Negative Speaking

[Curious]

I want to chip in here and suggest a very excellent resource on the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It's a book titled 'There Were Two Trees In the Garden' by Rick Joyner.

I know he's a bit controversial and and out on the loopy end for some, in other of his books, but this book is not loopy at all. I suggest to forget the author and just take the book on its own. Personally, I have read it about 5 times and each time I learned much more, than the time before. Its pretty dense but to me makes so much sense. Just my suggestion to those curious.

It certainly also lays the groundwork to easily expose those such as WL or anyone using what seems good to trap people into a system that served himself at their expense (evil).

I'm fact, thinking about it, WL did care an awful lot for good and evil. At least to present the LC as good not evil. That is, he certainly understood the need to use a 'good' facade to attract newcomers, as if people would think the LC to be bad they wouldn't join. So he used the impression of good to cover over doing evil. And that's the context the above mentioned book explains.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Curious

I want to chip in here and suggest a very excellent resource on the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It's a book titled 'There Were Two Trees In the Garden' by Rick Joyner.

I know he's a bit controversial and and out on the loopy end for some, in other of his books, but this book is not loopy at all. I suggest to forget the author and just take the book on its own. Personally, I have read it about 5 times and each time I learned much more, than the time before. Its pretty dense but to me makes so much sense. Just my suggestion to those curious.

It certainly also lays the groundwork to easily expose those such as WL or anyone using what seems good to trap people into a system that served himself at their expense (evil).

I have an ever-growing backlog of books to purchase when finances are less tight, so I wouldn't be able to buy this book any time soon, but I took a look on Amazon in hopes there would be a "look inside" feature for it. There was.

While the rest of the book may be more accurate (and it does have a good review rating), I choked on the very first page of chapter 1 where he says "...the Lord did not implement this restriction just to test Adam and Eve; He prohibited the eating of its fruit because He knew it was poison."

I'm sorry, but the verses are simply not there to back this conclusion up. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was literally described as being "good for food". There is just no way to say that poison can be good for food. It was described as "making you like God." "Poison" and "makes you like God" simply don't mesh.

And if you take that the tree itself was poisonous, then you are immediately on your way down the road to "not only is evil poison, but knowledge is poison and good is poison too", and we are forest-deep into a spiritually abusive teaching.

Ah, I just read a little more, and it's right there on the very next page: "the knowledge of good and evil kills us....."

Nope. It's the punishment for disobeying God by being restricted from having access to the tree of life that killed us. (If you are prevented from eating the tree that makes you live forever you.......die.) The bible doesn't say that "sin is death" but that "the WAGES (punishment) of sin is death."

Who punished us with death for our sins? God did. Death was punishment; it wasn't from the TOTKOGAE itself.

He then says, "It is significant that the Tree of Knowledge is found in the center of the garden (see Genesis 3:3). Self-centeredness is the chief malady with which it afflicts us."

Okay.....well he used Genesis 3:3, which refers to the TOTKOGAE only. However, Genesis 2:9 speaks of BOTH trees, and the tree of life is also described as being in the center of the garden, so his negative attribution of the central placement as pertains to the TOTKOGAE also means the tree of life has to do with self-centeredness too, which doesn't make any sense.

Then two pages later he says:

"The fruit of these two tree is to forever be separate and distinct, as the Lord Jesus also testified.

For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit; nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. For each tree is known by its fruit. Luke 6:43-44."

The verse he uses actually supports the conclusion that the TOTKOGAE was not a bad tree. It was described as being good for food. This means the fruit was good for food. It had good fruit. And Luke tells us straight out that a bad tree cannot produce good fruit. The TOTKOGAE cannot, Biblically, be a bad tree. Or poisonous. Or death.

I'm not saying there isn't good stuff in his book. In the next page or two he starts speaking of Jesus and it seems good, but that's where the preview cuts off for me .

For better or for worse, I get particular with the two trees teaching because getting it a half inch wrong up front leads so incredibly far off just a mile or two down the road. I don't mean to take away from your enjoyment of the book or your recommendation! The rest of the book may be just wonderful! I've just seen where the misinterpretation of this particular story leads, and the way it is used in the LC, and so I'm not super loosy-goosy about this one. Happy to get into it if someone disagrees, but this is just what I see.

