Jezebel -- why we should know who she is.

ZNPaaneah · 12-09-2016, 07:46 PM

ZNP,

Revelation provides a direct charaterization of the woman Jezebel. She leads people into spiritual fornication as the real Jezebel did with the nation of Israel.

Was she Israeli, a member of the beloved people of God? What does spiritual fornication mean as applied to the church?

Drake

Jezebel has been coming up more and more in the posts. It seems that this is becoming far too important to just give a brief answer to. I have come to realize that this is not referring to some obscure experience that only a few Christians in "degraded Christianity" experience, but rather something that all Christians need to overcome.

ZNPaaneah · 12-09-2016, 08:04 PM

1Kings 16:31 And it came to pass, as if it had been a light thing for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, that he took to wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and went and served Baal, and worshipped him.

You can't understand who Jezebel is unless you first understand the sins of Jeroboam, because Jezebel essentially takes the sins of Jeroboam to another level.

After King Solomon died his son was a poor heir and made a major blunder with the people. This opened the door for Jeroboam to set up another kingdom with the ten tribes of Israel, dividing Israel into two kingdoms. This division appears to be of God. However, it might have turned out as a temporary rebuke with the nation reconciling after a few months had it not been for Jeroboam setting up golden calves as idols and commanding the nation to ignore God's word. This is referred to as "the sins of Jeroboam".

So Jeroboam told the Israelites that it was the two golden calves that brought them out of Egypt, Ahab takes this to the next level, ditching God altogether, taking a heathen wife and serving Baal and worshipping Baal.

This is how we are first introduced to Jezebel. She takes the sins of Jeroboam to a new level, and she is fully associated with serving and worshipping Baal.

Evangelical · 12-09-2016, 11:06 PM

Jezebel represents the corruptive influences within the denominations or the local church, things of a idolatrous and sometimes sexual nature. It is something for every believer to overcome no matter what denomination or not-denomination they attend.

I read that here:

http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-dece..._pagan-temples

ZNPaaneah · 12-10-2016, 06:49 AM

1Kings 18:19 Now therefore send, and gather to me all Israel unto mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the Asherah four hundred, that eat at Jezebel’s table.

Jezebel fed (hired) 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah. This was not because she was generous or charitable, there is no evidence of this. What she did is exactly what our leaders do today.

They will hire a cabinet, experts, consultants, data specialists, pollsters, prognosticators, people to give them security briefings, economic briefings, with charts and tables predicting future outcomes (that is prophecy)

They advise leaders on how to speak to the public (that is prophecy). They get focus groups and determine what words to speak, how to spin it, how to sell it.

They spy on enemies and advise how to destroy them.

Jezebel made ruling without God a science.

Drake · 12-10-2016, 06:59 AM

The basic sin of Jeroboam is that he established a worship center that was not in the place appointed by God. This opened the door to all the other sins.

God prescribed the place, time, and methods for worshipping God. Jeroboam set up a his own place and method. God said in this way, and Jeroboam said, that way will do just as well. He disregarded God's prescription of worship for one of his own preference.

Drake

Cal · 12-10-2016, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

The basic sin of Jeroboam is that he established a worship center that was not in the place appointed by God. This opened the door to all the other sins.

God prescribed the place, time, and methods for worshipping God. Jeroboam set up a his own place and method. God said in this way, and Jeroboam said, that way will do just as well. He disregarded God's prescription of worship for one of his own preference.

Drake

God's prescription for worship in the NT is "in spirit and in truth." Nothing more, nothing less.

Worship in spirit and truth is thus the proper NT "place," and thus corresponds to the OT temple. The temple is the house of God, which is now the church. Thus, worshiping in spirit and truth implies the church is there, especially when two or three are gathered. Thus no need for "the local ground" to have church.

Since Jesus made it clear the proper place of worship is only "in spirit and truth," insisting on the local ground could be viewed as actually setting up a different place of worship than Jesus prescribed, and thus could be viewed as a sin like Jeroboam's. But clearly the temple was not the only place of worship. The Jews established synagogues, which Jesus attended reverently. Thus the strict idea that the temple was the only proper place of worship is an error.

So leveraging the "proper place of worship" as a pretext to pushing the local ground is both invalid and self-nullifying.

If you insist the temple was the only proper place of worship, then it must be that "in spirit and truth" implies that the temple, thus the church, is present and the local ground is unneeded.

If you don't insist the temple was the only proper place of worship then that weakens the local ground argument as well.

ZNPaaneah · 12-10-2016, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

The basic sin of Jeroboam is that he established a worship center that was not in the place appointed by God. This opened the door to all the other sins.

God prescribed the place, time, and methods for worshipping God. Jeroboam set up a his own place and method. God said in this way, and Jeroboam said, that way will do just as well. He disregarded God's prescription of worship for one of his own preference.

Drake

Yes, but the Bible never refers to the "basic sin" or the "sin of Jeroboam" but to the sins of Jeroboam.

1. Establishing a worship center is one

2. Causing the division to be permanent is a second.

The second is very difficult because it was God that told Jeroboam to initiate the process and it was prophesied that he would get the ten tribes to follow him. But God never told him to make this permanent or set up his own worship center. God's intention may have been to rebuke the nation of Israel but then to have them repent. Jeroboam did everything in his power to prevent them from being reconciled.

This brings to mind Jonah who didn't want to see his enemy reconciled to God.

Very often those that talk the most about oneness and the importance of oneness are actually the ones that don't want God's children to be reconciled. Oneness becomes a golden idol they make sacrifices to. Hence obedience is better than sacrifice.

The sins of Jeroboam are similar to the sins of Saul. Disobedience, envy, jealousy, idolatry, witchcraft.

ZNPaaneah · 12-10-2016, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

God's prescription for worship in the NT is "in spirit and in truth." Nothing more, nothing less.

Worship in spirit and truth is thus the proper NT "place," and thus corresponds to the OT temple. The temple is the house of God, which is now the church. Thus, worshiping in spirit and truth implies the church is there, especially when two or three are gathered. Thus no need for "the local ground" to have church.

Since Jesus made is clear the proper place of worship is only "in spirit and truth," insisting on the local ground is actually setting up a different place of worship that Jesus prescribed, and thus could be viewed as a sin like Jeroboam's.

Spirit and truth should immediately remind us of Matthew 18. The proper spirit is that of the shepherd seeking the lost sheep, the improper spirit is the one causing the little ones to stumble. Meeting in truth is when you are obedient to the Lord to faithfully deal with sins. Covering them up, ignoring them, that is not truth.

It is in this context that Jesus says "wherever two or three are gathered together in my name, I am in the midst".

The context is that they are meeting in Spirit and truth. That is the prerequisite to "meeting in the name of Jesus".

One thing that most people forget is that Matthew 18 was Jesus answering a question from the disciples. The entire chapter is his answer.

Ohio · 12-10-2016, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

God's prescription for worship in the NT is "in spirit and in truth." Nothing more, nothing less.

Worship in spirit and truth is thus the proper NT "place," and thus corresponds to the OT temple. The temple is the house of God, which is now the church. Thus, worshiping in spirit and truth implies the church is there, especially when two or three are gathered. Thus no need for "the local ground" to have church.

Since Jesus made it clear the proper place of worship is only "in spirit and truth," insisting on the local ground could be viewed as actually setting up a different place of worship than Jesus prescribed, and thus could be viewed as a sin like Jeroboam's. But clearly the temple was not the only place of worship. The Jews established synagogues, which Jesus attended reverently. Thus the strict idea that the temple was the only proper place of worship is an error.

The Lord made it clear to the Samaritan women that any physical or earthly place, even one prescribed in scripture, was no longer valid in the New Covenant time, "which is coming and now is." (John 4.24) Whether a church building, a synagogue, a mountain, the temple, or even the boundaries of a city -- all are done away with in the New Covenant, established through the cross of Christ. Old Testament instructions no longer apply here.

What is crucial is "in spirit and truth." The preposition "in" describes the only possible place to worship the Father. Are you in spirit? Are you in truth? These are the questions we all must ask. Any connection to an organization, a ministry, a minister, or a program cannot validate nor invalidate your worship of the Father.

I have worshiped the Father receiving communion at a Catholic wedding mass, in a home meeting, traveling in a car, in my bed, in a university examination, being berated by brothers, being outcast by family. When we consider all of God's children, there is just no limit to the "places" our Father has been worshiped in spirit and reality. When, however, I consider how sectarian leaders, like those of the LCM, mandate self-serving practices on the children of God, I wonder how often we completely missed the mark.

Tonight we are traveling to an old schoolhouse to have a "love feast" or Christmas dinner with some brothers and sisters we occasionally meet with. It is in the middle of no where. It is an unincorporated town or village. There is no "city" out there. There are no city boundaries. No mayor, no Walmart, no gas station. Definitely not "good material" for LC expansion. But God is there! We can worship in spirit and reality. We can gather in His name.

ZNPaaneah · 12-10-2016, 03:58 PM

1Kings 19:1-2 And Ahab told Jezebel all that Elijah had done, and withal how he had slain all the prophets with the sword. Then Jezebel sent a messenger unto Elijah, saying, So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not thy life as the life of one of them by to-morrow about this time.

All of the prophets are killed as the result of a single act of God. Think about that, the experts spend billions for years on a levy system for the Mississippi, then as a result of a single act of God like Katrina the whole world realizes they have been lied to for years.

Or think about the Haiti earthquake which exposed all the shoddy workmanship, government corruption, etc.

Or who could forget the ridiculous growth projections made when Witness Lee rolled out the New Way. Now al that is left to complete this is for fire to fall from heaven.

2 Tim 3:13 But evil men and impostors shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.

She hired evil men and impostors for the purpose of deceiving the nation of Israel, but in the end she thought Elijah was just like one of them. She spent her life deceiving and in the end she was deceived, unable to discern a prophet of God from a false prophet.

Evangelical · 12-11-2016, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Lord made it clear to the Samaritan women that any physical or earthly place, even one prescribed in scripture, was no longer valid in the New Covenant time, "which is coming and now is." (John 4.24) Whether a church building, a synagogue, a mountain, the temple, or even the boundaries of a city -- all are done away with in the New Covenant, established through the cross of Christ. Old Testament instructions no longer apply here.

What is crucial is "in spirit and truth." The preposition "in" describes the only possible place to worship the Father. Are you in spirit? Are you in truth? These are the questions we all must ask. Any connection to an organization, a ministry, a minister, or a program cannot validate nor invalidate your worship of the Father.

I have worshiped the Father receiving communion at a Catholic wedding mass, in a home meeting, traveling in a car, in my bed, in a university examination, being berated by brothers, being outcast by family. When we consider all of God's children, there is just no limit to the "places" our Father has been worshiped in spirit and reality. When, however, I consider how sectarian leaders, like those of the LCM, mandate self-serving practices on the children of God, I wonder how often we completely missed the mark.

Tonight we are traveling to an old schoolhouse to have a "love feast" or Christmas dinner with some brothers and sisters we occasionally meet with. It is in the middle of no where. It is an unincorporated town or village. There is no "city" out there. There are no city boundaries. No mayor, no Walmart, no gas station. Definitely not "good material" for LC expansion. But God is there! We can worship in spirit and reality. We can gather in His name.

You are trying to say that the view of locality contradicts John 4:24 but this is not so. We worship in spirit and truth and congregate on the basis of locality. What you say regarding worship matches Lee's commentary on John 4:24.

ZNPaaneah · 12-11-2016, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You are trying to say that the view of locality contradicts John 4:24 but this is not so. We worship in spirit and truth and congregate on the basis of locality. What you say regarding worship matches Lee's commentary on John 4:24.

Well I think we can agree that Jezebel does not meet in Spirit and truth, nor do the men that do her bidding.

1Kings 21:7 And Jezebel his wife said unto him, Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel? arise, and eat bread, and let thy heart be merry: I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite.

1Kings 21:11 And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who dwelt in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, according as it was written in the letters which she had sent unto them.

1Kings 21:15 And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money; for Naboth is not alive, but dead.

She came to steal, kill and destroy. She is a liar and follows the father of lies. This is why it is crucial for the church to deal with sins as described in Matt 18. This is the perfect example of a leader who "stumbles" the little brother that Jesus rebuked in Matt 18 saying it would be better to have a millstone around your neck. She is the contrast to the good shepherd who seeks the lost sheep. It is an evil spirit that permeates what she is about. Then when she is exposed it is deny, deny, deny. There is no truth because the truth is that she is a liar who has come to steal, kill and destroy.

Cal · 12-11-2016, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You are trying to say that the view of locality contradicts John 4:24 but this is not so.

Locality is extraneous to John 4:24. Locality itself doesn't contradict 4:24, insisting on meeting based on locality does. When asked specifically about the proper place of worship Jesus had the opportunity to mention locality, but he did not. He said specifically that the only requirement is in spirit and in truth (ISIT). Since ISIT has replaced the temple as the proper place of worship, and since the church is the NT temple (1 Tim 3:15), ISIT implies the church is present. There is no requirement for locality.

Locality is a natural consequence of meeting in Spirit. Believers tend to meet with other believers who live near them. Most people don't tend to travel 30 miles across town to meet, ironically unless they are in the LCM. But meeting based on locality, let alone based on city boundaries, is not a NT requirement. When two or three meet together in spirit and truth, the church is there.

Insisting otherwise is to say the church barely exists on earth today. If the church doesn't exist between believers in spirit, what does, and where has the church gone? Is it suspended somewhere? I remember Lee mocking Christian teachers who claimed that the kingdom was suspended. But his doctrine of no locality/no church results in an even more ridiculous doctrine of a suspended church.

Again, Lee's doctrine of locality is simply a means to validate his churches and discredit all others. It's just a ploy to keep members in his movement. The NT does not require it. It goes beyond what is written, including in John 4:24.

ZNPaaneah · 12-11-2016, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

Locality is extraneous to John 4:24. Locality itself doesn't contradict 4:24, insisting on meeting based on locality does. When asked specifically about the proper place of worship Jesus had the opportunity to mention locality, but he did not. He said specifically that the only requirement is in spirit and in truth (ISIT). Since ISIT has replaced the temple as the proper place of worship, and since the church is the NT temple (1 Tim 3:15), ISIT implies the church is present. There is no requirement for locality.

Locality is a natural consequence of meeting in Spirit. Believers tend to meet with other believers who live near them. Most people don't tend to travel 30 miles across town to meet, ironically unless they are in the LCM. But meeting based on locality, let alone based on city boundaries, is not a NT requirement. When two or three meet together in spirit and truth, the church is there.

Yes, locality is not a NT requirement, but in Spirit and in Truth is. Meeting in the name of Jesus is.

ZNPaaneah · 12-11-2016, 12:03 PM

1Kings 18:4 for it was so, when Jezebel cut off the prophets of Jehovah, that Obadiah took a hundred prophets, and hid them by fifty in a cave, and fed them with bread and water.)

The only ones that would stand against Jezebel would be the prophets of God. So a key part of her strategy was not to just put 850 of her own prophets into place but to also cut off the prophets of God.

We saw this with Hitler when he took power, assassinating those who would stand against him.

You can learn about the leader by those he appoints as well as those he goes after to cut off.

This is why we are so concerned with the attack from Witness Lee towards all Christianity and all Christians. He effectively "cut off" any prophets other than LSM approved prophets. As a result there were no voices to stand against WL.

Evangelical · 12-11-2016, 07:15 PM

Many here are confusing how we worship with where we congregate. They think it is okay to worship God wherever they are, which is not the point of Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman. His point was about how we worship, not where we congregate. The Samaritan woman thought a person worshiped by going to a certain place. Jesus said no, we worship in Spirit and truth, not by going to a certain place. This does not mean however, that we can congregate wherever we like, that where we congregate is not important. Jesus was not saying we can hold church a church service in a Hindu temple, for example. If we worshiped there, we may be in Spirit and truth, but our location would be wrong.

Jesus and the disciples also cared about the location of where they were. Just as it is not appropriate to behave in certain ways in certain places, it is not appropriate to worship God in certain locations. A person may worship in Spirit and truth in a Catholic church. Their worship is right but their location is wrong. Similarly, a person may worship in Spirit and truth in a brothel, casino, etc - their worship is right but their location is wrong. Some places are just not good for worship - such as a construction site. Jesus is an example of one who worshiped in Spirit and truth. However this does not mean he worshiped wherever he liked. Some may say "did no tJesus hang out with sinners?". Yes he did, for the purpose of fulfilling his ministry, but when it concerned his worship to the Father, He liked to frequent certain places over others:

Luke 5:16 "But Jesus Himself would often slip away to the wilderness and pray.".

Jesus did not go into the house of the prostitute and choose to have his worship time there. Jesus as one who kicked the money changers out of the temple, would not have worshiped in a place filled with idols (a Catholic church, for example).

Jesus and his disciples went to the synagogue to worship as they were Jews. In the New Testament period Christians worshiped "in the temple and from house to house". (Acts 5:42).

Suppose a group of Christians decided to "meet in the name of Jesus" at a brothel. It would not be appropriate and not pleasing to God.

ZNPaaneah · 12-12-2016, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Many here are confusing how we worship with where we congregate. They think it is okay to worship God wherever they are, which is not the point of Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman. His point was about how we worship, not where we congregate. The Samaritan woman thought a person worshiped by going to a certain place. Jesus said no, we worship in Spirit and truth, not by going to a certain place. This does not mean however, that we can congregate wherever we like, that where we congregate is not important. Jesus was not saying we can hold church a church service in a Hindu temple, for example. If we worshiped there, we may be in Spirit and truth, but our location would be wrong.

Jesus and the disciples also cared about the location of where they were. Just as it is not appropriate to behave in certain ways in certain places, it is not appropriate to worship God in certain locations. A person may worship in Spirit and truth in a Catholic church. Their worship is right but their location is wrong. Similarly, a person may worship in Spirit and truth in a brothel, casino, etc - their worship is right but their location is wrong. Some places are just not good for worship - such as a construction site. Jesus is an example of one who worshiped in Spirit and truth. However this does not mean he worshiped wherever he liked. Some may say "did no tJesus hang out with sinners?". Yes he did, for the purpose of fulfilling his ministry, but when it concerned his worship to the Father, He liked to frequent certain places over others:

Luke 5:16 "But Jesus Himself would often slip away to the wilderness and pray.".

Jesus did not go into the house of the prostitute and choose to have his worship time there. Jesus as one who kicked the money changers out of the temple, would not have worshiped in a place filled with idols (a Catholic church, for example).

Jesus and his disciples went to the synagogue to worship as they were Jews. In the New Testament period Christians worshiped "in the temple and from house to house". (Acts 5:42).

Suppose a group of Christians decided to "meet in the name of Jesus" at a brothel. It would not be appropriate and not pleasing to God.

Wow, so when Jesus said neither in this place or that place but in Spirit and Truth that was not about where you worship but how?

Jn 4:20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

Likewise when Jesus said that "wherever two or three gather together into my name there am I in their midst" that also was not about where but how?

Matt 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Is there any NT verse to support your assertion or is this just your last desperate attempt to rescue Witness Lee's damnable heresy?

Ohio · 12-12-2016, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Many here are confusing how we worship with where we congregate. They think it is okay to worship God wherever they are, which is not the point of Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman. His point was about how we worship, not where we congregate. The Samaritan woman thought a person worshiped by going to a certain place. Jesus said no, we worship in Spirit and truth, not by going to a certain place. This does not mean however, that we can congregate wherever we like, that where we congregate is not important. Jesus was not saying we can hold church a church service in a Hindu temple, for example. If we worshiped there, we may be in Spirit and truth, but our location would be wrong.

Perhaps it is you who is confusing what the Lord said to the Samaritan woman. If you go back and read the account in John 4, one readily ascertains that the context of the story is all about the "proper place" to worship. The Lord then qualifies what is the proper place to worship -- "in spirit and in truth." The place has nothing to do with where our body is, but only where our heart (our spirit) is. This corresponds with His rebuke to Israel, "this people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Jesus and the disciples also cared about the location of where they were. Just as it is not appropriate to behave in certain ways in certain places, it is not appropriate to worship God in certain locations. A person may worship in Spirit and truth in a Catholic church. Their worship is right but their location is wrong. Similarly, a person may worship in Spirit and truth in a brothel, casino, etc - their worship is right but their location is wrong. Some places are just not good for worship - such as a construction site. Jesus is an example of one who worshiped in Spirit and truth. However this does not mean he worshiped wherever he liked. Some may say "did not Jesus hang out with sinners?". Yes he did, for the purpose of fulfilling his ministry, but when it concerned his worship to the Father, He liked to frequent certain places over others:

Luke 5:16 "But Jesus Himself would often slip away to the wilderness and pray.".

Jesus did not go into the house of the prostitute and choose to have his worship time there. Jesus as one who kicked the money changers out of the temple, would not have worshiped in a place filled with idols (a Catholic church, for example).

Jesus and his disciples went to the synagogue to worship as they were Jews. In the New Testament period Christians worshiped "in the temple and from house to house". (Acts 5:42).

Suppose a group of Christians decided to "meet in the name of Jesus" at a brothel. It would not be appropriate and not pleasing to God.

Of course, true to form, Evangelical's counter-argument introduces extreme and absurd scenarios to rebut our Lord's pertinent instructions. "What? So we can worship anywhere? Sisters' meetings at the Hindu temple? Middle aged saints meeting at a construction site? Meetings of the brothers at Brothels? Young people's meetings at casinos? God forbid! Let it never be! Isn't it obvious to everyone that Ohio has just gone off the deep end? He's taking the Lord's words way too literally."

The Lord also said "in truth," which can be translated "in reality" or "in truthfulness."

Such is Evangelical's "irrefutable proof" that all "true worship" of the Father must take place in LC meeting halls and training centers of the LSM. He also forgot to mention those dreaded denominations, evil free groups, etc. How could any true Christian ever worship the Father in those places? Actually, in the minds of true LCM diehards, denominations are worse than casinos and brothels.

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps it is you who is confusing what the Lord said to the Samaritan woman. If you go back and read the account in John 4, one readily ascertains that the context of the story is all about the "proper place" to worship. The Lord then qualifies what is the proper place to worship -- "in spirit and in truth." The place has nothing to do with where our body is, but only where our heart (our spirit) is. This corresponds with His rebuke to Israel, "this people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me."

Of course, true to form, Evangelical's counter-argument introduces extreme and absurd scenarios to rebut our Lord's pertinent instructions. "What? So we can worship anywhere? Sisters' meetings at the Hindu temple? Middle aged saints meeting at a construction site? Meetings of the brothers at Brothels? Young people's meetings at casinos? God forbid! Let it never be! Isn't it obvious to everyone that Ohio has just gone off the deep end? He's taking the Lord's words way too literally."

The Lord also said "in truth," which can be translated "in reality" or "in truthfulness."

Such is Evangelical's "irrefutable proof" that all "true worship" of the Father must take place in LC meeting halls and training centers of the LSM. He also forgot to mention those dreaded denominations, evil free groups, etc. How could any true Christian ever worship the Father in those places? Actually, in the minds of true LCM diehards, denominations are worse than casinos and brothels.

