with a desire to see it in its fruition. Your studiousness is to be commended, but I don't see Israelology, nor eschatology as the primary Christian focus, but the church-we need the same heart as the apostle Paul! I would think
You seem to dismiss the weightiness of the church in this age with its degradation. I, for one, don't want to relegate my Christian life to sitting in pews or chairs, being entertained, shaking a few hands, and talking about football scores, just because all churches have problems. The modern American "church" is pathetic. WL brought out so much concerning the church that most commentators pass over; we shouldn't throw it out just because he ended up corrupting the very thing he worked to build.
I would think a clear understanding and practice of the church is needed before one can understand Israelology, not the other way around. If after 2000 years, we are left with the kind of church practice we see predominate in the US, I would say at the least, the average theologian and bible commentaries have failed miserably.
When the local church morphed into LSM affiliates, may of us left, and left as well the whole concept of the church and the church practice in the hand of the charlatans. I think it's time for the "recovery" of the church!

[JesusLover]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Yes, I understand your math and it is fatally flawed. What is this 58% of the OT that is in the NT? Is it the genealogy of Jesus showing us that Jesus is the Messiah, the one we should listen to, the one that the OT was pointing to? That doesn't weight the Bible towards the OT, it tilts it toward the NT.

Or is it all the verses where the Pharisees quoted OT laws about stoning sinners only to be rebuffed by Jesus. Once again, this does not tilt the NT towards an OT understanding, rather it tilts the Bible to seeing the OT through the eyes of Jesus.

Or is it the reference to Jesus as the lamb of God. All of the verses that demonstrate that Jesus is the fulfillment of the OT promises. Once again, this doesn't tilt the Bible towards Israelogy, rather it shows the NT was a type and shadow of the coming Jesus and the Church.

Your % of verses may be correct, but your interpretation of this tilting the understanding of the Bible to Israelogy and the OT is fatally flawed.

Answer:


If you do a little research (homework), you will see:


For example: IF, Mt has 1400 verses in the whole book. And IF, there are 500 verses in Mt that are quotations from the Old Testament; for Mt would be: 36 % of the OT. Then, if you do the same thing for every book of the New Testament, you will find out that 58 % of the OT is in the NT. But again, I say to you what I said to Drake: I can see that you are not understanding about Israelology. The exercise of showing the 83% is a very, very small part of the subject. That is only showing you how much (83%) of the “Biblical text” talks about Israel. Please understand that Israelology is not a “percentage”. Moving forward to the “real” subject. If you remember the “title” of my post is: “MAJOR” Errors of W. Lee’s Teaching. That means that Israelology is a “major” topic that W. Lee did not consider in his Life Studies. He spoke about Israel, but he applied to the church what is for Israel with the wrong interpretation. Pick up any Life Study of the Old Testament and you will see that he ends up sharing from the New Testament bringing the “church in”.
For you to have some idea of what Israelology is, I can show you what the experts have to say. Israelology is a huge topic in the Bible. Please read this little portion and then you can do your homework on your own and come to your own conclusions. You don’t have to believe anything I say, that is what Acts 17:11 is telling you.
ISRAELOLOGY
Part 1 of 6
by
Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum
INTRODUCTION
The issue of Israel is one of the major points of division in evangelical
theology today. This is true both among Arminians and

Calvinists. An evangelical theologian's view of Israel will determine
whether he is a Covenant Theologian or a Dispensationalist. It will also
determine what kind of Covenant Theologian he is: postmillennial,
amillennial, or premillennial.
The question of Israel is central for a proper Systematic Theology.
Paul, in his epistle to the Romans, which contains the first
Systematic Theology in Church history, expounds on Israel in the center
of his epistle devoting three full chapters (9-11) out of sixteen to
this topic. Yet, while there are many Systematic Theologies today that
have systematized all areas of biblical truth, none thus far has developed
an Israelology as part of their system. These articles will survey
what the concerns of an Israelology would be.1
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Important terms are used throughout this study that should be defined
as part of the introduction.
Systematic Theology
A science which follows a humanly devised scheme or order of
doctrinal development and which purports to incorporate into its system
all the truth about God and His universe from any and every
source.
Systematic Theology may be defined as the collecting,
scientifically arranging, comparing, exhibiting, and de-
1 For a detailed systematized Israelology, see this author's work, Israelology:
The Missing Link in Systematic Theology (Tustin, CA: Ariel Ministries Press,

fending of all facts from any and every source concerning God and His works.2.

Israelology
This term refers to a subdivision of Systematic Theology incorporating
all theological doctrines concerning the people of Israel.
Israel
As used in this study, the term Israel is viewed theologically as
referring to all descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, also known
as the Jews, the Jewish people, Israelites, Hebrews, etc.3 The term is
not limited to the present political and national state in the Middle East,
which is merely a part of the whole; nor is it limited to those who adhere
to the religion of Judaism only.
THE PLACE OF ISRAELOLOGY
IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY
In every work of Systematic Theology, Israelology is found
missing as a major division. In all Systematic Theologies, what exists
of Israelology will only be partially developed. In Covenant Theology,
the development will be minimal. In Dispensationalism, Israelology is
only fully developed in its future aspect, not in its past and present aspects.
Logically, Israelology must come just before Ecclesiology [the
study the Church] and follow the same development. Both are a people
of God but, historically, Israel precedes the Church. As Ecclesiology
has been developed in its past, present, and future aspects, so must Israelology
be. Only then will Systematic Theology be truly complete.