Originally Posted by Curious

I'm fact, thinking about it, WL did care an awful lot for good and evil. At least to present the LC as good not evil. That is, he certainly understood the need to use a 'good' facade to attract newcomers, as if people would think the LC to be bad they wouldn't join. So he used the impression of good to cover over doing evil. And that's the context the above mentioned book explains.

Yeah, and he also cared for good and evil when he thought others were perpetrating his version of "evil" upon him!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I have an ever-growing backlog of books to purchase when finances are less tight, so I wouldn't be able to buy this book any time soon, but I took a look on Amazon in hopes there would be a "look inside" feature for it. There was.

Here is free PDF you can download.

[Curious]

I’m so glad Trapped brought this up. Having recommended this book, I feel responsible to engage.

My conclusion, based on this thread and my book, (which I read before becoming aware of WL’s teachings, so I considered it in a state of ignorance of WL or any other teaching on this subject), is as follows:

First, I agree completely with Trapped. God would not create a bad tree. In fact, as Nell points out, God cares deeply abpout good and evil. Our whole experience of this life is to learn to discern good and evil from the starting point of truth. As God does and He does not allow evil into heaven, His dwelling place. Why trust God, even beyond our own understanding, as He requires? Because He alone is GOOD. Perfect in holiness. Not a stain of corruption in Him. And out of that Goodness, He loves us. The whole lesson of this life is to learn this lesson. Satan is evil….the fool angels that followed him (it) in rebellion against God did not perceive this. Yet we learn to perceive evil as we grow in faith and discernment and there is a scripture that declares we are to learn this ability to discern good and evil…..i cant find it right now but in the NT. I daresay Satan knew that it was Gods intention to teach them good from evil himself, so why satan sought to get in there quickly.

So Rick Joyner, when he sought to put his observations back into a doctrinal framework, has made a mistake. Trapped has spotted it straight away, showing the astuteness he (she?) has gained from his experiences in the LC. Yes RJ is wrong, right there at the start of his book!! What a shame.
The fall happened through disobedience is the key, not the fruit itself. No way around that. Missed by RJ but understood by posters on this forum.

Ok. Next point. The tree at the center of the garden alongside the tree of life. Now I understand this point as it depends on what is at the center of a person’s life. If it is the tree of life as representing Jesus, he at the center of our life, then it is ideal. The tree of life at the center of our heart. Then He is the one to teach us about good and evil. That’s Gods intention in having us live this mortal life under the earthly dominion of Satan and his (it’s) demons etc. Even Adam and Eve were co-existing on this earth with Satan before the fall. No matter what happened I believe its been Gods intention to teach us good from evil. RJ overstepped in his drawing back his good observations to a doctrinal base.

So now, having acknowledged all that, I’m going to explain why I liked the book and summarize what I got from it that I think IS helpful. What RJ has perceived correctly IMOO (In my opinion only) is how the twisted interpretation of good and evil works in the heart of fallen man. This is the strength of the book. This is how our gravitating to what we perceive to be good from a self-centered and unrepented perspective actually creates evil.
Say a husband says openly: “I’m a good husband. I don’t beat my wife, I don’t drink, I don’t stay away from home with my buddies or fraternize with other women”. Yet he talks over the top of her, makes important decisions without consulting her, allows his mother to gossip about her and slander her and never acknowledges it, lies to her about trivial things in a habitual way. But he’s not the very worst of men so he will never address these other issues. Is that ok? It’s the using of what’s good to excuse or deny, and persist in, things that are actually bad and doing harm. That is they key message.

....It’s coming up with a whole bunch of ideas that seem to transform Christian experience from something dead to something alive, with teachings on economy, unity of believers, new high-peak truths, then preaching it to where the numbers of people benefitting from this new and living experience of God, reach into the thousands and beyond. Then feeling so successful and certain of Gods great pleasure in you, the center and conveyor of this great discovery, that you get sloppy about things going on around you, and you start indulging your own vices. The good you seem to have done somehow deceives you away from the basics. You buy into your own hype!! This is the topic RJ exposes and explains so well. (IMOO).