Jesus was addressing the how not the where. The Samaritan thought worship was about the where, but Jesus said it's about the how. This does not address the question about where people should congregate. We see from the New Testament, that the believers met in the temple and from house to house. The fact that the believers met in specific places and does not say that they met "wherever they liked" (e.g. on a boat, in a shopping mall, up a tree) proves that Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman did not mean they can congregate wherever they think best. Jesus held the last supper in a house, Mark's house, and the early Christians continued this tradition of meeting in houses. In fact, the last supper took some preparation (Luke 22:7-16)

10 And He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house which he enters. 11 Then you shall say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, “Where is the guest room where I may eat the Passover with My disciples?”’ 12 Then he will show you a large, furnished upper room; there make ready.”

Jesus did not say like you have "guys, just find a place anywhere, the location does not matter, because we worship in Spirit and truth".

This fact disproves everything you say about meeting anywhere we like. The idea that we should not just congregate anywhere is also practiced by the denominations. Worshiping in a certain place is characteristic of the denominations. For example, a Catholic will not go to mass except in a Catholic church building, a Lutheran will not unless in a Lutheran church building. Ask anyone in such a denomination and they will tell you like I have - where we meet is important too.

Common sense tells us that we should not hold a wedding or funeral just anywhere. Because of the occasion we should hold weddings and funerals in an appropriate place. It is the same with the Lord's Table, we cannot just hold it in a place not fit for the occasion. If you want to meet anywhere you should join the New Age religion, they like to meet anywhere, in trees, on a park bench, on a beach etc. Probably this idea of meeting anywhere comes from the hippie Jesus movement not the Bible or church history.

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow, so when Jesus said neither in this place or that place but in Spirit and Truth that was not about where you worship but how?

Jn 4:20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

Likewise when Jesus said that "wherever two or three gather together into my name there am I in their midst" that also was not about where but how?

Matt 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Is there any NT verse to support your assertion or is this just your last desperate attempt to rescue Witness Lee's damnable heresy?

You are quoting Matt 18:20 out of context. Verses 18 and 19 prove that verse 20 is about prayers of agreement (such as for church discipline), and not giving instructions about how a church should meet.

That's just saying Christ is omnipresent, whether it is 1,2,3 or 10 billion, Christ is there. It does not talk about the appropriateness of where we meet. For example, it is not appropriate for 2 or 3 to gather in a place of ill repute. Of course Christ would be present in a place of ill repute, but it is not appropriate to hold the Lord's Table there, just as it is not appropriate to hold a funeral at an amusement park.

Cal · 12-12-2016, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

That's just saying Christ is omnipresent, whether it is 1,2,3 or 10 billion, Christ is there. It does not talk about the appropriateness of where we meet. For example, it is not appropriate for 2 or 3 to gather in a place of ill repute. Of course Christ would be present in a place of ill repute, but it is not appropriate to hold the Lord's Table there, just as it is not appropriate to hold a funeral at an amusement park.

Matthew 18:20 is not talking about omnipresence. It's talking about Jesus meeting with people who meet in his name. Something utterly different.

The point of Matt 18:20 is "wherever." Sorry, that includes in brothel, whether you like it or not. Please keep your Puritanism to yourself.

Cal · 12-12-2016, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Jesus was addressing the how not the where. The Samaritan thought worship was about the where, but Jesus said it's about the how.

Common sense tells us that we should not hold a wedding or funeral just anywhere.

More of Evangelical's specious logic, extrapolating things from the Bible that aren't there to fit his strange bias.

Jesus was addressing the where. That's what "in Spirit" means. He was definitely saying the outward where really didn't matter anymore. Yes, you can take thing to an extreme and say maybe some places are the best for meetings. But so what? Jesus point was "in spirit" had replaced the temple.

Your commentary about some places being inappropriate is unneeded and irrelevant to the text, and is probably just a pretext for you to drop the second shoe of localism.

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

Matthew 18:20 is not talking about omnipresence. It's talking about Jesus meeting with people who meet in his name. Something utterly different.

The point of Matt 18:20 is "wherever." Sorry, that includes in brothel, whether you like it or not. Please keep your Puritanism to yourself.

You are right it is not about omnipresence, but neither is it about coming together for worship or the Lord's Table.

The context of Matt 18:20 and "in my name" is the prayer of authority. Jesus is saying whenever two or three gather to pray the prayer of authority in His name, He is there with them.

Like it explains here:
http://www.born-again-christian.info...in-my-name.htm

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

Matthew 18:20 is not talking about omnipresence. It's talking about Jesus meeting with people who meet in his name. Something utterly different.

The point of Matt 18:20 is "wherever." Sorry, that includes in brothel, whether you like it or not. Please keep your Puritanism to yourself.

I've heard of church in a bar but church in a brothel that's a new one. No wonder Christianity is degraded if some think it's okay to have church in a brothel.

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

More of Evangelical's specious logic, extrapolating things from the Bible that aren't there to fit his strange bias.

Jesus was addressing the where. That's what "in Spirit" means. He was definitely saying the outward where really didn't matter anymore. Yes, you can take thing to an extreme and say maybe some places are the best for meetings. But so what? Jesus point was "in spirit" had replaced the temple.

Your commentary about some places being inappropriate is unneeded and irrelevant to the text, and is probably just a pretext for you to drop the second shoe of localism.

If you don't worship in the locality then where will you worship? Where can you go on Earth that is not in some locality? Where do you think Christians will worship in future? What does Revelation say? Does Revelation say that God will be worshiped wherever people like?

Ohio · 12-12-2016, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Jesus was addressing the how not the where. The Samaritan thought worship was about the where, but Jesus said it's about the how. This does not address the question about where people should congregate. We see from the New Testament, that the believers met in the temple and from house to house. The fact that the believers met in specific places and does not say that they met "wherever they liked" (e.g. on a boat, in a shopping mall, up a tree) proves that Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman did not mean they can congregate wherever they think best. Jesus held the last supper in a house, Mark's house, and the early Christians continued this tradition of meeting in houses. In fact, the last supper took some preparation (Luke 22:7-16)

10 And He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house which he enters. 11 Then you shall say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, “Where is the guest room where I may eat the Passover with My disciples?”’ 12 Then he will show you a large, furnished upper room; there make ready.”

Jesus did not say like you have "guys, just find a place anywhere, the location does not matter, because we worship in Spirit and truth".

This fact disproves everything you say about meeting anywhere we like. The idea that we should not just congregate anywhere is also practiced by the denominations. Worshiping in a certain place is characteristic of the denominations. For example, a Catholic will not go to mass except in a Catholic church building, a Lutheran will not unless in a Lutheran church building. Ask anyone in such a denomination and they will tell you like I have - where we meet is important too.

Common sense tells us that we should not hold a wedding or funeral just anywhere. Because of the occasion we should hold weddings and funerals in an appropriate place. It is the same with the Lord's Table, we cannot just hold it in a place not fit for the occasion. If you want to meet anywhere you should join the New Age religion, they like to meet anywhere, in trees, on a park bench, on a beach etc. Probably this idea of meeting anywhere comes from the hippie Jesus movement not the Bible or church history.

The Lord's word here is NOT about meeting anywhere you like, and neither was my post.

That is once again your twisting of scripture, and twisting my words.

The Lord's words are about worshiping the Father in spirit and in truth NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE.

Huge difference. Sorry if you can't understand that, but Paul did say that the "soulish man can not know the things of the Spirit."

Ohio · 12-12-2016, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If you don't worship in the locality then where will you worship? Where can you go on Earth that is not in some locality? Where do you think Christians will worship in future? What does Revelation say? Does Revelation say that God will be worshiped wherever people like?

I told you just the other day that we gathered together with Jesus in a place that had no locality. It was unincorporated. According to you, God should have remained absent, but our Lord refuses to be bound by your nonsensical ordinances conserning locality.

Jesus would say that He has crucified the ordinances of locality on the cross!

We were in His name, but we were not in a city!

We were in His name, but not in a denomination!

We broke all of your fleshly legalities.

Ohio · 12-12-2016, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I've heard of church in a bar but church in a brothel that's a new one. No wonder Christianity is degraded if some think it's okay to have church in a brothel.

Did not Jesus meet with drunks, whores, and crooks?

He was the founder of Christianity, unlike your recovery which was founded by Lee and Son.

Christianity = the body of Christ = all the children of God = the church of God = the house of God = temple of the Holy Ghost

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I told you just the other day that we gathered together with Jesus in a place that had no locality. It was unincorporated. According to you, God should have remained absent, but our Lord refuses to be bound by your nonsensical ordinances conserning locality.

Jesus would say that He has crucified the ordinances of locality on the cross!

We were in His name, but we were not in a city!

We were in His name, but not in a denomination!

We broke all of your fleshly legalities.

Does not make sense. It is not possible to meet in a place without locality. You must have been meeting in some location.

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did not Jesus meet with drunks, whores, and crooks?

He was the founder of Christianity, unlike your recovery which was founded by Lee and Son.

Christianity = the body of Christ = all the children of God = the church of God = the house of God = temple of the Holy Ghost

Yes He did but Jesus held the last supper in Mark's house, not the house of a prostitute. I am talking about where we should meet for worship or Lord's Table.

Evangelical · 12-12-2016, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Lord's word here is NOT about meeting anywhere you like, and neither was my post.

That is once again your twisting of scripture, and twisting my words.

The Lord's words are about worshiping the Father in spirit and in truth NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE.

Huge difference. Sorry if you can't understand that, but Paul did say that the "soulish man can not know the things of the Spirit."

really?

Post # 9 you said "I have worshiped the Father receiving communion at a Catholic wedding mass, in a home meeting, traveling in a car, in my bed, in a university examination, being berated by brothers, being outcast by family. When we consider all of God's children, there is just no limit to the "places" our Father has been worshiped in spirit and reality. "

That sounds like meeting anywhere you like to me...

ZNPaaneah · 12-13-2016, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Jesus was addressing the how not the where. The Samaritan thought worship was about the where, but Jesus said it's about the how. This does not address the question about where people should congregate.

So then, Jesus answer to her did not address her question?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We see from the New Testament, that the believers met in the temple and from house to house. The fact that the believers met in specific places and does not say that they met "wherever they liked" (e.g. on a boat, in a shopping mall, up a tree) proves that Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman did not mean they can congregate wherever they think best.

The believers met in the upper room, they met in the wilderness, they met on a boat, they met in the home of a ruler, they met in a field of wheat, they met in the streets of the city, they met on the outskirts of the city, they met in a prison, they met in a courtroom, they met on an island they had been banished to, they met on the beach, they met on the mountain top, a park bench, and yes, the Lord also met with a man who was up a tree. Have you even read the NT?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Common sense tells us that we should not hold a wedding or funeral just anywhere. Because of the occasion we should hold weddings and funerals in an appropriate place. It is the same with the Lord's Table, we cannot just hold it in a place not fit for the occasion. If you want to meet anywhere you should join the New Age religion, they like to meet anywhere, in trees, on a park bench, on a beach etc. Probably this idea of meeting anywhere comes from the hippie Jesus movement not the Bible or church history.

Common sense tells us that not every meeting is a wedding or a funeral. Where you meet will be dictated by how many people and what you plan to do. Two hundred people at a wedding or a funeral will need a different place to meet than three college students, or evangelists, or prisoners.

ZNPaaneah · 12-13-2016, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Yes He did but Jesus held the last supper in Mark's house, not the house of a prostitute. I am talking about where we should meet for worship or Lord's Table.

What if, like Paul you are in prison. You can't partake of the Lord's table in prison?

What if, like John you have been banished to the isle of Patmos. You can't take the Lord's table there?

What if you are being transported, in bonds, to Rome. You can't take the Lord's table on the ship?

Since we are talking about Jezebel then what if, like Elijah, you have fled to the wilderness to be fed by birds. You can't partake the Lord's table in the woods? That is too much of a hippy for you? Sounds like a rule Jezebel would make.

ZNPaaneah · 12-13-2016, 04:30 AM

1Kings 21:11 And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who dwelt in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, according as it was written in the letters which she had sent unto them.

1Kings 21:15 And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money; for Naboth is not alive, but dead.

Jezebel has the spirit of a vulture. Jesus said "where the vultures are gathered together there will the corpse be".

This is the situation at the Lord's coming. On the one hand we have had great success with the scientific and technological revolutions, so much so that it will be like "the lightening flashes in the East and shines to the West" with our modern telecommunications, fiber optic cables, internet, etc.

On the other hand no one has solved the issue of human government. The only one worthy to be Lord is Jesus.

Ohio · 12-13-2016, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Does not make sense. It is not possible to meet in a place without locality. You must have been meeting in some location.

So ... An old building with hot and cold running water ... Qualifies as a "locality?"

There's hope in here somewhere.

Ohio · 12-13-2016, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

really?

Post # 9 you said "I have worshiped the Father receiving communion at a Catholic wedding mass, in a home meeting, traveling in a car, in my bed, in a university examination, being berated by brothers, being outcast by family. When we consider all of God's children, there is just no limit to the "places" our Father has been worshiped in spirit and reality. "

That sounds like meeting anywhere you like to me...

No ... It sounds like worshiping the Father in spirit and in truth ... Anywhere you happen to be.

Is that too difficult for you to comprehend?

Evangelical · 12-13-2016, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So then, Jesus answer to her did not address her question?

The believers met in the upper room, they met in the wilderness, they met on a boat, they met in the home of a ruler, they met in a field of wheat, they met in the streets of the city, they met on the outskirts of the city, they met in a prison, they met in a courtroom, they met on an island they had been banished to, they met on the beach, they met on the mountain top, a park bench, and yes, the Lord also met with a man who was up a tree. Have you even read the NT?

Common sense tells us that not every meeting is a wedding or a funeral. Where you meet will be dictated by how many people and what you plan to do. Two hundred people at a wedding or a funeral will need a different place to meet than three college students, or evangelists, or prisoners.

We can meet anywhere, in the Recovery we have met in many different places, in a shopping mall, in homes, in a park, but we cannot hold the Lord's table just anywhere. Jesus and the disciples prepared a specific place for that.

Evangelical · 12-13-2016, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

So ... An old building with hot and cold running water ... Qualifies as a "locality?"

There's hope in here somewhere.

Depends if it was within a governed boundary or not. I presume it took place in a governed environment. If not, it would not be a locality.

By the way, who is this? - http://biblocality.com/

it does not seem to be LSM affiliated.

Evangelical · 12-13-2016, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

What if, like Paul you are in prison. You can't partake of the Lord's table in prison?

What if, like John you have been banished to the isle of Patmos. You can't take the Lord's table there?

What if you are being transported, in bonds, to Rome. You can't take the Lord's table on the ship?

Since we are talking about Jezebel then what if, like Elijah, you have fled to the wilderness to be fed by birds. You can't partake the Lord's table in the woods? That is too much of a hippy for you? Sounds like a rule Jezebel would make.

The bible mentions nothing about the Lord's table being done anywhere other than homes. If it was as you say, that it can be done anywhere, we should be able to find at least one reference to that. But there is no example of it being done in prison or on a ship, or on a road. In keeping with this tradition, the Orthodox and Roman Catholic will not celebrate the mass in a place other than a church building, unless necessary or expedient to do so.

Koinonia · 12-13-2016, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The bible mentions nothing about the Lord's table being done anywhere other than homes. If it was as you say, that it can be done anywhere, we should be able to find at least one reference to that. But there is no example of it being done in prison or on a ship, or on a road. In keeping with this tradition, the Orthodox and Roman Catholic will not celebrate the mass in a place other than a church building, unless necessary or expedient to do so.

Then--following your line of reasoning--why is it okay to have the Lord's table in LC meeting halls?

ZNPaaneah · 12-13-2016, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We can meet anywhere, in the Recovery we have met in many different places, in a shopping mall, in homes, in a park, but we cannot hold the Lord's table just anywhere. Jesus and the disciples prepared a specific place for that.

Then, based on your interpretation the account in the gospels is prescriptive. Going into the town nearby, following a man carrying water and finding an upper room is somehow prescriptive.

So then, can you elaborate? Did the apostle's pick up on this in the epistles to make this a doctrine related to how we meet? Or do we have to infer this great truth from this figurative language and story?

Evangelical · 12-13-2016, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Then, based on your interpretation the account in the gospels is prescriptive. Going into the town nearby, following a man carrying water and finding an upper room is somehow prescriptive.

So then, can you elaborate? Did the apostle's pick up on this in the epistles to make this a doctrine related to how we meet? Or do we have to infer this great truth from this figurative language and story?

It is inferred just as many other things we do are inferred. I think it shows that if believers can meet anywhere as claimed , then why did they not just meet anywhere? If Jesus said we could worship anywhere in Spirit and truth then why did they go to great lengths to prepare a specific place for the Lord's Table? Why did they not just do it anywhere they liked ? (the Garden of Gethsemane for example, they could have had a picnic in the park).

Evangelical · 12-13-2016, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Then--following your line of reasoning--why is it okay to have the Lord's table in LC meeting halls?

House or other suitable building as per :
http://www.local-church-meetings.org...cal-church.htm

HERn · 12-13-2016, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It is inferred just as many other things we do are inferred. I think it shows that if believers can meet anywhere as claimed , then why did they not just meet anywhere? If Jesus said we could worship anywhere in Spirit and truth then why did they go to great lengths to prepare a specific place for the Lord's Table? Why did they not just do it anywhere they liked ? (the Garden of Gethsemane for example, they could have had a picnic in the park).

Because it was a Seder involving several dishes not easily done in a garden.

Koinonia · 12-13-2016, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

House or other suitable building as per :
http://www.local-church-meetings.org...cal-church.htm

I see two verse references, and neither one has anything to do with "other suitable building[s]."

Drake · 12-13-2016, 11:20 PM

Igzy) "But clearly the temple was not the only place of worship. The Jews established synagogues, which Jesus attended reverently. Thus the strict idea that the temple was the only proper place of worship is an error."

Synagogues were not considered places of worship as in the worship in the temple. They were places of study, prayer, teaching, and community service but never alternatives to the worship associated with the temple. Equating the synagogues with the temple in terms of worship to God is a serious error. Not even the Jews did that and they would know the difference.

Jeroboam established a place of worship in Dan as a replacement for the place of worship ordained by God in Jerusalem. I don't disagree that we worship God in spirit and truth in every moment wherever we are for our bodies are the temple of the Lord and we have the Lords presence continually. Yet both the Lord and the apostle Paul revealed that we are to assemble corporately and in so doing there is prescription, not a free for all, and not an option whether to assemble or not, and not to assemble according to our own design or preferences.

Therefore, if we care about the Lords interest we will understand all the details He has ordained concerning corporate worship as did the Israelites who also followed the details of the worship related to the temple in Jerusalem. Some who did not follow the exact prescription for worship in the temple died.

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 04:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It is inferred just as many other things we do are inferred. I think it shows that if believers can meet anywhere as claimed , then why did they not just meet anywhere? If Jesus said we could worship anywhere in Spirit and truth then why did they go to great lengths to prepare a specific place for the Lord's Table? Why did they not just do it anywhere they liked ? (the Garden of Gethsemane for example, they could have had a picnic in the park).

If it is inferred then we don't insist on it. No item of the faith is an inferred teaching. We do not infer that Jesus is Lord, we are told matter of factly that this is in fact the case and that it is an item of the faith that we should fight for. We do not infer that Jesus redeemed us on the cross.

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

Igzy) "But clearly the temple was not the only place of worship. The Jews established synagogues, which Jesus attended reverently. Thus the strict idea that the temple was the only proper place of worship is an error."

Synagogues were not considered places of worship as in the worship in the temple. They were places of study, prayer, teaching, and community service but never alternatives to the worship associated with the temple. Equating the synagogues with the temple in terms of worship to God is a serious error. Not even the Jews did that and they would know the difference.

Jeroboam established a place of worship in Dan as a replacement for the place of worship ordained by God in Jerusalem. I don't disagree that we worship God in spirit and truth in every moment wherever we are for our bodies are the temple of the Lord and we have the Lords presence continually. Yet both the Lord and the apostle Paul revealed that we are to assemble corporately and in so doing there is prescription, not a free for all, and not an option whether to assemble or not, and not to assemble according to our own design or preferences.

Therefore, if we care about the Lords interest we will understand all the details He has ordained concerning corporate worship as did the Israelites who also followed the details of the worship related to the temple in Jerusalem. Some who did not follow the exact prescription for worship in the temple died.

Drake

Yes, there is one single temple, the proper place for certain sacrifices to be made, certain worship to be made, and for the celebration of certain feasts. Also, I agree that no Jew would confuse a synagogue with the Temple. But when you equate this "one place" with your "one locality" doctrine that is what you have done. Jesus has clearly equated this one place with "spirit and truth". That is the one place where we are to worship, make sacrifices and celebrate the feasts.

We do care about the Lord's interests and all the details He has ordained concerning corporate worship. This is why I asked for these details in the thread on the definition of the church. We were able to discover many details, but none of them supported the ground of the church doctrine that the boundary of a city is somehow prescriptive for a meeting.

In spirit and in truth is a detail. If those in the lead in Witness Lee's sect care about His interest they would care about everything that Jesus ordained about corporate worship. Clearly He has ordained that it take place in spirit and truth. However, my experience with Ed Marks, James Chu and Dennis Cooley in the church in NY clearly demonstrates that they don't care about spirit and truth.

The apostle Paul made it very clear in the book to the Corinthians, just as Jesus did in Matthew 18 that the sins of an influential leader like Philip Lee must be dealt with in a very specific way, and my experience with Ed Marks proves that not only was this sin not dealt with in the way ordained by Jesus and Paul, but that they did not have the spirit to deal with it nor were they going to let the truth be spoken about it in their little building.

My experience is simply a confirmation of Indiana's experience with Ron Kangas, John Ingals experience with Witness Lee, likewise with John So and Bill Mallon, etc. It is another prescription of the NT that you don't listen to a charge against an elder unless it is by the hand of 2 or 3 witnesses. We have far more than 2 or 3 witnesses.

Therefore, if we care about the Lords interest we will understand all the details He has ordained concerning corporate worship as did the Israelites who also followed the details of the worship related to the temple in Jerusalem. Some who did not follow the exact prescription for worship in the temple died. -- Drake

Evangelical · 12-14-2016, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If it is inferred then we don't insist on it. No item of the faith is an inferred teaching. We do not infer that Jesus is Lord, we are told matter of factly that this is in fact the case and that it is an item of the faith that we should fight for. We do not infer that Jesus redeemed us on the cross.

Certain things we are told matter of factly, other things we are not.

There are things in the Bible which are stated matter of factly - head coverings for example, yet no one insists on those.

There are other matters which are not stated matter of factly - baptism by immersion, for example, and yet a number of denominations will insist on baptism by full immersion. We can know that full immersion is the proper way because we can infer this from how people were baptized in the New Testament. Yet there is no instruction saying full immersion is the right way. This is all inferred from how it was done.

Similarly, how we meet for worship can be inferred from how it was done. Is it not hypocritical to infer certain things from the Bible such as baptism by immersion, yet not infer the matter of where the church should congregate?

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It is inferred just as many other things we do are inferred. I think it shows that if believers can meet anywhere as claimed , then why did they not just meet anywhere? If Jesus said we could worship anywhere in Spirit and truth then why did they go to great lengths to prepare a specific place for the Lord's Table? Why did they not just do it anywhere they liked ?

The celebration of the Passover meal was acc. to O.T. regulations.

In your post you purposely confused the old with the new.

Evangelical · 12-14-2016, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

The celebration of the Passover meal was acc. to O.T. regulations.

