Now's good - byHismercy

[aron]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

We were first cut off (from fellowship, friendship) by an older sister in Christ whom our family loved greatly. In fact, she led me to believe her dropping of our family was her obeying the Lord. This came from someone who I trusted and viewed as having a better walk, a deeper connection to Him. I thought and feared that He Himself was dropping me, or punishing me, or trying to rebuke me somehow. Then I had our other sister in Christ telling me, that the woman who dropped us knew when the building was just straw, to be burned, of course. And that my mentor in Christ, was waiting for me in the meetings. I began to understand....I was being shunned outside the meetings, but would be embraced, and worthy to speak to, if I came into the meetings.

The great problem with the LC system is that the subjectivism of Nee and Lee is now writ large across the assemblies and becomes that basis for ascertaining "reality" as it seems to be presenting to the members. It is all about how you feel. The Bible itself is secondary, as is basic righteousness, or rightness. Common sense. Interpretational consistency. All goes out the window in the subjective LC. If you don't "get life" you don't do it. And if Lee didn't "get life" from something, then neither can you.

All of which leads to some strange and very unchristian stuff. Eventually the disconnect becomes so glaring it is impossible not to notice. People who should always get love are treated as "straw to be burned" because why? They aren't absolute for this week's ministry message? What is the basis here? Subjectivism unhinged and unrestrained. "There is no one to restrain the madness of the prophet" indeed. The safety of multiple counselors, cited repeatedly in Proverbs, is completely absent in the LC. Whatever WL wanted to talk about today was "God's oracle."

The glory of the gospel, for me, is in its simplicity. God's love reaches everyone, not just those who fit our subjective comfort zones. God's power raised Jesus from the dead. God's light shines into the darkness, and mine is the worst, so why should I judge anyone? But rather God forgives, so I don't worry about anyone else's "subjective Christ" over-riding the word of the Bible in front of me.

Anyway I'm writing to say thank you for writing. I write too much, and often wish others would share their experiences. There's a need for people to realize there is indeed life, and "Christ", outside the LC. Thank you for sharing yours.

In Him always.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by aron

The great problem with the LC system is that the subjectivism of Nee and Lee is now writ large across the assemblies and becomes that basis for ascertaining "reality" as it seems to be presenting to the members. It is all about how you feel. The Bible itself is secondary, as is basic righteousness, or rightness. Common sense. Interpretational consistency. All goes out the window in the subjective LC. If you don't "get life" you don't do it. And if Lee didn't "get life" from something, then neither can you.

All of which leads to some strange and very unchristian stuff. Eventually the disconnect becomes so glaring it is impossible not to notice. People who should always get love are treated as "straw to be burned" because why? They aren't absolute for this week's ministry message? What is the basis here? Subjectivism unhinged and unrestrained. "There is no one to restrain the madness of the prophet" indeed. The safety of multiple counselors, cited repeatedly in Proverbs, is completely absent in the LC. Whatever WL wanted to talk about today was "God's oracle."

The glory of the gospel, for me, is in its simplicity. God's love reaches everyone, not just those who fit our subjective comfort zones. God's power raised Jesus from the dead. God's light shines into the darkness, and mine is the worst, so why should I judge anyone? But rather God forgives, so I don't worry about anyone else's "subjective Christ" over-riding the word of the Bible in front of me.

Anyway I'm writing to say thank you for writing. I write too much, and often wish others would share their experiences. There's a need for people to realize there is indeed life, and "Christ", outside the LC. Thank you for sharing yours.

In Him always.

Thank you aron and everybody else who kindly responded to my post....praise God in Christ Jesus, saints! His goodness and fellowship is faithful! This morning I was reflecting on one persons 'testing' of the teaching we received in the witness lee ministry about Satan himself dwelling in our flesh, I believe it was Nigel Tomes who wrote on this subject and refuted this idea with scripturs? Please correct me if I am wrong. That article was entirely eye opening to me...of course this lee teaaching I received at the time, but now, I see, of course, Satan CANNOT INDWELL ALL BELIEVERS because he is a fallen angel, not having omniscience nor omnipresence as our Lord Savior Christ does....

Realizing this teaching was completely in error made me realize that Lee and co. could be wrong about absolutely anything...

I agree with the Lord and several posters here....we should test all things, hold fast the good, leave the rest for the trashcan. Forgive me, that is not the accurate quote...oftentimes the Lord leaves me with a very strong impression of the truth, but not exactly His perfect wording...

Another scriptural truth I am choosing to believe over Lees word is in 1John 5.....for everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world-our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

I do! And this verse is one of many which the Lord gave me to shine His light into the darkness I was fed in the local church! I believe Him and His word, utterly! And how many other Lee teachings miss the mark completely, I am left wondering...

I know for sure the dividing from saints without the conditons set forth in the Word is unscriptual and abhorrent! And I will, by His mercy, never participate in such a body damaging practice. Again, thank you, saints! The warm responses from everybody really blessed me...

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

This morning I was reflecting on one persons 'testing' of the teaching we received in the witness lee ministry about Satan himself dwelling in our flesh, I believe it was Nigel Tomes who wrote on this subject and refuted this idea with scripturs? Please correct me if I am wrong. That article was entirely eye opening to me...of course this lee teaaching I received at the time, but now, I see, of course, Satan CANNOT INDWELL ALL BELIEVERS because he is a fallen angel, not having omniscience nor omnipresence as our Lord Savior Christ does....