Its how the pharisee looks down on the tax collector, he’s measuring good and evil, and counting himself a pass and the tax collector a fail.

The 10 commandments expose this. When we have a self-centered understanding of good and evil, then what satisfies me and makes me feel good is my good and what I don’t enjoy is my evil. To live to feed the self will cause a person to lust after his neighbour’s wife. (‘she’s much nicer and kinder than my grouchy and stubborn wife, [justification], I’ve suffered long enough, I deserve better’!) It will be the reason why a person lies, is jealous of others, may harm or kill, preserving and believing in oneself, rather than looking at the harm done to others by selfish actions, is the key. And the justifying is where the deception has tricked and trapped us. Having God at the center of our (garden) is to backtrack on this internal self-righteousness and judging right and wrong from the point of view of self.

The taxi driver who waits for an hour in a queue to get his next passenger at a busy airport, then lands a passenger who only needs a 10 minute ride, gets angry with his passenger. He feels short changed by circumstances. He was hoping for a long trip to justify the long waste of time he invested. From his point of view that’s a bad deal. But its not the passenger’s fault, they had no other way to get to their destination. We all have our story but it doesn’t justify sin. Sin exposes our sense of good and evil being centered in self and not in God/truth.

That’s the big overriding lesson. I welcome challenge to this as I’ve learned something important already from Trapped’s response, and I’m so happy about it! also, the guys who write and publish can miss things, and get things wrong that another person without such a reputation may see clear as day!! we don't have to defer to anyone but Jesus himself!!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Curious

In fact, thinking about it, WL did care an awful lot for good and evil. At least to present the LC as good not evil. That is, he certainly understood the need to use a 'good' facade to attract newcomers, as if people would think the LC to be bad they wouldn't join. So he used the impression of good to cover over doing evil. And that's the context the above mentioned book explains.

In fact, thinking more about it, WL actually redefined for the LC movement what is good and what is evil.

His definitions superseded those in the scripture. His definitions of good and evil replaced those in the Bible. The LC's today operate according to WL's new definitions for what is good and what is evil.

[Curious]

Originally Posted by Ohio

In fact, thinking more about it, WL actually redefined for the LC movement what is good and what is evil.

His definitions superseded those in the scripture. His definitions of good and evil replaced those in the Bible. The LC's today operate according to WL's new definitions for what is good and what is evil.

That reads to me as a really profound and true insight. Yes, his own self-serving definition, fed to his followers as truth. Illustrating that us humans cannot seperate from the concept of good and evil. Weather twisted or true, it is an unavoidable fact of our existence that it sits at the core of us, including any fool that thinks they can develop a theology that dismisses it!

I am seeing the mistake of Rick Joyner in this light. Its like he found a good puzzle piece, with the main content of his book, but he put his puzzle piece in completely the wrong place in the puzzle! (the theological position he gave it). And the simple reason why? He's not been part of a group that abused this Genesis account in the way WL did. So he hasn't seen that wisdom, or perceived how it can be an opening for evil to be done.

That's where the gift of particular wisdom comes from our own experiences and lessons learned, then these then can serve and protect the whole body of Christ from error. Just me sharing my own reflections on this issue. (IMOO)..... 🐄

[Curious]

I can't help it, I so badly want to share this. The problem of persons rising up in the church and criticising all others, narrowing their followers to listen only to themselves, then childishly hating on the others and stating one day they will bow the knee to jesus, when really they mean bow the knee to themselves..... well its all here in this short youtube video.

Another person, another time, a different set of peculiars, but same exact intention, method and goal.


https://youtu.be/VqYxDIgBp6Y

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Curious

I can't help it, I so badly want to share this. The problem of persons rising up in the church and criticising all others, narrowing their followers to listen only to themselves, then childishly hating on the others and stating one day they will bow the knee to jesus, when really they mean bow the knee to themselves.....

Often I hear warnings about wolves creeping into the church in sheep's clothing, but this phenomena of "rising up in the church" is far more subtle and dangerous. Apostle Paul actually warned us explicitly about this in Acts 20.30. The Lord used this verse to expose the Recovery system of error to me.