In your post you purposely confused the old with the new.

And that did not really change after Jesus's death. The early Christians continued to celebrate the Lord's Table in like manner, without celebrating it wherever they liked.

Drake · 12-14-2016, 05:54 AM

ZNP)"Jesus has clearly equated this one place with "spirit and truth". That is the one place where we are to worship, make sacrifices and celebrate the feasts."

ZNP,

Okay, let's take your doctrine to its logical conclusion. If the one place and only place to worship is in spirit and truth then why meet together ever? Since every believer can worship in spirit and truth 24X7 then there is no need for any assembly of believers. If the one place to worship is spirit and truth then Paul had no basis to say " forsake not the assembling of yourselves together". Why didn't Paul understand that we do not need to assemble together since we believers all worship in spirit and truth?

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Certain things we are told matter of factly, other things we are not.

There are things in the Bible which are stated matter of factly - head coverings for example, yet no one insists on those.

There are other matters which are not stated matter of factly - baptism by immersion, for example, and yet a number of denominations will insist on baptism by full immersion. We can know that full immersion is the proper way because we can infer this from how people were baptized in the New Testament. Yet there is no instruction saying full immersion is the right way. This is all inferred from how it was done.

Similarly, how we meet for worship can be inferred from how it was done. Is it not hypocritical to infer certain things from the Bible such as baptism by immersion, yet not infer the matter of where the church should congregate?

No, I agree with you. However, if the teaching is an inferred teaching it is wrong to insist on it as an item of the faith. Your claim (Witness Lee and his followers) that Christianity is degraded, adulterous, etc. is based in part on the claim that they are not meeting on the proper ground. They go so far as to state that taking a Lord's table meeting with other Christians could result in you getting sick and dying.

By doing this you make this doctrine the cornerstone of your sect, hence a damnable heresy.

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP)"Jesus has clearly equated this one place with "spirit and truth". That is the one place where we are to worship, make sacrifices and celebrate the feasts."

ZNP,

Okay, let's take your doctrine to its logical conclusion. If the one place and only place to worship is in spirit and truth then why meet together ever? Since every believer can worship in spirit and truth 24X7 then there is no need for any assembly of believers. If the one place to worship is spirit and truth then Paul had no basis to say " forsake not the assembling of yourselves together". Why didn't Paul understand that we do not need to assemble together since we believers all worship in spirit and truth?

Drake

Once again, just as your question with Jezebel which initiated this thread, this question will initiate another thread. There are many reasons to meet together, I will enumerate them when I get a chance, doubt I can give a comprehensive list.

Drake · 12-14-2016, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Once again, just as your question with Jezebel which initiated this thread, this question will initiate another thread. There are many reasons to meet together, I will enumerate them when I get a chance, doubt I can give a comprehensive list.

Okay. I'll start the list.

The Body of Christ is built up through the proper assembling of ourselves together according to His design.

Drake

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

And that did not really change after Jesus's death. The early Christians continued to celebrate the Lord's Table in like manner, without celebrating it wherever they liked.

Are you serious?

We were discussing the details in preparing the Sabbath meal on the night He was betrayed, and how it could not be eaten anywhere, including the garden of Gethsemane.

Then you conclude "Christians continued to celebrate the Lord's Table in like manner."

Have you ever studied the events surrounding that meal? It was part of the transition from the Old to the New. What started as the Passover, concluded as the Lord's Supper.

I'm sure you learned this stuff from Lee's writings.

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

Okay. I'll start the list.

The Body of Christ is built up through the proper assembling of ourselves together according to His design.

Drake

I could make a stronger case that the body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him.

WL put way too much emphasis on assembling. I'm not diminishing the benefits on the corporate side, but he was an extremist on this matter.

Drake · 12-14-2016, 06:47 AM

Ohio) "I could make a stronger case that the body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him."

Ohio,

Therfore, you could make the strongest case that the Body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him without ever meeting together.

And your basic assumption in that proposal is that obedience to the Head and abiding in Him does not include assembling together.

Since the Christians in Acts met daily they probably put too much emphasis on meeting and were extremists too?

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

Okay. I'll start the list.

The Body of Christ is built up through the proper assembling of ourselves together according to His design.

Drake

Then you can also see that this building up of the Body will result in the church as the family of God, Temple of God, Kingdom of God, Bride of Christ, one New Man, and the Warrior.

No individual Christian could ever represent or express any of these entities on their own.

Likewise you could never express any of these entities unless you are meeting in the name of Jesus and He is in your midst. He will only be in your midst if you are meeting in spirit and truth. What does that mean? You have one God and Father who is over all, one Lord, one faith, one Spirit, one baptism.

If you claim you have one Lord yet do not obey his command then you are not meeting in spirit or truth of Jesus being the one Lord. If you claim you have one God and Father who is over all, and then allow something else to act as a trump card to over rule our God and Father then you are not meeting in spirit and truth. If you claim you have one faith and then add something to that one faith or remove something from that one faith, then you are not meeting in spirit and truth. If you claim you have one baptism as an entrance into this kingdom and then you require something else for Christians to "enter" or else do not recognize their legitimacy based solely on this one baptism, then that is not meeting in spirit and in truth.

This is not an inferred teaching of the NT, it is the black and white teaching that is reiterated in many different ways by every apostle and writer of the NT.

Jezebel set up a governing principle that short circuited God out of the equation. In her reign God was not "over all". Jesus was not Lord. If you wanted an entrance into her kingdom you kowtowed to her request to stone Naboth. They did not meet in spirit and in truth, they met in malice and deceit.

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

Ohio) "I could make a stronger case that the body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him."

Ohio,

Therfore, you could make the strongest case that the Body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him without ever meeting together.

And your basic assumption in that proposal is that obedience to the Head and abiding in Him does not include assembling together.

Since the Christians in Acts met daily they probably put too much emphasis on meeting and were extremists too?

Drake

I never drew your conclusions.

Did you read my post?

I never diminished the benefits of assembling.

Repeat after me, "I never diminished the benefits of assembling."

Again. "I never diminished the benefits of assembling."

"But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit." Jude 20

Drake · 12-14-2016, 07:38 AM

ZNP)"Then you can also see that this building up of the Body will result in the church as the family of God, Temple of God, Kingdom of God, Bride of Christ, one New Man, and the Warrior.

No individual Christian could ever represent or express any of these entities on their own.

Likewise you could never express any of these entities unless you are meeting in the name of Jesus and He is in your midst. He will only be in your midst if you are meeting in spirit and truth. What does that mean? You have one God and Father who is over all, one Lord, one faith, one Spirit, one baptism.

If you claim you have one Lord yet do not obey his command then you are not meeting in spirit or truth of Jesus being the one Lord. If you claim you have one God and Father who is over all, and then allow something else to act as a trump card to over rule our God and Father then you are not meeting in spirit and truth. If you claim you have one faith and then add something to that one faith or remove something from that one faith, then you are not meeting in spirit and truth. If you claim you have one baptism as an entrance into this kingdom and then you require something else for Christians to "enter" or else do not recognize their legitimacy based solely on this one baptism, then that is not meeting in spirit and in truth.

This is not an inferred teaching of the NT, it is the black and white teaching that is reiterated in many different ways by every apostle and writer of the NT."

ZNP,

The part above I mostly agree with. I say "mostly" because it is one side of the truth but not the whole truth. There is the practice also. On the one hand we are, according to Ephesians, seated with Christ in the heavenlies. However, we also live on the earth in space and time and in Corinth or some other physical locale. Both are equally relevant. Yet, in your argument you conflate the two in the wrong way. You argue that the physical interferes with the spiritual when actually there is a symbiotic relationship between them. For instance, to experience the reality of the ones in Ephesians you cannot do this in a closet. You must have a practical way to experience the ones because though you have the position in Christ in Ephesians you need the experience while living in Corinth. On the other side, if you do not have the spiritual reality then the physical will be vanity. The building of the Body of Christ requires both the spiritual reality and the physical practice.

It is not as you, Igzy, and Ohio similarly argue that the physical is not needed or that the Body of Christ can be built without the assembling of ourselves together, or that just any old way of meeting will suffice.

Drake

Drake · 12-14-2016, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I never drew your conclusions.

Did you read my post?

I never diminished the benefits of assembling.

Repeat after me, "I never diminished the benefits of assembling."

Again. "I never diminished the benefits of assembling."

"But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit." Jude 20

But you did diminish it even though you claimed you weren't.

The way you did it was to say someone who pays a lot of attention to the biblical way to meet was an extremist. You front ended that with an argument that you could make a stronger case that the building of the Body of Christ could be accomplished as opposed to a meeting that was according to God's design.

Yes, you diminished the position and place of the meeting that is according to God's design.

Drake

Drake · 12-14-2016, 07:57 AM

ZNP) "Jezebel set up a governing principle that short circuited God out of the equation. In her reign God was not "over all". Jesus was not Lord. If you wanted an entrance into her kingdom you kowtowed to her request to stone Naboth. They did not meet in spirit and in truth, they met in malice and deceit."

ZNP,

Jezebel was Gentile prostitute. You talk about her as though she held some legitimate position in God's administration. Jezebel represents all that is opposed to God. She was Satanic and represents that still today. Don't misapply who she is and what she represents else you will miss the point. The book of Revelation provides that insight.

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP,

The part above I mostly agree with. I say "mostly" because it is one side of the truth but not the whole truth. There is the practice also. On the one hand we are, according to Ephesians, seated with Christ in the heavenlies. However, we also live on the earth in space and time and in Corinth or some other physical locale. Both are equally relevant. Yet, in your argument you conflate the two in the wrong way. You argue that the physical interferes with the spiritual when actually there is a symbiotic relationship between them.

I'm sorry where did I do that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

For instance, to experience the reality of the ones in Ephesians you cannot do this in a closet. You must have a practical way to experience the ones because though you have the position in Christ in Ephesians you need the experience while living in Corinth. On the other side, if you do not have the spiritual reality then the physical will be vanity. The building of the Body of Christ requires both the spiritual reality and the physical practice.

It is not as you, Igzy, and Ohio similarly argue that the physical is not needed or that the Body of Christ can be built without the assembling of ourselves together, or that just any old way of meeting will suffice.

Drake

When did I argue that the physical was not needed. I just said, and you just quoted, that you cannot have an expression of the temple of God, Kingdom of God, etc. without a corporate expression which is the church, a gathering of called out ones. That is physical, temporal, etc.

What I have been arguing is that you have created requirements that are not in the NT, and then you use these bogus requirements to disqualify 99.9% of all Christians. Igzy is the one who has focused on how arrogant and blind it is to assume that you alone are right and 99.9999% of Christians are wrong, not just today but for the last 2,000 years.

Neither Ohio, Igzy or myself have argued that the physical is not needed, nor have we argued that both spiritual and physical are not needed. If we thought that we wouldn't even be in the discussion. Our discussion demonstrates that we do care about both.

What we have noticed is that the so called "ground of the oneness" taught by Witness Lee does absolutely nothing to protect or keep the oneness and is actually used in practice as a tool to condemn and divide Christians. We have pointed out that it is an inferred teaching, there is no black and white teaching, no Apostle's fellowship as a doctrine, no prescription in the NT to keep this important teaching and therefore even if you think it is correct you should not hold to it, should not insist on it, should not use it as a tool to create your own sect. That is divisive and causes Witness Lee's sect to be a damnable heresy.

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP) "Jezebel set up a governing principle that short circuited God out of the equation. In her reign God was not "over all". Jesus was not Lord. If you wanted an entrance into her kingdom you kowtowed to her request to stone Naboth. They did not meet in spirit and in truth, they met in malice and deceit."

ZNP,

Jezebel was Gentile prostitute. You talk about her as though she held some legitimate position in God's administration. Jezebel represents all that is opposed to God. She was Satanic and represents that still today. Don't misapply who she is and what she represents else you will miss the point. The book of Revelation provides that insight.

Drake

Jezebel refers to a Queen in Israel who had a major influence on her husband, the king of Israel.

We see that she sent letters to have people stoned to death, that people obeyed her, that she seized their land, that she employed 850 "prophets" of Baal and Asharoth, that she sought to have prophets of God cut off and even killed.

In the New Testament we see her exercising an evil influence on the church in Thyatira. There is no Biblical record that she was a prostitute. I have already quoted verses from the OT that show she was a gentile. The closest connection the Bible makes to saying she was a prostitute was that she used make up at a time that this might have been unusual for your average Israelite (I am not familiar with the archaelogical records) but we know that make up was used in Egypt prior to this time.

The allegation that she was a prostitute is based on the association of her name with "evil and adulterous" in the church in Thyatira, however, that expression is very likely allegorical referring to spiritual adultery. There is a parallel that can be made based on the prophet Hosea referring to Jezreel and because of that he is to take a wife of whoredoms. But it is directly tied to Jeroboam, rather than Jezebel. Yes, they are both related to Jezreel, so that can be a very stretched allegorical connection. There is a very clear case made that her behavior was evil and adulterous from a spiritual perspective. That is clear. However, her name means chaste and it is likely that she cloaked herself in the "holier than thou" type rhetoric we have commonly seen in evil and adulterous politicians and religious leaders.

You have a very vague use of this expression "legitimate position in God's administration". The record in both the Old and New Testaments relate her being very much involved in the administration of the church in Thyatira, and the administration of the kingdom of Israel. We do not know anything of her position in the church other than she "called herself a prophetess" while in the OT she clearly had the position of Queen as well as someone who ran a stable of 850 prophets. Any body reading the Bible today would see very clearly that her position was not legitimate, based on the judgement of God and the judgement of Jesus. But during her lifetime you also see there were very few who actually stood up to oppose her. Perhaps Antipas, who was martyred did. Elijah did. But who else? I consider it deceptive to ignore the fact that the vast majority of those affected by her tolerated her, allowed her to operate, or at the very least did not openly oppose her.

The idea is to learn from history so that we don't repeat it. There were elders who did her bidding, there were those like Naboth who suffered her abuse, there were captains who followed her orders, and there was one prophet being fed by ravens who stood up to her.

I have not missed the point that she was Satanic, what people don't realize is that she was "deceitfully wicked". I am more focused on seeing through the deceit. I feel her deceit has permeated all government and all religion. I feel that only someone who has a very clear vision and strong faith, like Elijah or Antipas is going to see through her, expose her, stand up to her, and perhaps live to tell the tale.

ZNPaaneah · 12-14-2016, 11:01 AM

1Kings 21:23 And of Jezebel also spake Jehovah, saying, The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the rampart of Jezreel.

If this judgement were understood allegorically we consider certain types of newspapers to be "rags" and the paparazzi to behave like a pack of wild dogs. When you have a scandal on the front page of the newspaper it is as though the dogs are licking that persons blood. We see this happen all the time, every month for sure, perhaps every week, sometimes every day.

Jezebel is not some strange, once in a thousand years experience. Dealing with her is part of our everyday experience. My point is not that she has a legitimate position, but that she does have a very big influence on our daily life.

There is a lot more to this picture, you have the vineyard of Naboth that she seized, you have the use of stoning and false accusation of Blasphemy, and you have this reference to the rampart of Jezreel.

You don't need a black and white teaching concerning her because there are plenty of black and white teachings that condemn what she does both in the OT and NT.

Drake · 12-14-2016, 11:56 AM

ZNP) "Jezebel refers to a Queen in Israel who had a major influence on her husband, the king of Israel."

Jezebel was not the queen in that her coming together with Ahab was fornication. God does not acknowledge the marriage between His people and the Gentiles as proper. She calls herself a prophetess but was not a prophetess by God's definition. Through a marital arrangement, an official fornication arrangement in this case, this Gentile woman assumes authority to exercise over God's people. By calling herself a prophetess she teaches God's people to commit fornication which leads to idolatry. She confuses the words of God and the people of God. Ahab the king was joined to the world through Jezebel.

That is why I think you are giving too much credit to Jezebel as if she were a legitimate queen in God's eyes. The woman who leavens in Matthew 13, the Jezebel in Thyatira in Revelation 2, and the Harlot in Revelation 17 provide insight into this woman's character and what she represents. She is not a part of God's elect she is only calling herself such, teaching as if she were, and assuming authority to exercise over God's genuine people.

Drake

Drake · 12-14-2016, 12:16 PM

ZNP) "Neither Ohio, Igzy or myself have argued that the physical is not needed, nor have we argued that both spiritual and physical are not needed. If we thought that we wouldn't even be in the discussion. Our discussion demonstrates that we do care about both."

You are arguing about the same thing just in varying degrees and angles. However, it was not fair to cite Igzy and Ohio while addressing your comments so my apologies for doing that. I will address their comments in their own context.

ZNP)"What we have noticed is that the so called "ground of the oneness" taught by Witness Lee does absolutely nothing to protect or keep the oneness and is actually used in practice as a tool to condemn and divide Christians."

My observation is that in practice you continually retreat to the ones in Ephesians as the base of your argument. When the discussion is about the biblical definition of meetings you assert that Brother Lee's teaching is at odds with the ones in Ephesians. When in fact, Brother Lee's interest is for the building of the Body of Christ and the churches, the procedure in this age, is for the building. The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ. Being alone cannot build the Body of Christ. The clergy laity system cannot build the Body of Christ. There is a practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians. They are symbiotic. Define that to protect the oneness. Practice that and you keep in the oneness. Deviate that and you have divisions and confusion.

Drake

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

My observation is that in practice you continually retreat to the ones in Ephesians as the base of your argument. When the discussion is about the biblical definition of meetings you assert that Brother Lee's teaching is at odds with the ones in Ephesians. When in fact, Brother Lee's interest is for the building of the Body of Christ and the churches, the procedure in this age, is for the building.
The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ.
Being alone cannot build the Body of Christ.
The clergy laity system cannot build the Body of Christ.
There is a practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians. They are symbiotic. Define that to protect the oneness. Practice that and you keep in the oneness. Deviate that and you have divisions and confusion.

Drake

Just keep attacking the greater body of Christ and supposedly the "last man standing" is WL and the LC's who alone will "build the body of Christ."

This is the critical standard M.O. for every LC diehard. How is that working for you? Even Bill Lawson on that promotional message debunks that assertion. Have you heard?

I was in the LC's for 30 years, and I heard this spiel ad nauseum, but I never saw anything resembling the "builded body." Perhaps you might want to rethink your "gospel," and go with something that has a shred of veracity in it. The "practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians" exists no where in the present day "Recovery."

Drake · 12-14-2016, 01:02 PM

Ohio)" Even Bill Lawson on that promotional message debunks that assertion. Have you heard?"

If it is relevant post it here.

Drake

Evangelical · 12-14-2016, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Have you ever studied the events surrounding that meal? It was part of the transition from the Old to the New. What started as the Passover, concluded as the Lord's Supper.

Supposedly. This is a debated issue in Christianity about whether it was a Passover meal or not.

Also, the precise time when the Old finished and the New started is also a matter of debate. I lean towards the view that it was when Jesus died on the cross that stopped the Old Testament and started the New.

For the sake of discussion I will agree with you that there was an Old to New transition during the Passover. That still leaves the question of how the church celebrated the Lord's Table during the early stages of the New Testament.

I am quite sure based upon the New Testament and church history, that they did not proclaim "woohoo, we can never celebrate the Lord's Supper wherever we like because Jesus said location doesn't matter". In other words, it must have been such a burden for them to celebrate the Lord's Table in a 4-walled house, that they could not wait to celebrate it in a park or some other location (sarcasm).

I just wonder if you have thought through the practical implications of your "worship anywhere" doctrine and seen that Scripture does not show the disciples acting willy-nilly. I agree with you that in principle worship can be done anywhere, as it is a spiritual thing after all. But church is not just a matter of exercising one's spirit (which may be done anywhere), but of congregation in a physical location for a particular purpose. I would probably separate worship into two aspects - private worship which can be done anywhere, and corporate worship which cannot be done just anywhere.

Evangelical · 12-14-2016, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

No, I agree with you. However, if the teaching is an inferred teaching it is wrong to insist on it as an item of the faith. Your claim (Witness Lee and his followers) that Christianity is degraded, adulterous, etc. is based in part on the claim that they are not meeting on the proper ground. They go so far as to state that taking a Lord's table meeting with other Christians could result in you getting sick and dying.

By doing this you make this doctrine the cornerstone of your sect, hence a damnable heresy.

I see your point. It's not as important as the Trinity or whether Jesus came in the flesh or the Son of God. But at the level of its importance, I think it outranks the alternatives of denominationalism.

In as much as taking the Lord's table while not discerning the body I think 1 Corinthians 11:29 would apply.

Ellicott's commentary:
They did not rightly estimate such gatherings as being corporate meetings; they did not rightly estimate themselves as not now isolated individuals, but members of the common Body. They ought to discern in these meetings of the Church a body; they ought to discern in themselves parts of a body. Not only is this interpretation, I venture to think, the most accurate and literal interpretation of the Greek, but it is the only view which seems to me to make the passage bear intelligibly on the point which St. Paul is considering, and the real evil which he seeks to counteract

That said, I don't know anyone who has gotten sick or died from taking communion in a denomination or the local church. The only time I have gotten sick from church was from a potluck dinner.

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Supposedly. This is a debated issue in Christianity about whether it was a Passover meal or not.

All the preparations were made for the Lord and his disciples to celebrate the Passover, so we have no reason to suspect that they did not. But what was recorded was the first Table Meeting of the new covenant. Jesus broke bread and they shared the cup.

Of course, the meal was a transition ... In type. The Lord's body was broken and His blood shed ... In symbolism ... During the meal. Later that same day (Jewish day, evening then morning) He actually shed His blood.

Evangelical · 12-14-2016, 08:46 PM

The differences between passover and what they did has lead some to conclude that it was more of a chavurah than a seder. Or a chavurah with clear symbolism relating it to the passover.

Ohio · 12-14-2016, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I just wonder if you have thought through the practical implications of your "worship anywhere" doctrine and seen that Scripture does not show the disciples acting willy-nilly. I agree with you that in principle worship can be done anywhere, as it is a spiritual thing after all. But church is not just a matter of exercising one's spirit (which may be done anywhere), but of congregation in a physical location for a particular purpose. I would probably separate worship into two aspects - private worship which can be done anywhere, and corporate worship which cannot be done just anywhere.

The "doctrine" is not mine. Have you not read John 4?

Willy-nilly? So how do you define your doctrine? You tell me in detail what makes an officially-samctioned LSM-approved Table meeting.

What about damp coal mines and cemeteries? Does that qualify? What about Roman catacombs? Were they legit? What about Cappadocian caves?

I need some serious detail bro. Please provide several pages of specs for me to check off. Can't leave anything to chance. Need to know specifics, such as whether whole wheat flour is acceptable or not, cause we had one elder sister tear up the bread for not being bleached flour. Got to dot all the "I's" eh? Don't want no willy-nilly to get us.

Evangelical · 12-14-2016, 09:51 PM

They did not choose those places out of free choice but out of necessity because of persecution. Even those choices indicate specific meeting places rather than meeting wherever it pleased them.

Drake · 12-14-2016, 10:08 PM

Evangelical)"The only time I have gotten sick from church was from a potluck dinner."

It was the pot stickers wasn't it? I knew it. Almost went for them but went for the lasagna instead.

Drake

Ohio · 12-15-2016, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

They did not choose those places out of free choice but out of necessity because of persecution. Even those choices indicate specific meeting places rather than meeting wherever it pleased them.

