The gospel of salvation

aron · 10-24-2008, 08:21 AM

I am interested in the process of salvation, as presented in the Bible. For me it came to the fore when Timotheist presented his "Heaven and Hellenism" thread of how the pseudo-christian concepts of Heaven and Hell have emerged and changed over time due to non-biblical, primarily Greek influences.

I am not interested in ideas of Heaven or Hell so much as what lies in between, i.e. the process of salvation. Heaven seems to me to be a conceptual, future 'destination', whereas what I am concerned with right now is the journey of faith. My contact with christianity and its teachings is in line with Timotheist's proposal that they can become destination-oriented, heaven-fixated, which distracts them from the things of today. Secondly, they are touched with non-biblical influences which have accrued over time. Timotheist was good enough to point some of this out.

I am not trying to mirror him, however, in looking at the idea of salvation as it has progressed over time in its various adherents, christian and otherwise. I would rather look at what the Bible says. I think a historical review is useful; it is even essential at some point to see "how we got to here". But at the same time I have neither time nor intellectual resources to do so and thus will concentrate on the teachings of the Bible.

"...I buffet my body and make it my slave, lest perhaps having preached to others, I myself may become disapproved." ~1 Cor. 9:27

Then to chapter 10: "For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.....but with most of them God was not well pleased, for they were strewn along in the wilderness." ~vv. 1 - 5.

My thesis is that the christian experience, presented in the Bible, is not merely to believe into Jesus and be loosed from the pangs of Hell. The christian experience is to be placed into a pool of hopeful applicants, a few of whom will be selected as "overcomers", or use what terminology or imagery that you will. The Bride, The Millennial Kingdom, The Wedding Feast.

Whatever the imagery, it augers for the christian experience as not an arrival at some sought-for condition (i.e. heaven) but rather the initiation of a process which will hopefully one day place the recipient in the special status of 'approved'. This is versus First Corinthians chapter 9 verse 27, where the believer is unfortunately 'disapproved'.

I know some christians say this is teaching a kind of purgatory. I saw a website "bcbsr dot com" where the author raises the "P" word. He says the Nee/Lee teachings confuse 'disapproved believers' who are under dispensational punishment with what are actually unbelievers getting eternally condemned.

But Moses fell in the wilderness, and he is there with Christ on the mountain in transfiguration (Matt ch. 17). So Moses did not make it into the "Good Land", and was disapproved, yet did not end up in flames for eternity with the devil and his angels. There seems to be some "in between" that Paul is referring to when he mentions "disapproved" in chapter 9, verse 27. Chapter 10, verse 6 says "These things occurred as examples to us..." so the "falling in the wilderness" must be a warning to christians, not to unbelievers.

That is my take, anyway. First Corinthians 9 & 10 forces me to consider the place in between "Heaven and Hell". Which is where I am today, working out my own salvation, with fear and trembling (cf Philippians 2:12). And I do have some serious challenges to Lee's teaching on this "place between", which I shall hopefully address shortly, as time permits. Peace to all.

aron · 10-28-2008, 10:42 AM

Ephesians 2:8,9 says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works that no one should boast."

Revelation 22:12 says, "Behold, I come quickly, and My reward is with Me to render to each one as his work is."

One verse says salvation is by grace, not of works, and the other verse says a reward is coming to each one of us according to our works. It seems that "salvation" and "reward" are different things. Salvation is not according to works, and reward is according to works.

Now, most of what Timotheist refers to as the "Mainstream Gospel" crowd would ascribe to this. They recognize, for example, the parable of the talents. One faithful servant got jurisdiction over ten cities because his talents were invested wisely; another got five cities because he gained half as much for his labor (Luke chapter 19; vv 11-27). The reward is commensurate with the works. This is in full accordance with Revelation 22:12, above.

But what about the other side; what about "negative" compensation for negative works? First Corinthians chapter 10, as cited in the previous post, says "all came out of Egypt...all passed through the sea...all were led for forty years in the wilderness, fed manna every morning, visited with pillar of fire and pillar of smoke...but with most of them God was not pleased..."

Is it possible that at the end of our christian journey the righteous God will be "not pleased" with us? God is merciful, yes; it is by His mercy that I was taken out of the pool of blaspheming sinners and placed into the pool of christian race-runners. Salvation is by faith, it is a gift from God. But this gift includes a race. This gift includes a master who leaves me with talents and expects a return on His investment. The Mainstream Gospel seems to say (I am paraphrasing my years of exposure here, pardon the simplification) that the "reward" for works goes from zero and up; it is all positive. No negatives involved. But I say that God is not only merciful, He is also righteous; if we have negatives involved in our works, there will be negatives involved in compensation.

