The Psalms are the word of Christ

[JJ]

Originally Posted by VoiceInWilderness

The problem with WL's treatment of Psalms (and Proverbs, Job, James and Peter) is not that he missed places that were about Christ.

The problem is that WL taught, especially later in his life, that if the Bible does not emphasize what WL emphasizes, then that part of the Bible is erroneous human concept.

There are many parts of the Bible, including Psalms that are not about Christ or the church. Most of Psalms show by experience how to live a godly, humble, down-to-earth, honest life. This is part of a balanced diet of the truth. WL said that such verses or whole Psalms or whole books were not the word of God, but are human concepts contrary to God's truth. I think this was WL's greatest error.

This whole thread took an interesting tangent with a great discussion about the inerrancy of scripture. But, I was struck and helped by the above post because when I reread some of “the go to verses” in the New Testament (including those cited in this thread) they support this thought. First here are links to the verses I checked:

https://biblehub.com/blb/luke/24.htm

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/3-16.htm

https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/10-11.htm

I was struck with this. In Luke 24 Jesus was able to point out during part of a 7 mile walk (say 6 hours?) the parts of scripture (Old Testament of course) that were about himself. Then what exactly do the other verses say scripture is for?
“profitable for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” and “these things happened to them as types and were written for our admonition..”, they don’t say “are all about Christ” nor “are all about Christ and the church”, nor “are all about God’s economy”.

I don’t know about you, but I find that liberating. Thanks VoiceInWilderness!
No more hunting every scripture to see how it is about Christ (what I’ve been burdened with).

[aron]

Originally Posted by JJ

I don’t know about you, but I find that liberating.

No more hunting every scripture to see how it is about Christ (what I’ve been burdened with).

I never said "every scripture is about Christ", or if I did I mis-spoke. What I said in the first couple of posts on this thread was that there is probably "more Christ" in the first 21 Psalms than merely Psalm 2,8, and 16.

I pointed out Psalm 3 and Psalm 6 and Psalm 18 as examples.

Drake and Evangelical will point out Job's companions speaking "naturally" &c; I likewise pointed out Manoah and his wife. But that was never the issue of this thread: it was rather, are 18 of the first 21 Psalms likewise "natural human concept"? That was my inquiry.

The NT reception gives us ample latitude to "see Jesus" a la Hebrews 2:9, in the types and figures of the OT. The pious Jew who loves God's word, who obeys, and is rewarded - "He rescued me (Christ) because He delighted in me" is an obvious example (from Psalm 18).

But I never insinuated that every word of Psalms, or Scripture, must be "Christ". The Psalmist writing in Psalm 51, "In sin I was conceived" doesn't sound like Christ to me.

To re-iterated my theme, WL departed from the apostolic precedent set in Acts 2 by Peter and Acts 13 by Paul in finding "Christ" in the Psalms. This pattern of reception and usage was similarly followed in Hebrews, Peter's epistle, and the four Gospels. The sinner David, in his struggle to find God, was a picture of the coming "Seed of David". And Asaph, Lemuel, etc. These "godly sentiments" were fulfilled by Jesus the Nazarene.

But no, not every single word has to be "Christ". I don't think that I ever suggested that. What I am saying is that there is a pattern of reception and usage in the NT, and we shouldn't be so quick, as WL was, to dismiss the pattern given us by the apostles and writers of the NT.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

I never said "every scripture is about Christ", or if I did I mis-spoke. What I said in the first couple of posts on this thread was that there is probably "more Christ" in the first 21 Psalms than merely Psalm 2,8, and 16.

Actually, what you said is that all a Psalms portray Christ. I responded to this in post #717.

Aron, you reserve the right to change your mind or admit you misspoke but it’s not accurate to say you never said it. Why is that important? Well, you staked out a position and we all met you there to discuss it. Thinking you had mistakenly and inadvertently driven a peg in the wrong place, I asked you at one point if your disagreement with Brother Lee was that you saw Christ in the Psalms in more places than he did because I intimated that if that was the case then, “so what?”. That was your out..... I was facilitating a path for you to a more reasonable and moderate position. I’m glad you have reconsidered and backed off that ardent and unreasonable stake in the ground.