Realizing this teaching was completely in error made me realize that Lee and co. could be wrong about absolutely anything...

byHismercy, can you explain this a little more? What is the context that witness lee taught Satan himself indwells our flesh? What is the refutation (or where could you point me to it)? Thanks in advance.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

byHismercy, can you explain this a little more? What is the context that witness lee taught Satan himself indwells our flesh? What is the refutation (or where could you point me to it)? Thanks in advance.

It is the two trees in the garden of Eden. The tree of life represented God, and Lee taught that by eating the tree of knowledge, Satan got into our flesh -- like the so-called "original sin."

[Evangelical]

If Satan does not indwell the flesh, how come believers can do evil things?

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Satan does not indwell the flesh, how come believers can do evil things?

Maybe for the same reasons that, though the Holy Spirit indwells us, we don't always do holy things.

Actually, the Bible never tells us that Satan indwells our flesh. Just like the Bible never tells us that the Father died on the cross. Just like the Bible never tells us that God became man so that man can become God. These are all ill-advised theological constructs by a man who had absolutely no business delving into such deep and advanced theological concepts; much, much less claiming that his make-it-up-as-he-went-along theology was "recovered truth".
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Satan does not indwell the flesh, how come believers can do evil things?

Check out this excellent article on the subject by ex-member Professor Nigel Tomes, which debunks Lee's errant theology:

"The Enemy Within - Satan In The Believer's Body - LSM's Unorthodox Satanology"

We also had much excellent discussion on this article a number of years ago.

[Evangelical]

There are sources outside of Lee which can corroborate his beliefs. Here is an article by the evangelical bible scholar and theologian Brett Burrowes:

https://zerubbabel.org/intercessor-a...and-the-flesh/

also see https://brettburrowes.wordpress.com/...and-the-flesh/

In fact before St.Augustine’s time, the early church believed that “Sin” in Romans 7 did not refer to some mysterious sin principle or sin nature but to Satan himself. Didymus the Blind, who wrote in Egypt in the fourth century, said: “it is the devil who dwells in sinners and does the evil through them, just as Christworks the good in believers.” Another important theologian, Basil of Caesarea, known for his important work on the Trinity and the Holy Spirit, calls the devil “sin itself,” when interpreting Romans.Another church father of the fourth century, Methodius, also interpreting Romans 7, says: “But the devil, whom he calls sin, because he is the author of sin, taking occasion by the commandment to deceive me into disobedience, deceived and slew me. By such a choice I am sold to the devil, fallen under sin, the lawof the devil according to the lust which dwells in the flesh.” Irenaeus, one of the earliest Christian theologians and bishop of Lyon (185 AD),writes that Adam became a vessel in Satan’s possession. I could quote additional early church writers, but I think these suffice to showthat something changed in the way that sin in Romans 7 was understood. In my doctoral dissertation I have traced this change to St. Augustine. In fact, in the eastern part of the church,Augustine had no influence on their understanding of sin and human nature, and so to this day, the understanding of sin as a reference to the spirit of Satan is still an influential and important interpretation in Eastern Orthodox theology.


When Augustine became Christian, he reacted against the Manichean religion he had once followed and rejected the view that Satan continued to be the source of all human sin even after Adam’s sin and reduced him to only beginning the process. In other words, Satan corrupted human nature, which became independently sinful, but Satan did not continue to dwell in humanity, as the other church fathers taught.

Contrary to what Augustine and the entire Catholic and Protestant traditions have taught, sin is not the corruption of an independently operating human nature, but the enslaving spirit of Satan.

So we have good evidence that it was in fact Augustine who had "ill-advised theological constructs by a man who had absolutely no business delving into such deep and advanced theological concepts". Modern day beliefs about Satan do not come from the Bible nor the (earliest) early church, but from Augustine's personal reaction to Manichean religion.

The Nigel Tomes article does not consider the changes brought about by Augustine nor consider the similarity between Lee's beliefs and the early church fathers. It is clear from this article by Burrowes that Augustine swung the pendulum away from commonly held early Christian beliefs and Lee was one of a number to try and swing it back again. When I consider that the Tomes article or the discussion on here does not address or even mention these things, it proves that there is not enough evidence to debunk Lee's teaching entirely.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Satan does not indwell the flesh, how come believers can do evil things?

Romans 7:17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

Sin, NOT SATAN, dwells within us.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Romans 7:17 So no it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

Sin, NOT SATAN, dwells within us.

Ephesians 2:2 clearly shows Satan is a spirit who is at work inside people:

in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.

Romans 6:12 and 6:14 show that sin can reign and sin can be a master:

12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires.

14 For sin shall no longer be your master

A thing, an it, cannot reign and be a master. Only a living entity can reign and be master, i.e. Satan.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It is the two trees in the garden of Eden. The tree of life represented God, and Lee taught that by eating the tree of knowledge, Satan got into our flesh -- like the so-called "original sin."

After man ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, "Jehovah God said, Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil".

I never understood how the tree of knowledge could represent Satan (and partaking of it meant partaking of Satan) since God stated that the man became like God once he ate of it.

I asked an elder that question several months back: "was it the tree itself that was the problem and sin entered through taking in of the tree? or was it the act of disobedience that was the problem and there was nothing inherently 'wrong' with the tree but sin entered through the act?" He didn't have an answer but did reference Romans 5:12 about sin entering into the world through one man.

I've always grown up with "life good, knowledge bad" as evidenced by the two trees (and of course there is the verse that the letter kills but the Spirit gives life) but .... is that just an interpretation of Genesis by W.Lee that is not commonly held elsewhere or is that generally accepted, or is this one of those still-debated topics today?