Where's my detailed specs?

So ... are there none?

Or is it as we all thought ... only LSM-approved meetings are sanctioned and this sanctioning process began during the Philip Lee administration, a man by all accounts not even saved!

ZNPaaneah · 12-15-2016, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP) "Jezebel refers to a Queen in Israel who had a major influence on her husband, the king of Israel."..

So if I understand you correctly you are saying that Jezebel was unjust, and that she was not fit to rule Israel and that it was utterly a fault of Israel that they allowed her to confuse the word of God and the people of God?

Evangelical · 12-15-2016, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Where's my detailed specs?

There are really no detailed specs. Any house or other suitable building will suffice. The important thing is that it stands for the locality in the city, and I'm not aware of any other ministry other than LSM that will help facilitate that.

Ohio · 12-15-2016, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The important thing is that it stands for the locality in the city, and I'm not aware of any other ministry other than LSM that will help facilitate that.

Thank the Lord for that!

Cal · 12-15-2016, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Thank the Lord for that!

Amen. The fact that no one else facilitates locality should tell you something about the teaching.

Drake · 12-15-2016, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So if I understand you correctly you are saying that Jezebel was unjust, and that she was not fit to rule Israel and that it was utterly a fault of Israel that they allowed her to confuse the word of God and the people of God?

All that's true.

But that is not what I said.

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-15-2016, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

All that's true.

But that is not what I said.

Drake

No, but it is what Paul said:

1Cor 6:6 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?
8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

What you did say is that "Jezebel was not the Queen, her coming together with Ahab was fornication".

In the same way the US government should not be called on to determine if the Witness Lee sect is a cult. That choice was utterly a fault among the LC, it demonstrated that they were blind and didn't even see that the unbelievers are not just, they are not able to make this judgement, and it was a shame that they couldn't find a Christian to judge the matter among themselves. In the end, the final analysis, Witness Lee and his henchman defrauded our brethren. Not just those that lost the lawsuit, but those that supported it, paid for it, etc.

Which is what you said when you said "By calling herself a prophetess she teaches God's people to commit fornication which leads to idolatry. She confuses the words of God and the people of God. Ahab the king was joined to the world through Jezebel."

You accuse me of giving too much credit to Jezebel and giving her legitimacy she didn't have. That is what Witness Lee and the blendeds did and do by using a legal defense team and lawsuits to advance their "ministry". Before judging others try removing the beam that is in your own eye.

Drake · 12-15-2016, 08:55 AM

ZNP

Since you knew that is not what I said why did you ask me if that is what I said?

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-15-2016, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP

Since you knew that is not what I said why did you ask me if that is what I said?

Drake

So please clear up for us what you did say?

You said that "Jezebel was not a legitimate queen, her coming together with Ahaz was fornication."

In the same way Witness Lee came together with the US government to sue other Christians about an issue that should be judged by Christians, not unbelievers, not heathen, not the world.

You said ""By calling herself a prophetess she teaches God's people to commit fornication which leads to idolatry. She confuses the words of God and the people of God. Ahab the king was joined to the world through Jezebel."

In the same way Witness Lee joined the Local church with his legal defense fund when every single church was required to donate, privately, to this fund. If someone walks into a meeting and contributes to the offering they are completely unaware that this is being used, in part, to fund lawsuits against other Christians about LSM concerns with insults and slander others are speaking about them.

You accused me of giving Jezebel too much credit and legitimacy, yet it is Witness Lee that did that. Instead of going around and judging others, why not remove the beam from your own eye.

This isn't my opinion, it is Paul's --

1Cor 6:6 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?
8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

You said:

My observation is that in practice you continually retreat to the ones in Ephesians as the base of your argument. When the discussion is about the biblical definition of meetings you assert that Brother Lee's teaching is at odds with the ones in Ephesians. When in fact, Brother Lee's interest is for the building of the Body of Christ and the churches, the procedure in this age, is for the building. The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ. Being alone cannot build the Body of Christ. The clergy laity system cannot build the Body of Christ. There is a practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians. They are symbiotic. Define that to protect the oneness. Practice that and you keep in the oneness. Deviate that and you have divisions and confusion.

Witness Lee clearly deviated from the practical church life arrangement given to us by the Apostle Paul. That deviation has caused division and confusion.

You said:

That is why I think you are giving too much credit to Jezebel as if she were a legitimate queen in God's eyes. The woman who leavens in Matthew 13, the Jezebel in Thyatira in Revelation 2, and the Harlot in Revelation 17 provide insight into this woman's character and what she represents. She is not a part of God's elect she is only calling herself such, teaching as if she were, and assuming authority to exercise over God's genuine people.

The woman who leavens in Matthew 13 is the woman that Witness Lee joined to to stone other believers for blasphemy and seize their vineyards. She is Jezebel in Thyatira and the Harlot in the religious world (Rev 17) and the material world (Rev 18). Witness Lee allowed her to assume authority over God's genuine people.

Drake · 12-15-2016, 01:14 PM

ZNP,

Does the mention of Jezebel in the Old and New Testament have any greater significance to you than a lawsuit?

If so, what?

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-15-2016, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP,

Does the mention of Jezebel in the Old and New Testament have any greater significance to you than a lawsuit?

If so, what?

Drake

I think the 850 prophets that ate at her table signifies the way we govern now. We have two kinds of "prophets", scientists and pollsters.

We bring in all kinds of experts with their charts, and tables, and predictions and prognostications, etc. We also have the political strategists, pollsters, and spin meisters.

What we don't have is a government according to our conscience. This kind of administration has been very convincingly compared to a psychopath.

Ultimately her destination is Jezreel, the same destination that Jeroboam had. Jezebel is the fertilizer for this bloody day of judgement.

How do these ones operate when confronted with the truth? They stone you for blasphemy and then steal your vineyard. This is the story of climate change.

To me, Jezebel is the spirit and nature of the current worldly system. We have been called out this dark age. We should be a peculiar people, and yet what a shame that we would choose these unjust, deceitful people fully lacking in any kind of moral compass to come in and judge the things of God. Why? Because WL was "appealing to Caesar"? Why? Because someone said that his teachings were not fundamental. "Caesar, Caesar, this brother said I wasn't teaching the Bible correctly!"

Yes, it is totally shameful. But more than that, our goal is to inherit the kingdom of God, how could anyone with that as a goal make such a horrid detour? Why are you appealing to Caesar when your goal is to inherit the kingdom of the heavens?

As Paul said it is "utterly a fault among you". In this situation there is only one option, full and complete repentance. Confess your sins and repent.

Drake · 12-15-2016, 06:26 PM

ZNP

I understand better what you saying now.

However, the governments of the world are in place according to God's ordination. The time of the Gentiles was revealed to Daniel. Not until the Lord returns will that change. Paul reiterates this when he says we need to be subject to government authorities and he also appealed to Caesar showing that he accepted that authority.

Jezebel was something different. She brought God's people into fornication and idolatry. Though it is not wrong to say that she represents the spirit and nature of the current worldly system, it is imprecise to equate her to the current government of the USA. Rather, she represents a worldliness that is related to idolatry. There really is only one entity that fits the description of Christian in name, speaking for God (she calls herself a prophetess), and ultimately aligns with but eventually is destroyed by AntiChrist. That is the Catholic Church, not the US government.

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-16-2016, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP

I understand better what you saying now.

However, the governments of the world are in place according to God's ordination. The time of the Gentiles was revealed to Daniel. Not until the Lord returns will that change. Paul reiterates this when he says we need to be subject to government authorities and he also appealed to Caesar showing that he accepted that authority.

Jezebel was something different. She brought God's people into fornication and idolatry. Though it is not wrong to say that she represents the spirit and nature of the current worldly system, it is imprecise to equate her to the current government of the USA. Rather, she represents a worldliness that is related to idolatry. There really is only one entity that fits the description of Christian in name, speaking for God (she calls herself a prophetess), and ultimately aligns with but eventually is destroyed by AntiChrist. That is the Catholic Church, not the US government.

Drake

Wow, what happened to Witness Lee's sect? When I was there in the late 70s and 80s and 90s we were taught to read the Bible based on our experience. We were taught that every verse of the Bible was for us. Your doctrine basically says that all this bad stuff and judgement, that is for the Catholic church, not us.

I completely disagree. Yes, if you wanted to associate Thyatira with one "church" then sure, the Catholic church is the best fit. But my experience is that every believer must deal with Balaam and Jezebel, regardless of whether or not you are in the Catholic church. It is far too convenient and self serving to assume that part of the Bible doesn't speak to you.

The most obvious and undeniable link is 1Cor 6 -- the modern day equivalent of accusing someone of blasphemy and stoning them to death is a lawsuit for slander and libel.

Equating Paul's appeal to Caesar in a criminal case with Witness Lee's justification of a civil suit is shameful. The Apostle Paul wrote 1Cor 6. He was surely aware that he had also "appealed to Caesar".

1. Paul was already being tried, his appeal to Caesar was not the initiation of a lawsuit, but the use of the law to prevent his being assassinated.

2. Witness Lee's "appeal to Caesar" was the initiation of a civil lawsuit, Paul's appeal was a response to an attempt to bring the trial back to Jerusalem. His trial had been moved by the authorities because they had learned of a plot to kill him. Paul's point was that if there were an appeal, it should go up the chain, not down the chain.

Try as they might to justify their lawsuits, it is "utterly a fault" with the Witness Lee sect that they bring these lawsuits against others, that they are known as the group that goes around suing others, that they maintain a legal defense team. What a shame that every member in all of these churches gives to this defense fund whether they know it or not? Whatever happened to separation of the church and the ministry? It is an unholy alliance akin to Ahaz and Jezebel.

If the Catholic church is Thyatira, then Witness Lee's sect is surely Laodicea.

17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked:

They claim that they alone stand for oneness while at the time acting in a shameful way condemned by the apostles.

They condemn the Catholic church for tolerating Jezebel, but look at what they tolerate.

You said: The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ. Being alone cannot build the Body of Christ. The clergy laity system cannot build the Body of Christ. There is a practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians. They are symbiotic. Define that to protect the oneness. Practice that and you keep in the oneness. Deviate that and you have divisions and confusion.

You even admit they are symbiotic. We have these words given to us to define our practice, and then to keep the oneness we must practice it. You are the ones who have deviated from that and cause divisions and confusion.

2Kings 9:37 and the body of Jezebel shall be as dung upon the face of the field in the portion of Jezreel, so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel.

Dung is used as fertilizer. Jezebel became fertilizer for Jezreel, a place prophesied of by Hosea and related to Jeroboam and his sins.

But I like how Drake does not say that this is Jezebel regarding what Witness Lee did. Witness Lee's sect is like the remains of Jezebel being strewn across this bloody field. How many splits? John So and Europe. Some of the churches in Africa split. Some in South America split. The split with TC. Why is it being ripped up like this? The doctrines certainly haven't changed. No, it is the practice, the sins, the deviation from the Apostle's fellowship that has caused the division and confusion. At least one thing is sure, Drake and others who meet with the sect will not be able to claim ignorance.

Evangelical · 12-16-2016, 06:01 AM

Jezebel was the daughter of a pagan just as Christian Rome was the daughter of pagan Rome.

Jezebel called herself a queen. Queen of Heaven and Queen of apostles is a title given to the Virgin Mary by Roman Catholics.

Jezebel was engaged in witchcraft, idolatry and various other things, which a number of Popes and others had also engaged in. The Roman Catholic cathedrals of Europe are filled with superstitions, idols, and magical symbols.

Roman Catholicism worships various images and idols just like Jezebel did.

Roman Catholicism has utilized secular powers against the true Christians:

"as Jezebel stirred up Ahab against good and faithful men, is has this church stirred up the secular powers, emperors, kings, and princes, against the true followers of Christ:" (Gill bible commentary).

Just like Jezebel killed the genuine people of God, Roman Catholicism has killed true and genuine Christians throughout the past centuries.

None of these things seem to fit the USA - the USA has never killed true and genuine Christians in the name of God, and neither is the USA a religious entity.

However, that is not to say that the USA is not influenced by the Roman Catholic church, the USA could be seen as a country that tolerates Jezebel. The US may be in league with Jezebel, but Jezebel is a distinct entity.

The goal of the Catholic church has never been to build the body of Christ - only its own empire. It is one of the false religions of the world along with Buddhist, Hindu etc. If one travels to a buddhist ,hindu or moslem country there is often a Catholic church , even in countries where genuine Christians are persecuted or shunned, Catholicism is readily accepted.

Drake · 12-16-2016, 06:03 AM

ZNP) "Wow, what happened to Witness Lee's sect? When I was there in the late 70s and 80s and 90s we were taught to read the Bible based on our experience. We were taught that every verse of the Bible was for us. Your doctrine basically says that all this bad stuff and judgement, that is for the Catholic church, not us.

I completely disagree. Yes, if you wanted to associate Thyatira with one "church" then sure, the Catholic church is the best fit. But my experience is that every believer must deal with Balaam and Jezebel, regardless of whether or not you are in the Catholic church. It is far too convenient and self serving to assume that part of the Bible doesn't speak to you."

ZNP,

Of course the Lord may speak to us through every scripture. For instance, reading Revelation 2:23 the Lord may impress us that He is the One who has the ability to and will search our hearts and minds. He is the One that is qualified and will repay us according to our deeds. He may show me that my posts are deeds and He will assess them and repay me according to the thoughts, intents, and what I type.

However, that is not how you are applying the Word of God as demonstrated here in this thread. Rather, you are as you say above reading "the Bible based on your experience". You read the Bible and apply and interpret it according to your experience. That becomes a filter. Then the kind of Bible you have is based on the kind of person you are. Also, you apply it to others and not yourself.

Though the Lord may speak to us and enlighten us when we read the Bible there are also truths. Those truths are not changeable and we cannot apply them anyway we like, certainly not according to our experience. For instance, you have misapplied Jezebel as the US government. Nor are the 850 prophets who eat at her table symbols of scientists and pollsters.

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-16-2016, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Jezebel was the daughter of a pagan just as Christian Rome was the daughter of pagan Rome.
Jezebel called herself a queen. Queen of Heaven and Queen of apostles is a title given to the Virgin Mary by Roman Catholics.

Your one and only sole connection between Jezebel and the Catholic Church is in Revelation based on a historical interpretation of the 7 churches in which case Thyatira becomes the Catholic Church.

Revelation 2:20 But I have this against thee, that thou sufferest the woman Jezebel, who calleth herself a prophetess; and she teacheth and seduceth my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed to idols.

There are some interesting parallels with the history of the church to see some value in this interpretation.

However, there are many very serious problems with this interpretation to make it very clear that it is not "the" interpretation, nor is it the only way to view these 7 churches. For example Witness Lee taught that we will rule the nations in the coming age, yet that promise is given to the overcomers in the church in Thyatira. Witness Lee also taught that we have the morning star, the day star (hence the name of his failed business venture). But that promise is given to the overcomers in Thyatira. In fact Witness Lee taught that we go through all the experiences mentioned in the church of Ephesus, yet according to the Historical doctrine, that church no longer exists.

Second, there is no basis at all, from the Bible, to equate Jezebel with the Catholic Church. The first mention of Jezebel predates the Catholic church by a thousand years.

All of your parallels are equally valid if used for anyone who sets themselves up as an illegitimate leader of the church (MOTA).

A MOTA calls themselves a prophet. They use verses that clearly apply to Jesus as the minister of this age, to apply to themselves. That is idolatry.

A MOTA says that they alone have the authority to appoint elders and kick elders out.

A MOTA promotes the worship of idols -- see the loyalty pledge that elders were forced to sign and compare that with James warning --

James 5:12 But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by the heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath: but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay; that ye fall not under judgment.

Forcing the saints to sign a loyalty pledge is equivalent to seducing them to worship idols. Then requiring all kinds of payments for "standing orders" that they don't want, training fees, legal defense funds, lawsuits against saints, Blue chairs, One publication, etc is equivalent to forcing them to eat things sacrificed to idols. So why would you limit this to the Catholic church. Anyone that seduces the saints to worship idols and eat things sacrificed to idols could fit this bill.

You may argue that the MOTA was not involved in witchcraft, yet the Bible says that rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft. The Lawsuits are just one example of rebellion by the MOTA. There are others.

Lawsuits against Christians is using secular powers against Christians. Hence the MOTA did this as well.

You link Jezebel to the Pope, yet you can easily link Jezebel to any illegitimate leader in the church.

Evangelical · 12-16-2016, 02:34 PM

I believe Jezebel specifically refers to pagan idolatry and so forth. It also includes murderous intent towards true believers and an upside down authority of female over male (such as putting the woman Mary above Christ). Kinds of idolatry such as "I love my car" is not Jezebel...

Jezebel can represent the corruption of any part of Christianity due to pagan influences throughout the ages. Afterall, what is Christmas, Easter etc other than a pagan influence, coming from Catholicism.

I like this article by Professor Walter J. Veith which provides scholarly credence to the view:

http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception-Revelation_Thyatira_Jezebel_pagan-temples

Evangelical · 12-16-2016, 11:13 PM

Sometimes it helps to consider what sort of pagan influences we are talking about in relation to Jezebel and see some pictures. So I provide some websites with pictures below. Jezebel deceived God's people to worship Baal who was the sun god. In Catholic cathedrals there are various symbols pointing to the ancient religions and in particular worship of the sun god.

This is explained here:

The round disc in the crescent moon was a symbol of ancient Babylon, and is found in all the ancient religions. In Catholic cathedrals, these symbols are very prominent, often depicting a round form of mother and child within the crescent moon.

The rebirth of the sun god was celebrated by the eating of round bread in Babylonian times, and was common in Mithraism and Osiris worship. Historian Alexander Hislop says this:

And here, in a so-called Christian Church, a brilliant plate of silver, “in the form of the SUN,” is so placed on the altar, that everyone who adores at the altar must bow in lowly reverence before that image of the “SUN.” Whence, I ask, could that have come, than from the ancient SUN-worship, or the worship of Baal? And when the wafer is placed so that the silver “SUN” is fronting the “round” wafer, whose "roundness" is so important an element in the Romish Mystery, is only another symbol of Baal, or the sun, what can be the meaning of it, but to show to those who have eyes to see that the “Wafer” itself is only another symbol of Baal.i

i. Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons (New Jersey: Loizeauz Brothers, 1959): 120-121.

http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception_paganism_Catholic_mass_silver

For pictures to verify the connection between Catholicism and Paganism, see here:

http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/roman-catholic-sun-worship-eucharist.html

Various other pagan symbols are described here:
http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/roman-catholic-church-pagan-god-symbols/

I also found this a helpful read:
http://www.charismamag.com/blogs/the-plumb-line/23245-queen-of-may-the-spirit-jezebel-is-hiding-behind-these-altars

If we were to consider the question of who or where is Jezebel today, the religious institution which fits that description the best is the Roman Catholic church. Of course, this does not mean any individual Christian or group is not in danger of following the same path, nor does it excuse idolatry in general which may take various forms. There are many different kinds of idolatry yet the one related to Jezebel specifically must be the Catholic church. Of all the kinds of idolatry this one is the most dangerous as it substitutes genuine Christianity for a counterfeit. That is, it not only replaces God but also deceives a person into thinking the idol is God. People think they are worshiping God but instead are worshiping the counterfeit sun-god. It also stirs up genuine believers of God to kill other genuine believers - the Catholic church is responsible for the deaths of many over past history.

We should remember that with the Jezebel is also an Ahab. Without Ahab, Jezebel has no power in the church. The ones who defend the Catholic church are like Ahab's giving Jezebel free reign. Genuine Christianity has its roots in Judaism. Counterfeit Christianity has its roots in paganism.

ZNPaaneah · 12-17-2016, 03:58 PM

Great.

The Bible says several things about Jezebel we can all agree on:

1. She calls herself a prophetess -- so she presents herself as some sort of religious leader. Cultic leader.

2. She both teaches and seduces -- her form of teaching involves psychological ploys that play on people's fantasies, lusts, greed, etc.

3. She specifically teaches the servants of Jesus to commit fornication, that is to have another Lord other than Jesus. This is idol worship.

4. In addition to this she convinces these servants to eat things sacrificed to idols. Financially support this idolatrous practice.

Now it may be true that we can see this very clearly in the history of the Catholic church, but why should we limit this form of deceit to the Catholic church? There is nothing in the Bible that says we should.

If Witness Lee did these four things then why wouldn't you diagnose this as being the same spirit?

Nell · 12-17-2016, 10:26 PM

As an aside, I've noticed that regardless of the topic, many times the discussion turns to the "ground of locality" (GOL?) topic, as this one has below.

Quite a few years ago in Houston when I first began to meet with the LC, I heard Benson Phillips share the following:

"If we concentrate on Christ, the church will come out. If we concentrate on the church, nothing will come out." Has a ring of truth, huh? I'm not sure that he would make that statement today, but he can't "un-say" it now. Maybe it was prophetical because I certainly can't see a golden lampstand anywhere. In fact, all the "church talk", including Witness Lee's church talk, has not brought forth the promised results.

On the other hand, Paul told us "that I may know Him." I think that's the best idea yet. We don't really need to worry about "doing church" right. If we know the Lord, if we follow Him and obey His voice, if we repent for our sins and keep right relationships with the members of the body, then Christ will build His church and it will be revealed for all to see.

The "Ground Of Locality" doctrine is like a song with one note. It's promoted like a "be all, end all". There may be a few on this forum who agree on one side or the other but it's doubtful that anyone will be convinced to switch sides. Even if there is agreement of some sort, to what end? To use Benson's phrase, has the church "come out"? I don't see it.

I remember the old hymn "On Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand. All other ground is sinking sand."

Back to Jezebel...

Nell

Evangelical · 12-18-2016, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The Bible says several things about Jezebel we can all agree on:...

Not really because Witness Lee never taught or practiced worship of the sun god or Baal like Catholics did.

Drake · 12-18-2016, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Now it may be true that we can see this very clearly in the history of the Catholic church, but why should we limit this form of deceit to the Catholic church? There is nothing in the Bible that says we should.

If Witness Lee did these four things then why wouldn't you diagnose this as being the same spirit?

ZNP

Because using your interpretation method for Jezebel anyone can justify any belief from the Bible.

I'll illustrate using an entirely unrelated example. If I believe that UFOs exist and want to prove their existence from the Bible then I can start looking for examples that fit the description of a UFO and sure enough I find the examples I seek in Elijah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the star over Bethlehem , and Jesus when taken up in the cloud, and stuff in the book of Revelation. Since UFOs and those biblical descriptions look the same to me then why shouldn't everybody diagnose those as being the same thing?

You know how you want the story to end so you create a narrative using the Bible to justify your ending.

You did this twice with Jezebel in this thread. Once with equating the US governnent to Jezebel and her 850 prophets to scientists and pollsters. Then again below to Brother Lee using the same flawed argumentation.

Drake

Ohio · 12-18-2016, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

Because using your interpretation method for Jezebel anyone can justify any belief from the Bible.

Drake

I don't find ZNP to be any more extreme than Lee was.

ZNPaaneah · 12-18-2016, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Not really because Witness Lee never taught or practiced worship of the sun god or Baal like Catholics did.

That is fine, if you wish to have the most narrow definition possible.

But what about other forms of idolatry and other forms of worship and other false Gods?