So then, if your objection is that you see Christ in more Psalms than Brother Lee did then I ask again......so what?

Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

Well, you staked out a position and we all met you there to discuss it.

The position I staked out was that the ministry of Witness Lee deviated strongly from apostolic precedents in its reception of the Psalms, calling 18 of the first 21 psalms "natural human concepts"; I asked where was the NT precedent for this kind of wholesale dismissal of scripture? No answer. Instead I get a "Who cares".

Every fall, the LSM-captive assemblies send out tens of thousands of flyers to college freshmen, hoping to lure them into the thrall of WL's ministry. Perhaps some of these students will find the non-answer from the LSM apologist on this site as telling as I do.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by aron

I asked where was the NT precedent for this kind of wholesale dismissal of scripture? No answer. Instead I get a "Who cares".

Yeah, he's willing to dismiss Lee's attack on the authenticity of Scripture, but when I mention the differences in the manuscripts, he accuses me of attacking the authenticity of scripture. And mine don't even question the authenticity of scripture, just the manuscripts.

And then Untohim deletes my posts, or moves them to Tartarus.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

The position I staked out was that the ministry of Witness Lee deviated strongly from apostolic precedents in its reception of the Psalms, calling 18 of the first 21 psalms "natural human concepts"; I asked where was the NT precedent for this kind of wholesale dismissal of scripture? No answer. Instead I get a "Who cares".

“dismissal”? That is a synonym for your accusation that Brother Lee “lopped off” Scripture which you already recanted.

“...the human concept of the holy writers was produced out of their good nature created by God, formed with the traditions of their holy race, constituted with the teachings of the Holy Scriptures, promoted by their practice of a holy life, and uttered out of their holy sentiments and impressions.”

You may disagree with Brother Lee’s POV but he never wholesale dismissed scripture. The explanation he provides above (Psalm 1: Footnote 1) attests to his careful consideration of cutting straight the word of God, the book of Psalms, not dismissing it.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

“dismissal”? That is a synonym for your accusation that Brother Lee “lopped off” Scripture which you already recanted.

“...the human concept of the holy writers was produced out of their good nature created by God, formed with the traditions of their holy race, constituted with the teachings of the Holy Scriptures, promoted by their practice of a holy life, and uttered out of their holy sentiments and impressions.”

You may disagree with Brother Lee’s POV but he never wholesale dismissed scripture. The explanation he provides above (Psalm 1: Footnote 1) attests to his careful consideration of cutting straight the word of God, the book of Psalms, not dismissing it.

Drake

You must be the only LC member who actually reads all the fine print.

Most LC members only remember not to read the book of James, and numerous Psalms, Proverbs, etc.

Why even read the Bible when those HWfMR's occupy all their time? And all those "glorious green books" on their shelves collecting dust

[VoiceInWilderness]

Originally Posted by JJ

This whole thread took an interesting tangent with a great discussion about the inerrancy of scripture. But, I was struck and helped by the above post because when I reread some of “the go to verses” in the New Testament (including those cited in this thread) they support this thought. First here are links to the verses I checked:

https://biblehub.com/blb/luke/24.htm

https://biblehub.com/2_timothy/3-16.htm

https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/10-11.htm

I was struck with this. In Luke 24 Jesus was able to point out during part of a 7 mile walk (say 6 hours?) the parts of scripture (Old Testament of course) that were about himself. Then what exactly do the other verses say scripture is for?
“profitable for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” and “these things happened to them as types and were written for our admonition..”, they don’t say “are all about Christ” nor “are all about Christ and the church”, nor “are all about God’s economy”.

I don’t know about you, but I find that liberating. Thanks VoiceInWilderness!
No more hunting every scripture to see how it is about Christ (what I’ve been burdened with).

You're very welcome bro. Thank you for you comments.
I actually found that truth liberating also.
You might like the song I made out of Psalm 26 about the working together of faith and works.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_26.htm

[JJ]

Originally Posted by VoiceInWilderness

You're very welcome bro. Thank you for you comments.
I actually found that truth liberating also.
You might like the song I made out of Psalm 26 about the working together of faith and works.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_26.htm

Wow! Thanks for sending the link to your web site. I’m blown away. Looks like an amazing resource.

Peace and grace to you in Christ.

JJ