The note in the Recovery Version here totally misses the Apostle's warning. It's not about luring the sheep away to form another flock, but to draw away the flock from God Himself, who purchased us with His own blood, to himself.

And what are these "perverted teachings?" They are clever twistings and cunning distortions, like criticizing all others, exalting your own ministry, preventing other ministries in the church, etc. Teaching about Jesus, yet demanding absolute loyalty. Using the Bible to peddle your own ministry, corrupting others' conscience, suing and slandering those who would hold you accountable. Paul called this "walking in craftiness," hiding all the shameful things, in order to maintain some false but pristine image to delude your faithful followers.

[Raptor]

Do you think this is a clever twisting in this video? Apparently, most of the message seems to be good, on how to read the Bible by going to the Lord, praying and receiving light, revelation and vision. What do you think about this part of the video?

But right at the end WL talks about how Noah, Abraham and Moses were each raised up to accomplish God´s move in the age. Then he talks about how Peter and Paul were the same, and how now we need to pay attention to revelation and the move of God in this age. Is this a hidden suggestion that he was then the minister of the age?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwmJDX4Rj-I

[Curious]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Do you think this is a clever twisting in this video? Apparently, most of the message seems to be good, on how to read the Bible by going to the Lord, praying and receiving light, revelation and vision. What do you think about this part of the video?

But right at the end WL talks about how Noah, Abraham and Moses were each raised up to accomplish God´s move in the age. Then he talks about how Peter and Paul were the same, and how now we need to pay attention to revelation and the move of God in this age. Is this a hidden suggestion that he was then the minister of the age?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwmJDX4Rj-I

Yes I do think this talk from WL is set up to let the viewer come to their own conclusion that WL is indeed the man for the end times.

What I wonder is, are there any LCers who have been through law school? WL and Gene Kim make multiple unsubstantiated claims. WL has it, as demonstrated by Raptor's sample, that the rest of Christianity has a sheet of paper separating them from being able to see God face to face. WL does not have this sheet of paper in front of his face. How does he know this? He knows that every single Christian in the whole world has this sheet of paper permanently in front of his face! How ridiculous! If the sheet of paper could be removed from his eyes then surely God is capable of removing it from someone else's!

Backtracking to the sample I attached to my last post, Gene Kim likewise presents alot of false information about these other Christian speakers who have Internet channels. To the point where he is flat out wrong about John Macarthur, as pointed out by the host of the video. Anyone legally trained would want to clarify the claims, and would discover the lies and the unsoundness would be pretty obvious. Even his childish use of the surname 'slick' and careless accusation 'these guys are jerks', not even an intelligent critique. So I wonder if, outside of lawyers employed by LRM headquarters, if legally trained minds are a missing people group from LC congregations?

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Do you think this is a clever twisting in this video? Apparently, most of the message seems to be good, on how to read the Bible by going to the Lord, praying and receiving light, revelation and vision. What do you think about this part of the video?

But right at the end WL talks about how Noah, Abraham and Moses were each raised up to accomplish God´s move in the age. Then he talks about how Peter and Paul were the same, and how now we need to pay attention to revelation and the move of God in this age. Is this a hidden suggestion that he was then the minister of the age?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwmJDX4Rj-I

I only had a short time while getting ready for bed to listen to the last ~4-5 minutes of this clip, but the message is clearly that the OT and NT special people saw and were given a revelation of what God was doing, and that now we are at the end of the NT age and "millions and millions of Christians have the Bible but have no revelation" and "they don't know what God is doing today", BUUUUUUT...........WE DO!! We have the revelation! We know!

Yeah, the implication is that "we" know because Lee, the fulfillment of Noah/Abe/Moses/Peter/Paul, gave us the revelation from God.

It's been a while since I've listened to Lee rather than to the current co-workers. Although I grew up listening to him, now, being away from the LC for a while, it's very hard for me to listen to him anymore. I think some of his draw was simply the way he spoke - slightly hushed and husky, the melodic waver, the "aura", and the myriad of multi-syllabic words said with an accent that, kinda sometimes didn't really mean much or add anything to the message. It's so unique....it's like this kind, hushed, fatherly, grandfatherly, sweet......denigration and tossing aside of most of the Body of Christ.