If a person did the exact same thing that Jezebel did, only they taught and seduced the saints to a form of idolatry that was not identical to the worship of the Sun God but rather the worship of money or some other false "source of life", then what?

To me they are both the same breed of deceiver. Just like we have different breeds of pig, and different breeds of camel, and different breeds of dog.

A German Shepherd is not identical to a Great Dane, but they are both the same species, they are both dogs, and there is a tremendous overlap between the two.

ZNPaaneah · 12-18-2016, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP

Because using your interpretation method for Jezebel anyone can justify any belief from the Bible.

I'll illustrate using an entirely unrelated example. If I believe that UFOs exist and want to prove their existence from the Bible then I can start looking for examples that fit the description of a UFO and sure enough I find the examples I seek in Elijah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the star over Bethlehem , and Jesus when taken up in the cloud, and stuff in the book of Revelation. Since UFOs and those biblical descriptions look the same to me then why shouldn't everybody diagnose those as being the same thing?

You know how you want the story to end so you create a narrative using the Bible to justify your ending.

You did this twice with Jezebel in this thread. Once with equating the US governnent to Jezebel and her 850 prophets to scientists and pollsters. Then again below to Brother Lee using the same flawed argumentation.

Drake

No, here is why that does not apply.

1. Requiring that the person call themselves a prophet or prophetess is very limiting.

2. This person must teach the believers idol worship, they must present a substitute to Jesus as Lord. That is extremely limiting.

3. This person must convince the servants of Jesus to eat things sacrificed to idols. This is extremely limiting.

The definition I have is that the person must teach the servants of Jesus to commit idol worship and also to give money to support this idol and that they must present themself as a prophet of God.

Now if you don't want to call that person a Jezebel, that is fine, but what do you want to call them? It is clear that their behavior is condemned by the Bible, that is not "justifying any belief" that is clear and simple word.

Now if this person also used a worldly court system to "stone believers for blasphemy" and then "steal their vineyard", how about now? What is your reason to say they aren't a Jezebel?

Evangelical · 12-18-2016, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

That is fine, if you wish to have the most narrow definition possible.

But what about other forms of idolatry and other forms of worship and other false Gods?

If a person did the exact same thing that Jezebel did, only they taught and seduced the saints to a form of idolatry that was not identical to the worship of the Sun God but rather the worship of money or some other false "source of life", then what?

To me they are both the same breed of deceiver. Just like we have different breeds of pig, and different breeds of camel, and different breeds of dog.

A German Shepherd is not identical to a Great Dane, but they are both the same species, they are both dogs, and there is a tremendous overlap between the two.

There are other examples in the Bible. What about Balaam in Revelation 2:14, or the Pharisees? They were all involved in idols.
I believe Jezebel is a specific thing, and doesn't cover all situations. I would not say that Lutheranism for example is affected by Jezebel, because they got rid of the evil things in Catholicism. But I would say they are the daughter of the prostitute. You really should try to stop pinning every false thing in the Bible on Witness Lee.

ZNPaaneah · 12-18-2016, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

There are other examples in the Bible. What about Balaam in Revelation 2:14, or the Pharisees? They were all involved in idols.
I believe Jezebel is a specific thing, and doesn't cover all situations. I would not say that Lutheranism for example is affected by Jezebel, because they got rid of the evil things in Catholicism. But I would say they are the daughter of the prostitute.

Yes, Balaam is also a definite thing and doesn't cover all situations as are the Pharisees.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You really should try to stop pinning every false thing in the Bible on Witness Lee.

I have not tried to pin every false thing on Witness Lee.

Rather I have looked at the items we know he was responsible for

1. Fabricated a story about Watchman Nee. Without that lie you could never sell the story about WN being the MOTA, and without that what use would "being his closest coworker" be?

Maybe you should stop ignoring it.

2. Numerous examples of him accusing others of blasphemy, stoning them to death, and then seizing their vineyards. Max R and his wife because they knew and objected to the sins of his sons. JI, AK, and the Anaheim elders because they knew about the sins of his sons. The sister's rebellion because who knows, they might know about the sins of his sons.

Maybe you should stop ignoring this blatantly evil and unrighteous behavior.

3. Damnable heresies taught by Witness Lee -- Ground of the Church, and MOTA

You really should stop being an apologist for these heresies.

4. Making merchandise of the saints -- Standing orders for books they don't want, signing a loyalty pledge to WL, ignoring the separation of church and ministry, etc.

5. Lawsuits that are in direct rebellion to the apostle Paul's fellowship.

You really should stop trying to defend this behavior lest you share in his judgement.

Evangelical · 12-18-2016, 05:15 PM

Drake is right you have a tendency to revert to flawed arguments, misapplying Jezebel to the US government and then to Witness Lee.

In post number 3 I said:

Jezebel represents the corruptive influences within the denominations or the local church

It is possible for Jezebel to corrupt a local church, after all Thyatira was a local church and not a denomination.

However the "elephant in the room" here is clearly the Roman Catholic church which has been recognized by many (well before Lee/Nee came along) as fitting the description of a church which tolerates Jezebel.

ZNPaaneah · 12-18-2016, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Drake is right you have a tendency to revert to flawed arguments, misapplying Jezebel to the US government and then to Witness Lee.

If it is a flawed argument then it should be simple to destroy. (My references to the US Govt were moved to the Alt discussion, since I don't want to carry on there I do not want to respond to that, if you wish, bring those comments to the alt discussion). One has to wonder why it is so difficult for you or Drake to destroy these "flawed" arguments. You are the ones who revert to WL's old and tired interpretation of Rev 2&3. It is as though neither of you can read the Bible for yourself.

To me the key question for this website and for all of us who were in the Local church or who are still active participants with that sect is what think ye of Witness Lee? Is he a man of God who taught God's word faithfully, or is he a false teacher?

I do not think it is reasonable to have a third option. You can claim that he was a man of god, taught God's word faithfully, but like all men was a sinner.

Now I have considered these two options: imperfect man of God, or false teacher.

I cannot reconcile his pattern of abusive behavior for 40 years without repentance, without confession. Think of how abusive it was, he protected adulterers and philanderers who were abusing the children of God to the extent that he would destroy innocent people, slander them, libel them, ignoring crystal clear warnings in the Bible concerning his behavior, and disregarding the damage done to the Body of Christ. Max leaves, so what, JI leaves so what, John So leaves, so what. He is the one who did not discern the Body of Christ. He is the one who stumbled the little believers. I am unable to defend his actions and am forced to conclude he is a false prophet.

But, if you disagree, go ahead, I will listen to you explain in clear language, why my reasoning is flawed. I discuss these things on the website for a reason, to see if I have made a mistake or have missed something. The only ones to suggest that I have are you and Drake and yet you provide absolutely nothing persuasive. If anything you convince me not so much that I am right, but that others who I consider to have a more extreme view are right. I would like to think that the issue was primarily with Witness Lee, others feel that the entire LC is a cult. That was not my experience, but you are doing a good job of persuading me that it is more true than I would like to believe.

Evangelical · 12-18-2016, 06:22 PM

It is not WL's interpretation alone, the connection between Catholicism and Baal/Sun worship has long been recognized in Protestantism.

Why is it OK for you to equate the US government with Jezebel but it is not OK if I say the US is Sodom? Don't you know that homosexuality was part of Baal worship? So when you say the US government is Jezebel you are really saying it is Sodom plus other things. Yet you tried your best to argue that US was not Sodom when we had that discussion. I now realize it was because you thought it was Jezebel and not Sodom ,and not because you are ignorant of what is going on in the world.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It is not WL's interpretation alone, the connection between Catholicism and Baal/Sun worship has long been recognized in Protestantism.

Why is it OK for you to equate the US government with Jezebel but it is not OK if I say the US is Sodom? Don't you know that homosexuality was part of Baal worship? So when you say the US government is Jezebel you are really saying it is Sodom plus other things. Yet you tried your best to argue that US was not Sodom when we had that discussion. I now realize it was because you thought it was Jezebel and not Sodom ,and not because you are ignorant of what is going on in the world.

When did I say it was not OK to equate the US with Sodom? I don't think anyone on this forum has denied this connection. What we have pointed out is that as a Christian who is in the world but not of the world you should expect this. Likewise, we have pointed out that the response, dictated by the Lord Jesus is to preach the gospel so that they might receive a new heart. You don't read what people actually write.

Also, I have not equated the US government with Jezebel, what I have done is equated using the US government in lawsuits by "Christians" against other Christians as something that Jezebel did. I have equated her getting the elders to accuse Naboth the Jezreelite of Blasphemy, stone him, and seize his vineyard to our present day practice of civil lawsuits for slander and libel.

It is fitting that her body becomes fertilizer in Jezreel.

Drake · 12-19-2016, 05:52 AM

ZNP)" Also, I have not equated the US government with Jezebel, ..."

Post #4.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP)" Also, I have not equated the US government with Jezebel, ..."

Post #4.

Post #4 says that one item of what Jezebel did, hiring 850 prophets is what our government does.

It also says that human government makes ruling without God a science.

Both of these are true, but that does not equate them.

I gave 4 criteria, 4 key items that distinguish Jezebel in post #96

Hiring 850 prophets was not one of the four.

My point is that Jezebel brings the worldly practice into the church.

UntoHim · 12-19-2016, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ.

NO institute of man can, or ever will, build the Body of Christ. This is why it is so very important that ALL genuine born again believers resist, at all costs, participating in the initiation, continuation or proliferation of the institutes of man. There is little doubt that the Roman Catholic Church is the epitome of "institutionalized" Christianity.

So this begs the question: Why has the Local Church of Witness Lee followed the Roman Catholic church model and modus operandi in so many major categories? In leadership structure. In policies regulating movement publications. In the creation of a system of fear among the members.

In leadership structure. Witness Lee, at least for the last 20 years of his life, had become the supreme leader of the movement. "The One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age." "The Wise Master Builder". "The Commander in Chief". "The sole Apostle of the First Order". WHAT PART OF POPE DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? Upon his death, Lee's published ministry became the Paper Pope. Although the Pope is no longer alive, his College of Cardinals, the self-titled "Blended Brothers", rule and reign in his stead, and most importantly, propagate and enforce The One Publication. Which brings us to the next aspect of the Roman Catholic church:

In policies regulating movement publications. The One Publication edict, - really nothing more and nothing less than a Papal Bull issued against those wanting to turn the movement back to making the Bible the One Publication. Furthermore, "The Ministry", AKA the teachings of and practices established by Witness Lee, serve as the Catechism of the Local Church(es). This wouldn't be such a problem, except for the fact that, just like the Roman Catholic Church, all the members are expected to imbibe every iota with the acceptance and reverence of the Word of God. This one dynamic alone has gotten the Local Church of Witness Lee labeled as a cult of Christianity more than anything else.

In the creation of fear among the members. Admittedly, this dynamic has lessened over the past couple of decades - probably because so many members have departed the movement and have gone on to lead perfectly godly, spiritually fulfilling and fruitful lives. This was is direct contradiction to the warnings of Witness Lee, and more recently, the provably antithetical cautionary claims of LSM president Benson Phillips:

Quote:

“In any case, do not leave the Lord’s recovery. I can assure you that if you go away from the Lord’s recovery, you will have no way for the process of sanctification to go forward within you. Instead, you will just enter into a bankrupt situation. I know of no one who has left the Lord’s recovery and today is a great spiritual person on the earth. The sanctification process is carried out in the Lord’s recovery”
(The Ministry Magazine Vol. 8, No. 1 Page 189)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

There is a practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians. They are symbiotic. Define that to protect the oneness. Practice that and you keep in the oneness. Deviate that and you have divisions and confusion.

The "practical church life arrangement" has been a work in progress for about 2,000 years now. I hate to break the bad news to you my friend, but neither Nee nor Lee came close to cornering the market on such an arrangement. If they had, we wouldn't be discussing such things on this forum today. But alas, there is some valor in the effort, and for this their reward is in heaven. One of the hardest sayings of the Lord Jesus was "Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead".(Matt 8:22) If perhaps Nee and Lee did "define a practical church life arrangement" (and I think, in part, they did) they were never really able to get their followers to truly keep that arrangement. In fact, the years and the decades have declared that God has moved on. The "movement" of The Local Church(es) is no longer moving..and it hasn't been for a very long time.

No doubt, there is not much of a consolation for those who have reached for the best and have fallen short, especially when your intrepid leaders have not only fallen short, they have fallen hard. The dangers and damage are then compounded many fold when the followers of these men turn them into gurus, martyrs, One Apostles, Ministers of the Age, etc, etc.

Cal · 12-19-2016, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

NO institute of men can, or ever will, build the Body of Christ. This is why it is so very important that ALL genuine born again believers resist, at all costs, participating in the initiation, continuation or proliferation of the institutes of man. There is little doubt that the Roman Catholic Church is the epitome of "institutionalized" Christianity.

While I agree with much of your post, UntoHim, I just don't agree with the sentiment that we should resist at all costs the institutes of man. Should we resist colleges, schools and hospitals? Perhaps you were just speaking of "religious" institutions. But even then what does that include? Bible colleges, seminaries, ministries, water distributors in Africa? Even the FTTA can be seen as an institute of men. So can Vacation Bible School. So can Local Church Discussions.

If we declare open war on "institutes of men" then nothing is safe. Anything can be categorized as an "institute of men" and anything can be categorized as a "work of God." Who knows for sure which is which? We can see at the extremes. But as I've said, most things don't exist at the extremes.

The problem is not that men build institutions. They always have and always will. And God actually uses some. The problem is the CLAIMS they make about their institutions in order to manipulate and hold onto members and support. Both the RCC and the LCM have claimed to be God's unique church. They are not the only ones to do this and they won't be the last. But this is where the real problem lies because this is infringing on the consciences of believers.

God gives us the freedom to follow our consciences, and if someone feels to start an "institution" who am I to say he or she is wrong? But when anyone starts to claim that their little corner of the CHURCH is the best corner or, worse, the only legitimate corner, then THAT'S when they've crossed the line as far as I'm concerned. That's when they have become a real problem.

And that's what the LCM has done, in spades, and that's why I speak out against them. If they drop their claims and their way of getting hooks into people's minds to control them, then I'll say "God bless you." Until then they are a threat not only to people, but the CHURCH in general.

This post can be viewed as my "manifesto" of why I post here.

UntoHim · 12-19-2016, 09:10 AM

Igzy,
My post was in direct response to Drake's post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ.

My response was only addressing the building of the Body of Christ.

But let me be clear, I am not against any "institutes of men" per se. In fact, as you have pointed out, most of these institutes are helpful and profitable, even to the Christian Church. Seminaries and other para church organizations would be a good example.
-

Cal · 12-19-2016, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Igzy,
My post was in direct response to Drake's post:

My response was only addressing the building of the Body of Christ.

But let me be clear, I am not against any "institutes of men" per se. In fact, as you have pointed out, most of these institutes are helpful and profitable, even to the Christian Church. Seminaries and other para church organizations would be a good example.
-

Right, I think what you meant was the institutes are just tools like anything else. They themselves cannot build the Body of Christ. Only God working through people can.

It's like saying a car can't drive to Dallas. No, the car can't, only the driver can. The car is just a tool the driver uses.

But some tools have taken over and become the reason for being. The RCC structure is such a thing, as is the LCM structure.

As the saying goes, a fanatic is someone who redoubles his effort while forgetting his aim. The LCM has lost its aim.

Ohio · 12-19-2016, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

The problem is not that men build institutions. They always have and always will. And God actually uses some. The problem is the CLAIMS they make about their institutions in order to manipulate and hold onto members and support. Both the RCC and the LCM have claimed to be God's unique church. They are not the only ones to do this and they won't be the last. But this is where the real problem lies because this is infringing on the consciences of believers.

For me personally, having lived the LC experience through good and bad times, these verses are the most definitive and instructive ...

Quote:

When the disciples heard this, they became indignant with the two brothers. But Jesus called them all over and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles dominate them, and the men of high position exercise power over them. It must not be like that among you. On the contrary, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life -- a ransom for many." (Matt 20)

Like Igzy said, human institutions are in themselves benign, they can be used for good or for evil. What distinguishes the results are the leaders. Do they serve, or do they lust for power? God Himself is very forgiving of these human institutions. History tells us that they have been used for great good, and unfortunately, for great evil. Jesus Himself never advocated for us to become activists for social change, rather He regularly (throughout scripture indeed) instructed shepherds and leaders how to serve His people.

I think if we investigated every failure of LCM leadership over the decades we would find, not readily understandable happenstance mistakes, but at their source a lust for power and control. This is what so damages God's people. The very things that the Lord repeatedly warned us about.

Cal · 12-19-2016, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I think if we investigated every failure of LCM leadership over the decades we would find, not readily understandable happenstance mistakes, but at their source a lust for power and control. This is what so damages God's people. The very things that the Lord repeatedly warned us about.

And, to get back on point a bit, that's what Jezebel represents: an abuse of power. Jezebel claimed to be someone speaking for God. If she was in the mold of the OT Jezebel, which I'm sure she was, she used seductive means to manipulate people.

All these imaginings in this thread of who or what specifically Jezebel is (RCC, US govt) seem beside the point, which is don't be seduced by manipulative teachers and leaders. Well, what's more manipulative than suggesting that one's ministry is indispensable for the completion of God's purpose and that those who ignore it are risking judgment? That's about as seductively manipulative as you can get. That's Jezebel.

This is why I always come back to the freedom of the conscience. Javertical and Drake like to repeat that "you can't have any old meeting," which, by the way, is the fallacy of the appeal to extremes. No one argues for "any old" anything. But what they are really against is anything but what they approve of, which rather than "any old thing" is actually "most things."

But the fact is, yes, just about any meeting sincerely in the name of the Lord will do. And neither Javertical or Drake are qualified or authorized to say otherwise. For them to say they are is to fall into the sin of Jezebel.

Cal · 12-19-2016, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

God Himself is very forgiving of these human institutions. History tells us that they have been used for great good, and unfortunately, for great evil.

Cases in point: The Bible clearly says that governments are instituted by God to keep order.

And Jesus gave the Pharisees credit for "sitting in the seat of Moses" and he told the Jews "to do what they tell you but not what they do." So Jesus knew that there would be religious leaders and that they would preach the word.

What he was saying was see the difference between the truth they teach and how they behave. In other words, as always, have a discerning conscience, don't be manipulated.

Unfortunately, allowing yourself to be manipulated is practically a membership requirement in the LCM. And manipulation is the calling card of Jezebel.

Jezebel, being a vain woman, surely expected nothing but praise from followers. LCM leaders are the same, which is why LCMers never criticize them. Thus are they manipulated by Jezebel.

In "fallen Christianity" however, members have the freedom to realize "this leader is a Jezebel" and follow their consciences and leave. The "uplifted LCM" doesn't allow this though. They empower Jezebel as much as possible, and members that leave are considered traitors to the lovely and perfect "lady."

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP...
You know how you want the story to end so you create a narrative using the Bible to justify your ending.

You did this twice with Jezebel in this thread. Once with equating the US governnent to Jezebel and her 850 prophets to scientists and pollsters. Then again below to Brother Lee using the same flawed argumentation.

Drake

I never equated the US government to Jezebel, what I said was that Jezebel employing 850 prophets to run the country of Israel is what the US government does. The point was not that the US government is Jezebel, the point is that Jezebel brings in worldly methods to run the church.

You think you know how the story ends so you just fill in the ending you assumed I was going to say.

I did equate Witness Lee to Jezebel but I did not use the reference to the 850 prophets, though I could have by referencing the FTTT and the use of accounting methods, etc.

No, I used the following points to equate Witness Lee to Jezebel

1. He refers to himself as a prophet of God, even the apostle who alone has the authority to appoint and fire elders. This is based on the lie he perpetrated about Watchman Nee's excommunication. His mass firing of the elders in Taipei is reminiscent of Jezebel cutting off the prophets of God. His use of PL to be the president of LSM is similar to Jezebel hiring prophets of Baal.
2. He had 450 elders sign a loyalty pledge to him, in direct opposition to the epistle of James in which he said above all not to make an oath. I consider this idolatry. Very reminiscent of the Lord's word to Elijah about those He had that "had not bowed the knee". Signing a loyalty pledge to Witness Lee means they bowed the knee to Witness Lee.
3. I also consider the standing orders, Daystar, and other business schemes to be teaching the servants of Jesus to eat things sacrificed to idols.

I appreciate that you and others might disagree. However, I consider his support of PL even at the cost of ripping the church in half, with the "Max Rebellion", "Sister's rebellion" and John Ingals fiasco to be the rotten smell that proves this is one ugly mess.

4. I also base it on the "leaven" he hid in the pure word of God -- MOTA and Ground of the church.

5. And I base it on the similarity between Jezebel getting some elders to accuse Nahor of blasphemy and then stone him to death in order to steal his vineyard to Witness Lee establishing a legal defense fund so that he could sue Christian ministries who could not afford lawsuits, drive them into bankruptcy and then bash their brains in.

Who has seduced you that you do not obey the truth? Don't you think it is important that we know who it is that did this?

I view Jezebel as the woman who hides leaven in the meal. That would cause it to ferment. You can say that the Roman Catholic Church is a big hunk of fermented or moldy cheese. That is fine. But why is the leaven that Witness Lee introduced not viewed with the same concern as the Catholic church which has little or nothing to do with you personally?

The fact that the woman "hides" the leaven indicates it is a deceitful work, difficult to discern. It is not easy to "see" leaven, but it is easy to see the effect -- the bread is puffed up, the cheese smells, etc. Surely you can see that doctrines like MOTA and Ground of the church have the effect of "puffing up" and the lawsuits give the Witness Lee sect a "stinky smell".

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

When did I say it was not OK to equate the US with Sodom? I don't think anyone on this forum has denied this connection. What we have pointed out is that as a Christian who is in the world but not of the world you should expect this. Likewise, we have pointed out that the response, dictated by the Lord Jesus is to preach the gospel so that they might receive a new heart. You don't read what people actually write.

Also, I have not equated the US government with Jezebel, what I have done is equated using the US government in lawsuits by "Christians" against other Christians as something that Jezebel did. I have equated her getting the elders to accuse Naboth the Jezreelite of Blasphemy, stone him, and seize his vineyard to our present day practice of civil lawsuits for slander and libel.

It is fitting that her body becomes fertilizer in Jezreel.

Don't you remember our discussions where you tried your darnedest to prove that the US was not Sodom? To you it was not Sodom unless there were fewer than 10 righteous people.

Now you are backtracking on what you said about the US Government and Jezebel in post #88 - you said "To me, Jezebel is the spirit and nature of the current worldly system."

I think the 850 prophets that ate at her table signifies the way we govern now. We have two kinds of "prophets", scientists and pollsters.

We bring in all kinds of experts with their charts, and tables, and predictions and prognostications, etc. We also have the political strategists, pollsters, and spin meisters.

What we don't have is a government according to our conscience. This kind of administration has been very convincingly compared to a psychopath.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Don't you remember our discussions where you tried your darnedest to prove that the US was not Sodom? To you it was not Sodom unless there were fewer than 10 righteous people.

No, but apparently you do, why don't you quote it for me or refer to the post #. Drake recently demonstrated he had misread what I said, and you also have the same penchant.

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

No, but apparently you do, why don't you quote it for me or refer to the post #. Drake recently demonstrated he had misread what I said, and you also have the same penchant.

ZNPaaneah, that suggests an issue with the way you write, it is open to misinterpretation.

#546

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?p=51438

This is a great point, what really caused God's judgement to fall on Sodom was the lack of any righteous men. God had said that if there had been 10 he wouldn't have destroyed it.

Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people.

You were hesitant to equate the US with Sodom. Not as hesitant to call it Jezebel:

"To me, Jezebel is the spirit and nature of the current worldly system."

I am not saying the worldly system is good it is clearly bad. I am saying Jezebel normally has something to do with the people of God. I don't believe the worldly system is Jezebel is correct for that reason, even though the worldly system does exemplify many of the things Jezebel represents. I would say the worldly system is influenced by Jezebel through the Roman Catholic church. I would say Protestantism has been influenced by Jezebel to a limited extent (in as much as they accept the doctrines/practices of Catholicism). But I would not say the worldly system is Jezebel.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

ZNPaaneah, that suggests an issue with the way you write, it is open to misinterpretation.

#546

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?p=51438

This is a great point, what really caused God's judgement to fall on Sodom was the lack of any righteous men. God had said that if there had been 10 he wouldn't have destroyed it.

Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people.

Do you disagree with this?

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Do you disagree with this?

Yes, to me the US is Sodom because of the widespread acceptance of homosexuality, not because of a certain number of righteous people. I think we discussed this sufficiently in that thread.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

ZNPaaneah, that suggests an issue with the way you write, it is open to misinterpretation.

#546

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?p=51438

This is a great point, what really caused God's judgement to fall on Sodom was the lack of any righteous men. God had said that if there had been 10 he wouldn't have destroyed it.

Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people.

You were hesitant to equate the US with Sodom. Not as hesitant to call it Jezebel:

"To me, Jezebel is the spirit and nature of the current worldly system."

I am not saying the worldly system is good it is clearly bad. I am saying Jezebel normally has something to do with the people of God. I don't believe the worldly system is Jezebel is correct for that reason, even though the worldly system does exemplify many of the things Jezebel represents. I would say the worldly system is influenced by Jezebel through the Roman Catholic church. I would say Protestantism has been influenced by Jezebel to a limited extent (in as much as they accept the doctrines/practices of Catholicism). But I would not say the worldly system is Jezebel.

Post 546 in which thread?

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Post 546 in which thread?

Merged Thread: Various Themes by Evangelical , easier to copy paste this:

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?p=51438

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

ZNPaaneah, that suggests an issue with the way you write, it is open to misinterpretation.

#546

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?p=51438

This is a great point, what really caused God's judgement to fall on Sodom was the lack of any righteous men. God had said that if there had been 10 he wouldn't have destroyed it.

Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people.

You were hesitant to equate the US with Sodom. Not as hesitant to call it Jezebel:

"To me, Jezebel is the spirit and nature of the current worldly system."

I am not saying the worldly system is good it is clearly bad. I am saying Jezebel normally has something to do with the people of God. I don't believe the worldly system is Jezebel is correct for that reason, even though the worldly system does exemplify many of the things Jezebel represents. I would say the worldly system is influenced by Jezebel through the Roman Catholic church. I would say Protestantism has been influenced by Jezebel to a limited extent (in as much as they accept the doctrines/practices of Catholicism). But I would not say the worldly system is Jezebel.

There is no "misinterpretation" with what I wrote concerning Sodom and the US. You disagree. That is not a misinterpretation.

You and Drake both have openly agreed with the interpretation that Jezebel includes the woman in Matt 13 who hid the leaven in the fine meal, and with the Great Prostitute, the Great Babylon in Rev 17. This is also what WL taught.

According to our point of view, there are many different countries, nations, and empires. But in the eyes of God, the entire human government from Nimrod to Antichrist is Babylon. This human government—Babylon—has always done three things: rebel against God, exalt man, and worship idols (Gen. 11:4, 9). To worship idols is actually to worship the devil who is behind the idols. Wherever we may go, we will see that human government rebels against God, exalts man, and worships idols. (Life-Study of Daniel, Chapter 4, Section 1)

How is this any different from what I said?

"The entire human government from Nimrod to Antichrist is Babylon" -- read Rev 2

Pergamon -- worldly church -- where Satan's throne is

Thyatira -- know the deep things of Satan.

Against the suffering church there was the synagogue of Satan (2:9); with the worldly church there was the throne of Satan (2:13); and within the apostate church there are “the deep things of satan.” The religion of the synagogue, the world under Satan's throne, and the philosophy of the satanic mysteries are all used by Satan to damage and corrupt the church. (Life-Study of Revelation, Chapter 13, Section 3)

The more you speak the less I think you actually know Witness Lee's ministry.

Drake · 12-19-2016, 06:11 PM

ZNP,

Suggest reading the footnotes in the Recovery Version on Revelation 17 & 18 for additional clarity on what Brother Lee taught about the two aspects of Babylon.

In short Jezebel refers to the religious aspect in chapter 17 that is Mystery Babylon. . The LS Daniel excerpt you quoted refers to the material Babylon, the Great Babylon in Chapter 18.

Both have their own place and significance but are not interchangeable.

Thanks
Drake

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

There is no "misinterpretation" with what I wrote concerning Sodom and the US. You disagree. That is not a misinterpretation.

You and Drake both have openly agreed with the interpretation that Jezebel includes the woman in Matt 13 who hid the leaven in the fine meal, and with the Great Prostitute, the Great Babylon in Rev 17. This is also what WL taught.

According to our point of view, there are many different countries, nations, and empires. But in the eyes of God, the entire human government from Nimrod to Antichrist is Babylon. This human government—Babylon—has always done three things: rebel against God, exalt man, and worship idols (Gen. 11:4, 9). To worship idols is actually to worship the devil who is behind the idols. Wherever we may go, we will see that human government rebels against God, exalts man, and worships idols. (Life-Study of Daniel, Chapter 4, Section 1)

How is this any different from what I said?

The more you speak the less I think you actually know Witness Lee's ministry.

The misinterpretation is about what we believe you said which you deny.

You said US was not Sodom in our previous discussions. You have denied this (or forgotten you said this) in this thread when you said

"When did I say it was not OK to equate the US with Sodom? I don't think anyone on this forum has denied this connection."

In this thread you have also drawn a connection between worldly systems of government and Jezebel. This you seem to have also denied in recent posts.

As Drake said, you have confused Mystery Babylon with material Babylon.

There is a relationship between the two - the Roman Catholic church is the religious arm of the Roman Empire. But we should draw the distinction between the forces of evil at work in the church such as Jezebel, and the forces of evil in the worldly governments.

The distinction should be drawn because in Revelation, Jesus was concerned about Jezebel in the church in Thyatira. He was not concerned about the Roman Empire. It does not say "you have tolerated the Roman Empire and the worldly governments". It is not about material Babylon but Mystery Babylon. There is a relationship between the two but the distinction should be made.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP,

Suggest reading the footnotes in the Recovery Version on Revelation 17 & 18 for additional clarity on what Brother Lee taught about the two aspects of Babylon.

In short Jezebel refers to the religious aspect in chapter 17 that is Mystery Babylon. . The LS Daniel excerpt you quoted refers to the material Babylon, the Great Babylon in Chapter 18.

Both have their own place and significance but are not interchangeable.

Thanks
Drake

I am familiar with that and have read it.

My point is that "rebelling against God, worshipping idols, and exalting man" is the spirit of Jezebel and is the spirit of the world.

1. Cutting off the prophets of God = rebelling against God.

2. Telling Ahab that she will give him the vineyard of Naboth = exalting man.

3. The elders and nobles of the city did as Jezebel said = exalting man over God.

4. Teaching my servants to commit fornication and to eat things sacrificed to idols is to worship idols.

The basic theme is the worldly system, she might be a variation on the theme, calling herself a prophetess, while others claim to be atheists. But it is still the basic spirit of the world that has operated since Babel.

They "both have their significance and place but are not interchangeable". What does this have to do with anything I have written or quoted? I made my connection to Babel. My quote from Witness Lee was from the Life Study of Daniel on Babel. Do you guys read what I have written?

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The misinterpretation is about what we believe you said which you deny.

You said US was not Sodom in our previous discussions. You have denied this (or forgotten you said this) in this thread when you said

"When did I say it was not OK to equate the US with Sodom? I don't think anyone on this forum has denied this connection."

Enough already! Produce the quote. The only quote you have produced did not equate the US with Sodom. It is not a misinterpretation if you can't read english. It doesn't matter what you believe I said, what matters is what I did say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

In this thread you have also drawn a connection between worldly systems of government and Jezebel. This you seem to have also denied in recent posts.

I have not denied a single word that I have written, I have denied your feeble attempt to interpret it. I did not equate Jezebel to the US, I did equate Jezebel to the spirit of the worldly system. I have provided a very clear quote from Witness Lee where he also made this equation. If you don't like it, say so. If you disagree, fine. But quit accusing me of being deceitful. Provide the quote otherwise it is slander.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

As Drake said, you have confused Mystery Babylon with material Babylon.

I have connected Babel to Babylon. You disagree fine. But you have no credibility with me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

There is a relationship between the two - the Roman Catholic church is the religious arm of the Roman Empire. But we should draw the distinction between the forces of evil at work in the church such as Jezebel, and the forces of evil in the worldly governments.

The distinction should be drawn because in Revelation, Jesus was concerned about Jezebel in the church in Thyatira. He was not concerned about the Roman Empire. It does not say "you have tolerated the Roman Empire and the worldly governments". It is not about material Babylon but Mystery Babylon. There is a relationship between the two but the distinction should be made.

Wow, spectacular reasoning. You have a woman in Matthew 13 that hides leaven in meal.

Whatever is not of the Spirit or of Christ is leaven. Leaven is something added to make things easy to eat. Without leaven, bread would be hard, and it would be difficult to eat and digest. (Life-Study of Matthew, Chapter 38, Section 4)

It is said that this is like the kingdom of heaven. It doesn't say it is like the material babylon or the religious babylon. But we know it is deceitful. Could it be the deceit and idolatry of a religious system? Sure. Could it be the deceit and idolatry of a worldly, material system? Sure. Is the material babylon of "the spirit of Christ"? If not it is leaven.

But according to your wonderful interpretation we don't need to worry about the material Babylon infecting the church? Where did you get that from? James says that pure religion is to keep yourself unspotted from the world. Is that the religious world or the material world?

Is this really how you teach the Bible? This is unbelievable.

In the church as recorded in Rev 2 you see the synagogue of Satan, then the throne of Satan, then the deep things of Satan.

Satan's worldly system is attacking and now infecting the church.

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Enough already! Produce the quote. The only quote you have produced did not equate the US with Sodom. It is not a misinterpretation if you can't read english. It doesn't matter what you believe I said, what matters is what I did say.

I have not denied a single word that I have written, I have denied your feeble attempt to interpret it. I did not equate Jezebel to the US, I did equate Jezebel to the spirit of the worldly system. I have provided a very clear quote from Witness Lee where he also made this equation. If you don't like it, say so. If you disagree, fine. But quit accusing me of being deceitful. Provide the quote otherwise it is slander.

I have connected Babel to Babylon. You disagree fine. But you have no credibility with me.

Wow, spectacular reasoning. You have a woman in Matthew 13 that hides leaven in meal. It is said that this is like the kingdom of heaven. It doesn't say it is like the material babylon or the religious babylon. But we know it is deceitful. Could it be the deceit and idolatry of a religious system? Sure. Could it be the deceit and idolatry of a worldly, material system? Sure.

But according to your wonderful interpretation we don't need to worry about the material Babylon infecting the church? Where did you get that from? James says that pure religion is to keep yourself unspotted from the world. Is that the religious world or the material world?

Is this really how you teach the Bible? This is unbelievable.

I have already quoted you saying:
"Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people."

Then in this thread you said:
"When did I say it was not OK to equate the US with Sodom? I don't think anyone on this forum has denied this connection. "

Well FYI you denied that connection in our previous discussion on the US and Sodom and I don't recall anyone on this forum agreeing with me that the US is Sodom in that discussion. So both of your statements are false.

Re: "I did not equate Jezebel to the US, I did equate Jezebel to the spirit of the worldly system. "

You seemed to be referring to the US government as being part of the worldly system when you said:

I think the 850 prophets that ate at her table signifies the way we govern now. We have two kinds of "prophets", scientists and pollsters.

We bring in all kinds of experts with their charts, and tables, and predictions and prognostications, etc. We also have the political strategists, pollsters, and spin meisters.

What we don't have is a government according to our conscience. This kind of administration has been very convincingly compared to a psychopath.

"I have connected Babel to Babylon. You disagree fine. But you have no credibility with me."

I agree there is a connection between material and mystery Babylon. I disagree with you focusing on material Babylon to divert attention away from the Roman Catholic church and blaming Witness Lee for things that are nothing like what Catholicism is and has done.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I have already quoted you saying:
"Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people."

Then in this thread you said:
"When did I say it was not OK to equate the US with Sodom? I don't think anyone on this forum has denied this connection. "

Well FYI you denied that connection in our previous discussion on the US and Sodom.

Fair enough. There is a spirit of Sodom, you can surely see this operating in the US, no doubt. There is also the city of Sodom which God judged. You cannot equate any city in the US to Sodom in the sense of asking for God to judge the city unless there is an overwhelming number of unrighteous people, as described in Genesis. This is why I asked for you to provide the quote that I could look at. The context of my comment was a reference to you calling on God's judgement of the US. You take my comments out of context, then accuse me of saying something I didn't say. I never said that the spirit of Sodom is not operating in the US, instead I said that this is what you should expect in the world. I said that we made this statement when we were baptized that the world is condemned.

Yes you "quoted" me but made it impossible for me to find the quote or deal with it in a clear way looking at the context. How is it that only you are unable to give a clear reference, everyone else is able to give the thread and post so that it is easy to find. You provided a link which did not work.

Does this clear up your misunderstanding? There is a spirit of Sodom and there is a city of Sodom. There is a judgement of God on Sodom. The context of my quote saying "you can only equate the US with Sodom if you can find a city without ten righteous people in it" was a response to your call on God to judge the US as he judged Sodom.

You accused me of intentionally being misleading, now I am accusing you. Go back to your quote, look at the context and admit that this quote was in fact a response to your call on God to judge the US. If you don't do this it proves you are intentionally trying to cause misunderstandings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Re: "I did not equate Jezebel to the US, I did equate Jezebel to the spirit of the worldly system. "

You seemed to be referring to the US government as being part of the worldly system when you said:

I think the 850 prophets that ate at her table signifies the way we govern now. We have two kinds of "prophets", scientists and pollsters.

We bring in all kinds of experts with their charts, and tables, and predictions and prognostications, etc. We also have the political strategists, pollsters, and spin meisters.

What we don't have is a government according to our conscience. This kind of administration has been very convincingly compared to a psychopath.

Yes, I was referring to human government, it could have been Russia, it could have been China, it could have been the US. I never "equated the US with Jezebel" which is what you accused me of doing.

This is now the second time I am saying this, Jezebel introduces the worldly system into the church. How are you still confused? Is it intentional?

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 07:43 PM

Here is the complete quote from Post #546

This is a great point, what really caused God's judgement to fall on Sodom was the lack of any righteous men. God had said that if there had been 10 he wouldn't have destroyed it.

Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people.

It was a reply to someone else who pointed out that God's judgement on that city was based on the lack of any righteous men in the city.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

In "fallen Christianity" however, members have the freedom to realize "this leader is a Jezebel" and follow their consciences and leave. The "uplifted LCM" doesn't allow this though. They empower Jezebel as much as possible, and members that leave are considered traitors to the lovely and perfect "lady."

This is a very interesting point. I imagine it wasn't always this way. Perhaps Ohio or someone who knows church history very well can explain this. What happened? We know that the Catholic church at the time of Martin Luther made it very difficult to leave, almost impossible. But was it the same for the denominations? What happened to loosen their grip?

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Fair enough. There is a spirit of Sodom, you can surely see this operating in the US, no doubt. There is also the city of Sodom which God judged. You cannot equate any city in the US to Sodom in the sense of asking for God to judge the city unless there is an overwhelming number of unrighteous people, as described in Genesis. This is why I asked for you to provide the quote that I could look at. The context of my comment was a reference to you calling on God's judgement of the US. You take my comments out of context, then accuse me of saying something I didn't say. I never said that the spirit of Sodom is not operating in the US, instead I said that this is what you should expect in the world. I said that we made this statement when we were baptized that the world is condemned.

Yes you "quoted" me but made it impossible for me to find the quote or deal with it in a clear way looking at the context. How is it that only you are unable to give a clear reference, everyone else is able to give the thread and post so that it is easy to find. You provided a link which did not work.

Does this clear up your misunderstanding? There is a spirit of Sodom and there is a city of Sodom. There is a judgement of God on Sodom. The context of my quote saying "you can only equate the US with Sodom if you can find a city without ten righteous people in it" was a response to your call on God to judge the US as he judged Sodom.

You accused me of intentionally being misleading, now I am accusing you. Go back to your quote, look at the context and admit that this quote was in fact a response to your call on God to judge the US. If you don't do this it proves you are intentionally trying to cause misunderstandings.

Yes, I was referring to human government, it could have been Russia, it could have been China, it could have been the US. I never "equated the US with Jezebel" which is what you accused me of doing.

This is now the second time I am saying this, Jezebel introduces the worldly system into the church. How are you still confused? Is it intentional?

I never accused you of being intentionally misleading at all.

So the thread in question is: Local Church Discussions > Oh Lord, Where Do We Go From Here?>Merged Thread: Various Themes by Evangelical

This seems to hinge on the interpretation of the word "equate" .

You used the word equate in both threads, there and here.

In one you said we cannot equate the US with Sodom because of the 10 righteous people thing.

Here you said we can equate the US with Sodom because of the spirit of Sodom.

So it is like this:

US equates to Sodom because of the spirit of Sodom.
US does not equate to Sodom because there are more than 10 righteous people in it.

To me this is saying that the US is like Sodom before God's judgement came. That is, there was a period in which God allowed Sodom to exist and do what it wanted until the threshold of 10 righteous men was reached, then judgement came. This is the situation with the US today.

Drake · 12-19-2016, 08:01 PM

ZNP) "They "both have their significance and place but are not interchangeable". What does this have to do with anything I have written or quoted? I made my connection to Babel. My quote from Witness Lee was from the Life Study of Daniel on Babel. Do you guys read what I have written?"

ZNP,

Because....

You applied Brother Lee''s quote about the material Babylon in the LS Daniel to the religious Babylon signified by Jezebel in our conversation. You saw the word "Babylon" and it was interchangeable in your argument. By conflating the two you misapply what Brother Lee meant.

Then you accuse Evangelical and yours truly that it is we who do not understand what Brother Lee taught. So I respectfully suggested that you read the footnotes for Revelation 17 & 18. You said you did. Okay, you did but you missed the meaning of the footnote in Revelation 17:5 which states clearly:

51 Mystery here indicates that Babylon the Great in this chapter is not the material Babylon in ch. 18 but the religious one. The religious Babylon, the apostate church, is truly mysterious in what she is, in what she practices, and in what she teaches.

If you want to make a complaint about PL, a lawsuit, MOTA, meany buns Blendeds, etc. you can do that without cutting up the Scriptures like so many puzzle pieces. Sorry ZNP, but the picture puzzle you present does not look right. There are pieces that have been snipped, others pounded into place that clearly belong somewhere else, and for some the colors don't align. I assure you that up to this point I read your notes carefully but i do not see the scriptural support for them. Sometimes I think we might have an understanding but then you repeat the same error.

Drake

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I never accused you of being intentionally misleading at all.

So the thread in question is: Local Church Discussions > Oh Lord, Where Do We Go From Here?>Merged Thread: Various Themes by Evangelical

This seems to hinge on the interpretation of the word "equate" .

You used the word equate in both threads, there and here.

In one you said we cannot equate the US with Sodom because of the 10 righteous people thing.

Here you said we can equate the US with Sodom because of the spirit of Sodom.

So it is like this:

US equates to Sodom because of the spirit of Sodom.
US does not equate to Sodom because there are more than 10 righteous people in it.

Can you understand that the spirit of Sodom can be likened to the legalization of gay marriage by the Supreme court. The Supreme Court represents the entire US, so by legalizing gay marriage they have legitimized the comparison of the US with the Spirit (the law) of Sodom.

But that the city of Sodom refers to a city of people.

When God rained fire down on Sodom he rained it down on a city with people who were killed, not on a fleshly spirit that permeates the world.

The United States is "the world", not a "Christian country". There may be quite a few Christians in this country, maybe even a majority, the Lord knows, but it is not a Christian country in the sense that Israel was the nation of God.

Because it is the world we should expect that all of the sins of the world are here, and that spirit of disobedience operates in them. But God chooses not to exercise His judgement at this time because his people, like grains of wheat, are growing and are not ready to reaped. If he roots up the tares He might kill some of the wheat as well.

So, yes, He judged Sodom in the OT, but only after determining there weren't 10 righteous people. In the end he only pulled out 3.

Read the quote that you claim is giving you so much confusion, it is talking about the city of Sodom, not the spirit of Sodom.

ZNPaaneah · 12-19-2016, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

ZNP) "They "both have their significance and place but are not interchangeable". What does this have to do with anything I have written or quoted? I made my connection to Babel. My quote from Witness Lee was from the Life Study of Daniel on Babel. Do you guys read what I have written?"

ZNP,

Because....

You applied Brother Lee''s quote about the material Babylon in the LS Daniel to the religious Babylon signified by Jezebel in our conversation. You saw the word "Babylon" and it was interchangeable in your argument. By conflating the two you misapply what Brother Lee meant.

Then you accuse Evangelical and yours truly that it is we who do not understand what Brother Lee taught. So I respectfully suggested that you read the footnotes for Revelation 17 & 18. You said you did. Okay, you did but you missed the meaning of the footnote in Revelation 17:5 which states clearly:

51 Mystery here indicates that Babylon the Great in this chapter is not the material Babylon in ch. 18 but the religious one. The religious Babylon, the apostate church, is truly mysterious in what she is, in what she practices, and in what she teaches.

Perhaps we disagree on what the Bible says.

I understand that there is a worldly system that began with Cain. This was manifested in Babel. This city was full of idols. Ultimately we see this as "the great Babylon" in Rev 17 and 18 as a counterfeit for the New Jerusalem.

The spirit that operates is the spirit of disobedience. We can see this operation in the story of Jezebel. She is the personification of this evil system.

I agree with WL that she can be seen in the woman that hid the leaven in the meal. I also agree with WL that she can be seen in the harlot that sits on the beast and that this same spirit operates in her daughters.

So, when someone says "what is the spirit of the worldly system", what does that mean? I would say that you can see what that means by looking at Jezebel.

You want to say that Jezebel does not refer to the material world.

Once again I would refer you to the key criteria.

1. Teach idolatry -- Christmas is an example. Is Christmas part of the religious world or the material world? I say both. If you don't agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

2. Eat things sacrificed to idols -- Christmas is a good example. Is the "eating things sacrificed to this idol" part of the religious world or the material world? I say it is both. If you don't agree fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

3. Do they claim that Santa Claus is a saint, a prophet, a magical being? I say they do. Both the worldly system as well as the religious system. If you don't agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

4. I feel they substitute Santa for Jesus. I feel this is true of both the worldly Babylon and the Religious Babylon. If you don' agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

5. I feel they seduce the Lord's servants to commit fornication in their worship. I feel this is true of both the worldly Babylon and the Religious Babylon. If you don't agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

I do not disagree with any of the correlation made with the Roman Catholic church. It is all valid. What I do disagree with is your assertion that Jezebel must be limited to that historical example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

If you want to make a complaint about PL, a lawsuit, MOTA, meany buns Blendeds, etc. you can do that without cutting up the Scriptures like so many puzzle pieces.

You are making a mock of sin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

Sorry ZNP, but the picture puzzle you present does not look right. There are pieces that have been snipped, others pounded into place that clearly belong somewhere else, and for some the colors don't match. I assure you that up to this point I read your notes carefully but i do not see the scriptural support for them. Sometimes I think we might have an understanding but then you repeat the same error.

Drake

Well perhaps we'll be able to get things into focus. I am very clear that you have accused me of error, but do not see any error that you have identified.

Evangelical · 12-19-2016, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Perhaps we disagree on what the Bible says.

I understand that there is a worldly system that began with Cain. This was manifested in Babel. This city was full of idols. Ultimately we see this as "the great Babylon" in Rev 17 and 18 as a counterfeit for the New Jerusalem.

The spirit that operates is the spirit of disobedience. We can see this operation in the story of Jezebel. She is the personification of this evil system.

I agree with WL that she can be seen in the woman that hid the leaven in the meal. I also agree with WL that she can be seen in the harlot that sits on the beast and that this same spirit operates in her daughters.

So, when someone says "what is the spirit of the worldly system", what does that mean? I would say that you can see what that means by looking at Jezebel.

You want to say that Jezebel does not refer to the material world.

Once again I would refer you to the key criteria.

1. Teach idolatry -- Christmas is an example. Is Christmas part of the religious world or the material world? I say both. If you don't agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

2. Eat things sacrificed to idols -- Christmas is a good example. Is the "eating things sacrificed to this idol" part of the religious world or the material world? I say it is both. If you don't agree fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

3. Do they claim that Santa Claus is a saint, a prophet, a magical being? I say they do. Both the worldly system as well as the religious system. If you don't agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

4. I feel they substitute Santa for Jesus. I feel this is true of both the worldly Babylon and the Religious Babylon. If you don' agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

5. I feel they seduce the Lord's servants to commit fornication in their worship. I feel this is true of both the worldly Babylon and the Religious Babylon. If you don't agree, fine, but don't accuse me of being misleading.

I do not disagree with any of the correlation made with the Roman Catholic church. It is all valid. What I do disagree with is your assertion that Jezebel must be limited to that historical example.

You are making a mock of sin.

Well perhaps we'll be able to get things into focus. I am very clear that you have accused me of error, but do not see any error that you have identified.

Generally in the world there is a "spirit of lawlessness" that the Bible speaks of. Jezebel is possibly one form of that. The spirit of lawlessness manifests as the Jezebel spirit, Balaam etc. But in Revelation Jesus attributes Jezebel to the church at Thyatira and does not mention the worldly system at all. Jezebel is thought to be applied to a faction within the church.

Ellicot's commentary says

A large number of respectable critics regard Jezebel as a name applied to a faction, not as belonging to an individual. It seems best to view the name as symbolical, always remembering that the Jezebel spirit of proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of—and perhaps a proud contempt for—“legalism,” and followed by open immorality, has again and again run riot in the churches of God.

Evangelical · 12-20-2016, 02:21 AM

For an example of Jezebel...

Hear the testimony of an Ex-Roman Catholic Nun, Sister Charletta and the atrocities she experienced at the hands of the wicked and barbaric priests of the Roman Catholic Whore of Babylon.

https://www.spreaker.com/user/overcomingthedragon/the-vatican-its-dark-dark-dark-secret

"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." - Revelation 18:4

ZNPaaneah · 12-20-2016, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Generally in the world there is a "spirit of lawlessness" that the Bible speaks of. Jezebel is possibly one form of that. The spirit of lawlessness manifests as the Jezebel spirit, Balaam etc. But in Revelation Jesus attributes Jezebel to the church at Thyatira and does not mention the worldly system at all. Jezebel is thought to be applied to a faction within the church.

Ellicot's commentary says

A large number of respectable critics regard Jezebel as a name applied to a faction, not as belonging to an individual. It seems best to view the name as symbolical, always remembering that the Jezebel spirit of proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of—and perhaps a proud contempt for—“legalism,” and followed by open immorality, has again and again run riot in the churches of God.

Wow, if I read this post I would think that you support this interpretation.

yet when I read this post of yours (107):

It is not WL's interpretation alone, the connection between Catholicism and Baal/Sun worship has long been recognized in Protestantism.

Why is it OK for you to equate the US government with Jezebel but it is not OK if I say the US is Sodom? Don't you know that homosexuality was part of Baal worship? So when you say the US government is Jezebel you are really saying it is Sodom plus other things. Yet you tried your best to argue that US was not Sodom when we had that discussion. I now realize it was because you thought it was Jezebel and not Sodom ,and not because you are ignorant of what is going on in the world.

you can only conclude that you feel the US government is Sodom (which you have stated) and therefore Jezebel.

So let's address what you have said.

1. Jezebel is definitely a manifestation of the spirit of lawlessness, not "possibly".

2. Your quote from Ellicot does not support your assertion that Jezebel does not mention the worldly system at all.

It seems best to view the name as symbolical, always remembering that the Jezebel spirit of proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of—and perhaps a proud contempt for—“legalism,” and followed by open immorality, has again and again run riot in the churches of God.

Is not the authority which legalized gay marriage in the US despite this being contrary to majority opinion, using the Supreme court to override a democratically elected congress, isn't that a "proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of -- and perhaps a proud contempt for -- legalism and followed by open immorality."?

3. Regarding your question "why is it ok for you to equate the US government with Jezebel" has been answered twice before. I never equated the US government with Jezebel, what I said was that Jezebel uses worldly methods to rule the church. Now a spirit of disobedience does pervade the US as it is the world, and this spirit does manifest itself very often as a spirit of Jezebel.

For example, during WWII 1% of California farmland was owned by Japanese farmers, but these farms produced 40% of California crops. One of the motivations behind the internment camps in California was that people coveted those farms.

We’re charged with wanting to get rid of the Japs for selfish reasons. We might as well be honest. We do. It’s a question of whether the white man lives on the Pacific Coast or the brown men. They came to this valley to work, and they stayed to take over. They offer higher land prices and higher rents than the white man can pay for land. They undersell the white man in the markets. They can do this because they raise their own labor. They work their women and children while the white farmer has to pay wages for his help. If all the Japs were removed tomorrow, we’d never miss them in two weeks, because the white farmers can take over and produce everything the Jap grows. And we don’t want them back when the war ends, either. (Morton Grodzins, Americans Betrayed Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949)

ZNPaaneah · 12-20-2016, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Drake is right you have a tendency to revert to flawed arguments, misapplying Jezebel to the US government and then to Witness Lee.

In post number 3 I said:

Jezebel represents the corruptive influences within the denominations or the local church

It is possible for Jezebel to corrupt a local church, after all Thyatira was a local church and not a denomination.

However the "elephant in the room" here is clearly the Roman Catholic church which has been recognized by many (well before Lee/Nee came along) as fitting the description of a church which tolerates Jezebel.

I thought, based on your posts, the elephant in the room was Christmas and gay marriage? Clearly both of these exhibit the spirit if Jezebel in the material Babylon having a corrupting influence on the servants of Jesus (see my posts 138 and 141). Both of these threaten to leave the servants of Jesus "spotted by the world" contrary to James definition of "pure religion".

Ohio · 12-20-2016, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

For an example of Jezebel...

Hear the testimony of an Ex-Roman Catholic Nun, Sister Charletta and the atrocities she experienced at the hands of the wicked and barbaric priests of the Roman Catholic Whore of Babylon.

https://www.spreaker.com/user/overcomingthedragon/the-vatican-its-dark-dark-dark-secret

"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." - Revelation 18:4

Is that any worse than the carnage inflicted by Phillip Lee while running LSM?

"Come out of her My people!"

Does that make the LCM part of the Whore of Babylon?

Ohio · 12-20-2016, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

A large number of respectable critics regard Jezebel as a name applied to a faction, not as belonging to an individual. It seems best to view the name as symbolical, always remembering that the Jezebel spirit of proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of—and perhaps a proud contempt for—“legalism,” and followed by open immorality, has again and again run riot in the churches of God.

Great quote!

I saw this occur before, during, and after the GLA quarantines.

LSM exhibited the Jezebel spirit in full display -- proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of—and perhaps a proud contempt for—“legalism,” and followed by open immorality, has again and again run riot in the churches of God.

Cal · 12-20-2016, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This is a very interesting point. I imagine it wasn't always this way. Perhaps Ohio or someone who knows church history very well can explain this. What happened? We know that the Catholic church at the time of Martin Luther made it very difficult to leave, almost impossible. But was it the same for the denominations? What happened to loosen their grip?

I grew up in the Catholic church 50 years ago. I remember the assumption was if your weren't Catholic you couldn't "go to heaven." I'm not sure what the official stance was, but that was a general assumption. But I think most people in their hearts knew there was someone wrong with such a idea. I had protestant friends. One time I went to my friend's Baptist church. It was strange and different, but I still felt it was valid. But in general there was more separation and less fellowship between denominations.

All that has changed. What changed? I think the Lord has just been working. Also, people are smarter and biblical knowledge has much improved. Tolerance is much more appreciated these days, and snobbery is more looked down on. both culturally and spiritually. I think it has just reached a critical mass where if you push your flavor of Christianity too much you are seen as sectarian. In short people just want Jesus Christ now, they want a theology that teaches them how to walk with God and they want a community which is loving and supportive.

The LCM, for all its superficial talk about oneness, is behind the times. This is due to several factors: (1) an intransigent ecclesiology they can't question, (2) a need to feel special and (3) a realization that if they ever admit it's okay to leave their little enclave that people will flock away in droves.

So they continue to employ the wiles of Jezebel to cajole and scare people into staying. It's the only way they can keep the numbers up.

UntoHim · 12-20-2016, 07:45 AM

Ok guys, I think it's time to put miss Jezebel to bed. ZNP and Evangelical, if you want, go ahead and make some closing statements.
-

ZNPaaneah · 12-20-2016, 10:04 AM

We are not ignorant of Satan’s devices

None of us should be ignorant of Jezebel’s devices, and all of us should overcome her.

I think when we consider Jezebel we must remember Jezreel. The Lord prophesied that her body would be used as fertilizer in Jezreel. This is where Nahor’s vineyard was that she stole.

When you approach them concerning this sin they will despise you and make a mock of sin, like Witness Lee’s mockery that Daystar was when the saints lost their virginity. But Jezebel’s death, being torn apart by dogs and strewn around Jezreel shows that God was not laughing.

Jezreel is also associated with Jeroboam. When you rebel against God’s word and are disobedient you open the door for such evil and ugly rulers in the church. Jeroboams sins were similar in rebellion to Witness Lee's lawsuit and loyalty pledge. The loyalty pledge is clearly forbidden by James who says above all do not make an oath. It is similar to setting up an idol. The lawsuit was not merely rebellion but they seduced saints to pay for the legal defense fund and then went so far as to have churches support this fund out of their tithes so that those giving to the church were not even aware that they were giving for this. In this way WL seduced the Lord's servants to eat things sacrificed to idols.

Why, what did she offer? 850 prophets with heathen business practices. Think about Christmas — Christmas songs, Christmas TV shows, Christmas movies, Christmas decorations, etc. All of this helps make merchandise of the saints, eating things sacrificed to idols. Or think about the "ministry" which provides each church with a ready made "message". Video tapes, written word, trainings, conferences, and fellowship with other churches. Speakers at conferences, etc.

Jesus likened this kind of deceit to a woman hiding leaven in meal. It may appear to be hidden, but the result is that they are “puffed up” like leavened bread, and you will often have the stinky smell of moldy cheese. Doctrines like MOTA and Ground of the church act to puff people up. Lawsuits and Fraudulent schemes and lascivious men give you the stinky smell that should be a dead give away that you have Jezebel in your midst.

Evangelical · 12-20-2016, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Is that any worse than the carnage inflicted by Phillip Lee while running LSM?

"Come out of her My people!"

Does that make the LCM part of the Whore of Babylon?

I do believe the local churches can be affected by Jezebel , I said that in one of my earlier posts on this topic. Was not Thyatira a genuine local church? (not a denomination).

However I cannot say whether or not these matters you referred to are or are not worse, because I came into the Recovery after all this happened. Probably I should read some more threads on here to accurately assess what actually happened.

Evangelical · 12-20-2016, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow, if I read this post I would think that you support this interpretation.

yet when I read this post of yours (107):

It is not WL's interpretation alone, the connection between Catholicism and Baal/Sun worship has long been recognized in Protestantism.

Why is it OK for you to equate the US government with Jezebel but it is not OK if I say the US is Sodom? Don't you know that homosexuality was part of Baal worship? So when you say the US government is Jezebel you are really saying it is Sodom plus other things. Yet you tried your best to argue that US was not Sodom when we had that discussion. I now realize it was because you thought it was Jezebel and not Sodom ,and not because you are ignorant of what is going on in the world.

you can only conclude that you feel the US government is Sodom (which you have stated) and therefore Jezebel.

So let's address what you have said.

1. Jezebel is definitely a manifestation of the spirit of lawlessness, not "possibly".

2. Your quote from Ellicot does not support your assertion that Jezebel does not mention the worldly system at all.

It seems best to view the name as symbolical, always remembering that the Jezebel spirit of proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of—and perhaps a proud contempt for—“legalism,” and followed by open immorality, has again and again run riot in the churches of God.

Is not the authority which legalized gay marriage in the US despite this being contrary to majority opinion, using the Supreme court to override a democratically elected congress, isn't that a "proud, self-constituted authority, vaunting claims of superior holiness, or higher knowledge, linked with a disregard of -- and perhaps a proud contempt for -- legalism and followed by open immorality."?

3. Regarding your question "why is it ok for you to equate the US government with Jezebel" has been answered twice before. I never equated the US government with Jezebel, what I said was that Jezebel uses worldly methods to rule the church. Now a spirit of disobedience does pervade the US as it is the world, and this spirit does manifest itself very often as a spirit of Jezebel.

For example, during WWII 1% of California farmland was owned by Japanese farmers, but these farms produced 40% of California crops. One of the motivations behind the internment camps in California was that people coveted those farms.

We’re charged with wanting to get rid of the Japs for selfish reasons. We might as well be honest. We do. It’s a question of whether the white man lives on the Pacific Coast or the brown men. They came to this valley to work, and they stayed to take over. They offer higher land prices and higher rents than the white man can pay for land. They undersell the white man in the markets. They can do this because they raise their own labor. They work their women and children while the white farmer has to pay wages for his help. If all the Japs were removed tomorrow, we’d never miss them in two weeks, because the white farmers can take over and produce everything the Jap grows. And we don’t want them back when the war ends, either. (Morton Grodzins, Americans Betrayed Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949)

Drake and I have been making the distinction that the Bible (and WL) use the term Jezebel in a specific way. That being, the term Jezebel is used in reference to that which affects the people of God from within, not from without. The church is mainly concerned with religious Jezebel as opposed to "worldly Jezebel". Actually the term "worldly Jezebel" does not make sense, because the story of Jezebel only applies to God's people, not the surrounding nations.

Just so we are clear - I believe there is no such thing as an actual spirit of Jezebel going around doing all these things. It is just a manifestation of Satan. Jezebel is a metaphor for a particular set of vices or manifestations of Satan. Just as Sodom is. We all believe Satan is behind it and that is the important thing.

Ohio · 12-20-2016, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I do believe the local churches can be affected by Jezebel , I said that in one of my earlier posts on this topic. Was not Thyatira a genuine local church? (not a denomination).

However I cannot say whether or not these matters you referred to are or are not worse, because I came into the Recovery after all this happened. Probably I should read some more threads on here to accurately assess what actually happened.

I was taught by Lee to condemn the Catholic church for what their ancestors did a thousand years ago, so how could W. Lee complain about you researching his history?

Evangelical · 12-20-2016, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I was taught by Lee to condemn the Catholic church for what their ancestors did a thousand years ago, so how could W. Lee complain about you researching his history?

Indeed, how can he, now that he is dead.

ZNPaaneah · 12-20-2016, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I was taught by Lee to condemn the Catholic church for what their ancestors did a thousand years ago, so how could W. Lee complain about you researching his history?

Is this really his argument? He condemns the catholic church for things that took place 500-1,000 years ago, but has no idea about the things that took place in Witness Lee's sect are worse or not because "he came in after they happened"?

I think one thing these guys don't understand is that you never have any idea about these things that are happening until many years later. When you are there at the time you are told that "the responsible brothers" are taking care of it.

Ohio · 12-20-2016, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Is this really his argument? He condemns the catholic church for things that took place 500-1,000 years ago, but has no idea about the things that took place in Witness Lee's sect are worse or not because "he came in after they happened"?

I think one thing these guys don't understand is that you never have any idea about these things that are happening until many years later. When you are there at the time you are told that "the responsible brothers" are taking care of it.

Actually, back in those days, no brother was acting responsibly, and no responsible brother was acting as he should.

Evangelical · 12-20-2016, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Is this really his argument? He condemns the catholic church for things that took place 500-1,000 years ago, but has no idea about the things that took place in Witness Lee's sect are worse or not because "he came in after they happened"?

I think one thing these guys don't understand is that you never have any idea about these things that are happening until many years later. When you are there at the time you are told that "the responsible brothers" are taking care of it.

Actually the story I posted about Sister “Charletta” happened around the 1940's -50's. Catholicism has not changed any.

Ohio · 12-20-2016, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Actually the story I posted about Sister “Charletta” happened around the 1940's -50's. Catholicism has not changed any.

Some posters here feel the same way about the LCM.

Evangelical · 12-20-2016, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Some posters here feel the same way about the LCM.

I know that, but the claim that the Catholics are condemned for what they did 1000 years ago is misconstrued.

ZNPaaneah · 12-20-2016, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Actually the story I posted about Sister “Charletta” happened around the 1940's -50's. Catholicism has not changed any.

My point is that you have no problem judging the Catholic church, which you were not in, for things that took place 50, 60, 70 years ago, yet when asked about the Witness Lee sect which you are in you claim ignorance and the inability to judge because these things happened 10 or 20 years before you were there.

I do not understand that.

Also, either you or Drake have referred to the sins of Popes that occurred 500-1,000 years ago. That is not misconstrued. Your condemnation of the Catholic church is not based on a single post.

ZNPaaneah · 12-20-2016, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Drake and I have been making the distinction that the Bible (and WL) use the term Jezebel in a specific way. That being, the term Jezebel is used in reference to that which affects the people of God from within, not from without. The church is mainly concerned with religious Jezebel as opposed to "worldly Jezebel". Actually the term "worldly Jezebel" does not make sense, because the story of Jezebel only applies to God's people, not the surrounding nations.

Evangelical and Drake,

So Jezebel feeding 850 pagan prophets at her table "affected God's people from within" hence it is different from the worldly Babylon depicted in Rev 18.

Typical gobbledygook from you.

How about Christmas, does this affect God's people from within? How about a heathen song writer who writes a Christmas song, or a fleshly rock and roll group that performs the Christmas song, or the hollywood studio that makes a Christmas movie, or the actors and actresses, sacred prostitutes, who perform the movie? Do they affect the church from within? Do they seduce God's servants to eat things sacrificed to idols?

If they do affect the church from within are they somehow distinct from the Hollywood industry and Music industry that are part of the worldly Babylon?

How about tele-evangelists. How are they not part of and affected by the television industry?

There is an Episcopal church in NYC that runs a billion dollar fund. How is the running of that fund, which invests in the stocks and bonds that trade on the NYSE, NASDAQ, Chicago mercantile, etc. not affected by the world?

Please answer. Thanks.

12-09-2016, 07:46 PM	#1
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP, Revelation provides a direct charaterization of the woman Jezebel. She leads people into spiritual fornication as the real Jezebel did with the nation of Israel. Was she Israeli, a member of the beloved people of God? What does spiritual fornication mean as applied to the church? Drake Jezebel has been coming up more and more in the posts. It seems that this is becoming far too important to just give a brief answer to. I have come to realize that this is not referring to some obscure experience that only a few Christians in "degraded Christianity" experience, but rather something that all Christians need to overcome.

12-09-2016, 08:04 PM	#2
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- taking the sins of Jeroboam to a new level 1Kings 16:31 And it came to pass, as if it had been a light thing for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, that he took to wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and went and served Baal, and worshipped him. You can't understand who Jezebel is unless you first understand the sins of Jeroboam, because Jezebel essentially takes the sins of Jeroboam to another level. After King Solomon died his son was a poor heir and made a major blunder with the people. This opened the door for Jeroboam to set up another kingdom with the ten tribes of Israel, dividing Israel into two kingdoms. This division appears to be of God. However, it might have turned out as a temporary rebuke with the nation reconciling after a few months had it not been for Jeroboam setting up golden calves as idols and commanding the nation to ignore God's word. This is referred to as "the sins of Jeroboam". So Jeroboam told the Israelites that it was the two golden calves that brought them out of Egypt, Ahab takes this to the next level, ditching God altogether, taking a heathen wife and serving Baal and worshipping Baal. This is how we are first introduced to Jezebel. She takes the sins of Jeroboam to a new level, and she is fully associated with serving and worshipping Baal.

12-09-2016, 11:06 PM	#3
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Jezebel represents the corruptive influences within the denominations or the local church, things of a idolatrous and sometimes sexual nature. It is something for every believer to overcome no matter what denomination or not-denomination they attend. I read that here: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-dece..._pagan-temples

12-10-2016, 03:58 PM	#10
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. 1Kings 19:1-2 And Ahab told Jezebel all that Elijah had done, and withal how he had slain all the prophets with the sword. Then Jezebel sent a messenger unto Elijah, saying, So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not thy life as the life of one of them by to-morrow about this time. All of the prophets are killed as the result of a single act of God. Think about that, the experts spend billions for years on a levy system for the Mississippi, then as a result of a single act of God like Katrina the whole world realizes they have been lied to for years. Or think about the Haiti earthquake which exposed all the shoddy workmanship, government corruption, etc. Or who could forget the ridiculous growth projections made when Witness Lee rolled out the New Way. Now al that is left to complete this is for fire to fall from heaven. 2 Tim 3:13 But evil men and impostors shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. She hired evil men and impostors for the purpose of deceiving the nation of Israel, but in the end she thought Elijah was just like one of them. She spent her life deceiving and in the end she was deceived, unable to discern a prophet of God from a false prophet.

12-11-2016, 12:03 PM	#15
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. 1Kings 18:4 for it was so, when Jezebel cut off the prophets of Jehovah, that Obadiah took a hundred prophets, and hid them by fifty in a cave, and fed them with bread and water.) The only ones that would stand against Jezebel would be the prophets of God. So a key part of her strategy was not to just put 850 of her own prophets into place but to also cut off the prophets of God. We saw this with Hitler when he took power, assassinating those who would stand against him. You can learn about the leader by those he appoints as well as those he goes after to cut off. This is why we are so concerned with the attack from Witness Lee towards all Christianity and all Christians. He effectively "cut off" any prophets other than LSM approved prophets. As a result there were no voices to stand against WL.

12-10-2016, 06:49 AM	#4
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. 1Kings 18:19 Now therefore send, and gather to me all Israel unto mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the Asherah four hundred, that eat at Jezebel’s table. Jezebel fed (hired) 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah. This was not because she was generous or charitable, there is no evidence of this. What she did is exactly what our leaders do today. They will hire a cabinet, experts, consultants, data specialists, pollsters, prognosticators, people to give them security briefings, economic briefings, with charts and tables predicting future outcomes (that is prophecy) They advise leaders on how to speak to the public (that is prophecy). They get focus groups and determine what words to speak, how to spin it, how to sell it. They spy on enemies and advise how to destroy them. Jezebel made ruling without God a science.

12-10-2016, 06:59 AM	#5
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. The basic sin of Jeroboam is that he established a worship center that was not in the place appointed by God. This opened the door to all the other sins. God prescribed the place, time, and methods for worshipping God. Jeroboam set up a his own place and method. God said in this way, and Jeroboam said, that way will do just as well. He disregarded God's prescription of worship for one of his own preference. Drake

12-11-2016, 07:15 PM	#16
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Many here are confusing how we worship with where we congregate. They think it is okay to worship God wherever they are, which is not the point of Jesus's words to the Samaritan woman. His point was about how we worship, not where we congregate. The Samaritan woman thought a person worshiped by going to a certain place. Jesus said no, we worship in Spirit and truth, not by going to a certain place. This does not mean however, that we can congregate wherever we like, that where we congregate is not important. Jesus was not saying we can hold church a church service in a Hindu temple, for example. If we worshiped there, we may be in Spirit and truth, but our location would be wrong. Jesus and the disciples also cared about the location of where they were. Just as it is not appropriate to behave in certain ways in certain places, it is not appropriate to worship God in certain locations. A person may worship in Spirit and truth in a Catholic church. Their worship is right but their location is wrong. Similarly, a person may worship in Spirit and truth in a brothel, casino, etc - their worship is right but their location is wrong. Some places are just not good for worship - such as a construction site. Jesus is an example of one who worshiped in Spirit and truth. However this does not mean he worshiped wherever he liked. Some may say "did no tJesus hang out with sinners?". Yes he did, for the purpose of fulfilling his ministry, but when it concerned his worship to the Father, He liked to frequent certain places over others: Luke 5:16 "But Jesus Himself would often slip away to the wilderness and pray.". Jesus did not go into the house of the prostitute and choose to have his worship time there. Jesus as one who kicked the money changers out of the temple, would not have worshiped in a place filled with idols (a Catholic church, for example). Jesus and his disciples went to the synagogue to worship as they were Jews. In the New Testament period Christians worshiped "in the temple and from house to house". (Acts 5:42). Suppose a group of Christians decided to "meet in the name of Jesus" at a brothel. It would not be appropriate and not pleasing to God.

12-13-2016, 04:30 AM	#34
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. 1Kings 21:11 And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who dwelt in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, according as it was written in the letters which she had sent unto them. 1Kings 21:15 And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money; for Naboth is not alive, but dead. Jezebel has the spirit of a vulture. Jesus said "where the vultures are gathered together there will the corpse be". This is the situation at the Lord's coming. On the one hand we have had great success with the scientific and technological revolutions, so much so that it will be like "the lightening flashes in the East and shines to the West" with our modern telecommunications, fiber optic cables, internet, etc. On the other hand no one has solved the issue of human government. The only one worthy to be Lord is Jesus.

12-13-2016, 11:20 PM	#46
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Igzy) "But clearly the temple was not the only place of worship. The Jews established synagogues, which Jesus attended reverently. Thus the strict idea that the temple was the only proper place of worship is an error." Synagogues were not considered places of worship as in the worship in the temple. They were places of study, prayer, teaching, and community service but never alternatives to the worship associated with the temple. Equating the synagogues with the temple in terms of worship to God is a serious error. Not even the Jews did that and they would know the difference. Jeroboam established a place of worship in Dan as a replacement for the place of worship ordained by God in Jerusalem. I don't disagree that we worship God in spirit and truth in every moment wherever we are for our bodies are the temple of the Lord and we have the Lords presence continually. Yet both the Lord and the apostle Paul revealed that we are to assemble corporately and in so doing there is prescription, not a free for all, and not an option whether to assemble or not, and not to assemble according to our own design or preferences. Therefore, if we care about the Lords interest we will understand all the details He has ordained concerning corporate worship as did the Israelites who also followed the details of the worship related to the temple in Jerusalem. Some who did not follow the exact prescription for worship in the temple died. Drake

12-14-2016, 05:54 AM	#52
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP)"Jesus has clearly equated this one place with "spirit and truth". That is the one place where we are to worship, make sacrifices and celebrate the feasts." ZNP, Okay, let's take your doctrine to its logical conclusion. If the one place and only place to worship is in spirit and truth then why meet together ever? Since every believer can worship in spirit and truth 24X7 then there is no need for any assembly of believers. If the one place to worship is spirit and truth then Paul had no basis to say " forsake not the assembling of yourselves together". Why didn't Paul understand that we do not need to assemble together since we believers all worship in spirit and truth? Drake

12-14-2016, 06:47 AM	#58
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Ohio) "I could make a stronger case that the body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him." Ohio, Therfore, you could make the strongest case that the Body of Christ is built up by all the members obedient to the Head and abiding in Him without ever meeting together. And your basic assumption in that proposal is that obedience to the Head and abiding in Him does not include assembling together. Since the Christians in Acts met daily they probably put too much emphasis on meeting and were extremists too? Drake

12-14-2016, 07:38 AM	#61
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP)"Then you can also see that this building up of the Body will result in the church as the family of God, Temple of God, Kingdom of God, Bride of Christ, one New Man, and the Warrior. No individual Christian could ever represent or express any of these entities on their own. Likewise you could never express any of these entities unless you are meeting in the name of Jesus and He is in your midst. He will only be in your midst if you are meeting in spirit and truth. What does that mean? You have one God and Father who is over all, one Lord, one faith, one Spirit, one baptism. If you claim you have one Lord yet do not obey his command then you are not meeting in spirit or truth of Jesus being the one Lord. If you claim you have one God and Father who is over all, and then allow something else to act as a trump card to over rule our God and Father then you are not meeting in spirit and truth. If you claim you have one faith and then add something to that one faith or remove something from that one faith, then you are not meeting in spirit and truth. If you claim you have one baptism as an entrance into this kingdom and then you require something else for Christians to "enter" or else do not recognize their legitimacy based solely on this one baptism, then that is not meeting in spirit and in truth. This is not an inferred teaching of the NT, it is the black and white teaching that is reiterated in many different ways by every apostle and writer of the NT." ZNP, The part above I mostly agree with. I say "mostly" because it is one side of the truth but not the whole truth. There is the practice also. On the one hand we are, according to Ephesians, seated with Christ in the heavenlies. However, we also live on the earth in space and time and in Corinth or some other physical locale. Both are equally relevant. Yet, in your argument you conflate the two in the wrong way. You argue that the physical interferes with the spiritual when actually there is a symbiotic relationship between them. For instance, to experience the reality of the ones in Ephesians you cannot do this in a closet. You must have a practical way to experience the ones because though you have the position in Christ in Ephesians you need the experience while living in Corinth. On the other side, if you do not have the spiritual reality then the physical will be vanity. The building of the Body of Christ requires both the spiritual reality and the physical practice. It is not as you, Igzy, and Ohio similarly argue that the physical is not needed or that the Body of Christ can be built without the assembling of ourselves together, or that just any old way of meeting will suffice. Drake

12-14-2016, 07:57 AM	#63
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP) "Jezebel set up a governing principle that short circuited God out of the equation. In her reign God was not "over all". Jesus was not Lord. If you wanted an entrance into her kingdom you kowtowed to her request to stone Naboth. They did not meet in spirit and in truth, they met in malice and deceit." ZNP, Jezebel was Gentile prostitute. You talk about her as though she held some legitimate position in God's administration. Jezebel represents all that is opposed to God. She was Satanic and represents that still today. Don't misapply who she is and what she represents else you will miss the point. The book of Revelation provides that insight. Drake

12-14-2016, 11:01 AM	#66
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. 1Kings 21:23 And of Jezebel also spake Jehovah, saying, The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the rampart of Jezreel. If this judgement were understood allegorically we consider certain types of newspapers to be "rags" and the paparazzi to behave like a pack of wild dogs. When you have a scandal on the front page of the newspaper it is as though the dogs are licking that persons blood. We see this happen all the time, every month for sure, perhaps every week, sometimes every day. Jezebel is not some strange, once in a thousand years experience. Dealing with her is part of our everyday experience. My point is not that she has a legitimate position, but that she does have a very big influence on our daily life. There is a lot more to this picture, you have the vineyard of Naboth that she seized, you have the use of stoning and false accusation of Blasphemy, and you have this reference to the rampart of Jezreel. You don't need a black and white teaching concerning her because there are plenty of black and white teachings that condemn what she does both in the OT and NT.

12-14-2016, 11:56 AM	#67
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP) "Jezebel refers to a Queen in Israel who had a major influence on her husband, the king of Israel." Jezebel was not the queen in that her coming together with Ahab was fornication. God does not acknowledge the marriage between His people and the Gentiles as proper. She calls herself a prophetess but was not a prophetess by God's definition. Through a marital arrangement, an official fornication arrangement in this case, this Gentile woman assumes authority to exercise over God's people. By calling herself a prophetess she teaches God's people to commit fornication which leads to idolatry. She confuses the words of God and the people of God. Ahab the king was joined to the world through Jezebel. That is why I think you are giving too much credit to Jezebel as if she were a legitimate queen in God's eyes. The woman who leavens in Matthew 13, the Jezebel in Thyatira in Revelation 2, and the Harlot in Revelation 17 provide insight into this woman's character and what she represents. She is not a part of God's elect she is only calling herself such, teaching as if she were, and assuming authority to exercise over God's genuine people. Drake

12-14-2016, 12:16 PM	#68
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP) "Neither Ohio, Igzy or myself have argued that the physical is not needed, nor have we argued that both spiritual and physical are not needed. If we thought that we wouldn't even be in the discussion. Our discussion demonstrates that we do care about both." You are arguing about the same thing just in varying degrees and angles. However, it was not fair to cite Igzy and Ohio while addressing your comments so my apologies for doing that. I will address their comments in their own context. ZNP)"What we have noticed is that the so called "ground of the oneness" taught by Witness Lee does absolutely nothing to protect or keep the oneness and is actually used in practice as a tool to condemn and divide Christians." My observation is that in practice you continually retreat to the ones in Ephesians as the base of your argument. When the discussion is about the biblical definition of meetings you assert that Brother Lee's teaching is at odds with the ones in Ephesians. When in fact, Brother Lee's interest is for the building of the Body of Christ and the churches, the procedure in this age, is for the building. The Catholic Church cannot build the Body of Christ. Being alone cannot build the Body of Christ. The clergy laity system cannot build the Body of Christ. There is a practical church life arrangement in the New Testament that is completely congruent with the ones in Ephesians. They are symbiotic. Define that to protect the oneness. Practice that and you keep in the oneness. Deviate that and you have divisions and confusion. Drake

12-14-2016, 01:02 PM	#70
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Ohio)" Even Bill Lawson on that promotional message debunks that assertion. Have you heard?" If it is relevant post it here. Drake

12-14-2016, 08:46 PM	#74
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. The differences between passover and what they did has lead some to conclude that it was more of a chavurah than a seder. Or a chavurah with clear symbolism relating it to the passover.

12-14-2016, 09:51 PM	#76
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. They did not choose those places out of free choice but out of necessity because of persecution. Even those choices indicate specific meeting places rather than meeting wherever it pleased them.

12-14-2016, 10:08 PM	#77
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Evangelical)"The only time I have gotten sick from church was from a potluck dinner." It was the pot stickers wasn't it? I knew it. Almost went for them but went for the lasagna instead. Drake

12-15-2016, 08:55 AM	#85
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP Since you knew that is not what I said why did you ask me if that is what I said? Drake

12-15-2016, 01:14 PM	#87
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP, Does the mention of Jezebel in the Old and New Testament have any greater significance to you than a lawsuit? If so, what? Drake

12-15-2016, 06:26 PM	#89
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP I understand better what you saying now. However, the governments of the world are in place according to God's ordination. The time of the Gentiles was revealed to Daniel. Not until the Lord returns will that change. Paul reiterates this when he says we need to be subject to government authorities and he also appealed to Caesar showing that he accepted that authority. Jezebel was something different. She brought God's people into fornication and idolatry. Though it is not wrong to say that she represents the spirit and nature of the current worldly system, it is imprecise to equate her to the current government of the USA. Rather, she represents a worldliness that is related to idolatry. There really is only one entity that fits the description of Christian in name, speaking for God (she calls herself a prophetess), and ultimately aligns with but eventually is destroyed by AntiChrist. That is the Catholic Church, not the US government. Drake

12-16-2016, 06:01 AM	#91
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Jezebel was the daughter of a pagan just as Christian Rome was the daughter of pagan Rome. Jezebel called herself a queen. Queen of Heaven and Queen of apostles is a title given to the Virgin Mary by Roman Catholics. Jezebel was engaged in witchcraft, idolatry and various other things, which a number of Popes and others had also engaged in. The Roman Catholic cathedrals of Europe are filled with superstitions, idols, and magical symbols. Roman Catholicism worships various images and idols just like Jezebel did. Roman Catholicism has utilized secular powers against the true Christians: "as Jezebel stirred up Ahab against good and faithful men, is has this church stirred up the secular powers, emperors, kings, and princes, against the true followers of Christ:" (Gill bible commentary). Just like Jezebel killed the genuine people of God, Roman Catholicism has killed true and genuine Christians throughout the past centuries. None of these things seem to fit the USA - the USA has never killed true and genuine Christians in the name of God, and neither is the USA a religious entity. However, that is not to say that the USA is not influenced by the Roman Catholic church, the USA could be seen as a country that tolerates Jezebel. The US may be in league with Jezebel, but Jezebel is a distinct entity. The goal of the Catholic church has never been to build the body of Christ - only its own empire. It is one of the false religions of the world along with Buddhist, Hindu etc. If one travels to a buddhist ,hindu or moslem country there is often a Catholic church , even in countries where genuine Christians are persecuted or shunned, Catholicism is readily accepted.

12-16-2016, 06:03 AM	#92
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP) "Wow, what happened to Witness Lee's sect? When I was there in the late 70s and 80s and 90s we were taught to read the Bible based on our experience. We were taught that every verse of the Bible was for us. Your doctrine basically says that all this bad stuff and judgement, that is for the Catholic church, not us. I completely disagree. Yes, if you wanted to associate Thyatira with one "church" then sure, the Catholic church is the best fit. But my experience is that every believer must deal with Balaam and Jezebel, regardless of whether or not you are in the Catholic church. It is far too convenient and self serving to assume that part of the Bible doesn't speak to you." ZNP, Of course the Lord may speak to us through every scripture. For instance, reading Revelation 2:23 the Lord may impress us that He is the One who has the ability to and will search our hearts and minds. He is the One that is qualified and will repay us according to our deeds. He may show me that my posts are deeds and He will assess them and repay me according to the thoughts, intents, and what I type. However, that is not how you are applying the Word of God as demonstrated here in this thread. Rather, you are as you say above reading "the Bible based on your experience". You read the Bible and apply and interpret it according to your experience. That becomes a filter. Then the kind of Bible you have is based on the kind of person you are. Also, you apply it to others and not yourself. Though the Lord may speak to us and enlighten us when we read the Bible there are also truths. Those truths are not changeable and we cannot apply them anyway we like, certainly not according to our experience. For instance, you have misapplied Jezebel as the US government. Nor are the 850 prophets who eat at her table symbols of scientists and pollsters. Drake

12-16-2016, 02:34 PM	#94
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. I believe Jezebel specifically refers to pagan idolatry and so forth. It also includes murderous intent towards true believers and an upside down authority of female over male (such as putting the woman Mary above Christ). Kinds of idolatry such as "I love my car" is not Jezebel... Jezebel can represent the corruption of any part of Christianity due to pagan influences throughout the ages. Afterall, what is Christmas, Easter etc other than a pagan influence, coming from Catholicism. I like this article by Professor Walter J. Veith which provides scholarly credence to the view: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception-Revelation_Thyatira_Jezebel_pagan-temples

12-16-2016, 11:13 PM	#95
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Sometimes it helps to consider what sort of pagan influences we are talking about in relation to Jezebel and see some pictures. So I provide some websites with pictures below. Jezebel deceived God's people to worship Baal who was the sun god. In Catholic cathedrals there are various symbols pointing to the ancient religions and in particular worship of the sun god. This is explained here: The round disc in the crescent moon was a symbol of ancient Babylon, and is found in all the ancient religions. In Catholic cathedrals, these symbols are very prominent, often depicting a round form of mother and child within the crescent moon. The rebirth of the sun god was celebrated by the eating of round bread in Babylonian times, and was common in Mithraism and Osiris worship. Historian Alexander Hislop says this: And here, in a so-called Christian Church, a brilliant plate of silver, “in the form of the SUN,” is so placed on the altar, that everyone who adores at the altar must bow in lowly reverence before that image of the “SUN.” Whence, I ask, could that have come, than from the ancient SUN-worship, or the worship of Baal? And when the wafer is placed so that the silver “SUN” is fronting the “round” wafer, whose "roundness" is so important an element in the Romish Mystery, is only another symbol of Baal, or the sun, what can be the meaning of it, but to show to those who have eyes to see that the “Wafer” itself is only another symbol of Baal.i i. Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons (New Jersey: Loizeauz Brothers, 1959): 120-121. http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception_paganism_Catholic_mass_silver For pictures to verify the connection between Catholicism and Paganism, see here: http://www.end-times-prophecy.org/roman-catholic-sun-worship-eucharist.html Various other pagan symbols are described here: http://romancatholicbeliefs.org/roman-catholic-church-pagan-god-symbols/ I also found this a helpful read: http://www.charismamag.com/blogs/the-plumb-line/23245-queen-of-may-the-spirit-jezebel-is-hiding-behind-these-altars If we were to consider the question of who or where is Jezebel today, the religious institution which fits that description the best is the Roman Catholic church. Of course, this does not mean any individual Christian or group is not in danger of following the same path, nor does it excuse idolatry in general which may take various forms. There are many different kinds of idolatry yet the one related to Jezebel specifically must be the Catholic church. Of all the kinds of idolatry this one is the most dangerous as it substitutes genuine Christianity for a counterfeit. That is, it not only replaces God but also deceives a person into thinking the idol is God. People think they are worshiping God but instead are worshiping the counterfeit sun-god. It also stirs up genuine believers of God to kill other genuine believers - the Catholic church is responsible for the deaths of many over past history. We should remember that with the Jezebel is also an Ahab. Without Ahab, Jezebel has no power in the church. The ones who defend the Catholic church are like Ahab's giving Jezebel free reign. Genuine Christianity has its roots in Judaism. Counterfeit Christianity has its roots in paganism.

12-17-2016, 03:58 PM	#96
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Great. The Bible says several things about Jezebel we can all agree on: 1. She calls herself a prophetess -- so she presents herself as some sort of religious leader. Cultic leader. 2. She both teaches and seduces -- her form of teaching involves psychological ploys that play on people's fantasies, lusts, greed, etc. 3. She specifically teaches the servants of Jesus to commit fornication, that is to have another Lord other than Jesus. This is idol worship. 4. In addition to this she convinces these servants to eat things sacrificed to idols. Financially support this idolatrous practice. Now it may be true that we can see this very clearly in the history of the Catholic church, but why should we limit this form of deceit to the Catholic church? There is nothing in the Bible that says we should. If Witness Lee did these four things then why wouldn't you diagnose this as being the same spirit?

12-17-2016, 10:26 PM	#97
Nell Admin/Moderator Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 2,055	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. As an aside, I've noticed that regardless of the topic, many times the discussion turns to the "ground of locality" (GOL?) topic, as this one has below. Quite a few years ago in Houston when I first began to meet with the LC, I heard Benson Phillips share the following: "If we concentrate on Christ, the church will come out. If we concentrate on the church, nothing will come out." Has a ring of truth, huh? I'm not sure that he would make that statement today, but he can't "un-say" it now. Maybe it was prophetical because I certainly can't see a golden lampstand anywhere. In fact, all the "church talk", including Witness Lee's church talk, has not brought forth the promised results. On the other hand, Paul told us "that I may know Him." I think that's the best idea yet. We don't really need to worry about "doing church" right. If we know the Lord, if we follow Him and obey His voice, if we repent for our sins and keep right relationships with the members of the body, then Christ will build His church and it will be revealed for all to see. The "Ground Of Locality" doctrine is like a song with one note. It's promoted like a "be all, end all". There may be a few on this forum who agree on one side or the other but it's doubtful that anyone will be convinced to switch sides. Even if there is agreement of some sort, to what end? To use Benson's phrase, has the church "come out"? I don't see it. I remember the old hymn "On Christ the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand. All other ground is sinking sand." Back to Jezebel... Nell

12-18-2016, 05:15 PM	#105
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Drake is right you have a tendency to revert to flawed arguments, misapplying Jezebel to the US government and then to Witness Lee. In post number 3 I said: Jezebel represents the corruptive influences within the denominations or the local church It is possible for Jezebel to corrupt a local church, after all Thyatira was a local church and not a denomination. However the "elephant in the room" here is clearly the Roman Catholic church which has been recognized by many (well before Lee/Nee came along) as fitting the description of a church which tolerates Jezebel.

12-18-2016, 06:22 PM	#107
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. It is not WL's interpretation alone, the connection between Catholicism and Baal/Sun worship has long been recognized in Protestantism. Why is it OK for you to equate the US government with Jezebel but it is not OK if I say the US is Sodom? Don't you know that homosexuality was part of Baal worship? So when you say the US government is Jezebel you are really saying it is Sodom plus other things. Yet you tried your best to argue that US was not Sodom when we had that discussion. I now realize it was because you thought it was Jezebel and not Sodom ,and not because you are ignorant of what is going on in the world.

12-19-2016, 05:52 AM	#109
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP)" Also, I have not equated the US government with Jezebel, ..." Post #4.

12-19-2016, 06:11 PM	#127
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. ZNP, Suggest reading the footnotes in the Recovery Version on Revelation 17 & 18 for additional clarity on what Brother Lee taught about the two aspects of Babylon. In short Jezebel refers to the religious aspect in chapter 17 that is Mystery Babylon. . The LS Daniel excerpt you quoted refers to the material Babylon, the Great Babylon in Chapter 18. Both have their own place and significance but are not interchangeable. Thanks Drake

12-19-2016, 07:43 PM	#133
ZNPaaneah Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 7,105	Re: Jezebel -- why we should know who she is. Here is the complete quote from Post #546 This is a great point, what really caused God's judgement to fall on Sodom was the lack of any righteous men. God had said that if there had been 10 he wouldn't have destroyed it. Equating the US with Sodom could only be done if you could argue that in any given city we had less than 10 righteous people. It was a reply to someone else who pointed out that God's judgement on that city was based on the lack of any righteous men in the city.