Luke 12: 47, 48: "That slave who knew his master's will and did not prepare or do according to his will, will receive many lashes; but he who did not know, yet did things worthy of stripes, will receive few lashes. To everyone to whom much has been given, much will be expected..." This also is in full accordance with Revelation 22:12, and it is on the negative side.

Some may say this refers to sinners in eternal torment, but it doesn't read that way to me. If you are in eternal punishment, what is the difference between "few" and "many" lashes? I strike a man once per hour for eternity, he gets an infinite number of smacks. If I strike a man once per day for eternity, he also gets an infinite number. There is no "few" and "many" with infinity. There is a dispensational aspect to these verses. And they are on the "negative" side of the "reward" ledger.

aron · 10-29-2008, 05:47 AM

One day I was with a brother, watching a video of a Witness Lee message. WL was standing behind a lectern and talking about something, I don't remember what. Evidently the subject included some kind of the "negative recompense" I have been discussing in my previous two posts, because at one point, Lee said, "There is a dark room. Go there." He was paraphrasing the "righteous master" condemning the "unrighteous servant" who had squandered his stewardship. I don't remember the exact context. But I indelibly remember the words: "There is a dark room. Go there."

I remember it because when speaking those words he simultaneously made a jabbing motion, palms down, fingers extended, like he was pushing garbage off the surface of a table. Like he was poking someone in the ribcage, pushing them away. And I remember it also because both I and the brother with me both laughed nervously. My companion said, "Wow." And we could hear the audience murmer and stir uncomfortably.

I think Lee was a master at crowd control. He would pause, then whirl suddenly. He would slowly draw out intonations: "Weellllll....", then puncture the silence with a forceful word. He would gaze out over the assembly with a look of happy expectation, snapping his head back and forth, birdlike. And he would make jabbing motions with his hands and arms, using them as extensions of his words, to give them more force.

We all have mannerisms; I am not singling out Lee here. But his were for control, as were many of his teachings. This brother, I believe, had serious "control issues". And his "dark room" teachings were a glaring and pernicious example of this.

I don't see where in the Bible that this "dark room" existed. But in Lee's universe, if you didn't overcome, you went into the dark room. I believe he was deliberately vague about this, because it gave him power over the listeners. It was the "boogie man" he could wave in front of the huddled sheep, that if they didn't follow the "New way", the "God-ordained way", which he was naturally the mouthpiece of, then it's "Off to the dark room for you". I don't remember hearing him say that it was for one thousand years, but that was the impression I got. It was the thought in my head for years. "If I am not subject to the elders who are (naturally) subject to Brother Lee I get tortured in a dark room for 1,000 years. If I'm not "one" with the current "move" of "the Body" then it's off to beatings and unimaginable horrors for a thousand years."

This is worse than the Purgatory of Catholicism, in some ways. At least you could make a large cash payment and get out of purgatory. Why, even your unrighteous uncle, or cousin, could get sprung, if you had cash enough! The Sistine Chapel was going up and the Pope needed dough. Remember Johannes Tetzel? "When the coin in the offering box rings, the soul to heaven springs!" Well, with Lee, you got a lifetime of indentured servitude, hoping to avoid the dark room. No cash payment was big enough to get you out.

Lee was deliberately vague, because it suited his ends. But he was wrong, I believe. The Bible shows us how to move, to get ourselves out of darkness. And you don't need Witness Lee or the Local Churches. You just need the truth. The truth is what sets us free. And the truth is in the Bible. For me, I found the truth in the teachings of Jesus, especially in the parables.

aron · 10-29-2008, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Lee was deliberately vague, because it suited his ends. But he was wrong, I believe. The Bible shows us how to move, to get ourselves out of darkness. And you don't need Witness Lee or the Local Churches. You just need the truth. The truth is what sets us free. And the truth is in the Bible. For me, I found the truth in the teachings of Jesus, especially in the parables.

Look at the parable in Luke chapter 12, verses 47 and 48. The negative recompense involves options between "few" and "many". If we want a positive reward, we go for "many" over "few". If you are selling your junker car for a thousand bucks, and some rich guy comes along and offers 10,000 dollars because he likes the color of the bucket seats, and your eyes widen with delighted surprise, only then an even richer guy comes along and offers 14,000 dollars because he likes the bucket seats also, you're going to tell rich guy Number One to take a hike. Why? Not because ten thousand dollars was a bad deal for the car, but because it's not as good a deal, for you, as fourteen thousand is. That extra four grand, while unexpected, you will seize upon with as much alacrity and determination as if it were earned, one laborious drop of sweat at a time.

We are "marginal" creatures in that we always are looking for "more". The baseball player who gets offered 8 million dollars a year to go play outfield is insulted and demeaned by the paltry sum, if he can get another rich owner to fork over 12 million. Whatever we get, we always want more.

And on the negative side, we always choose "few" over "many". As in "few" stripes being preferable to "many" stripes. Jesus was teaching using simple economic principles: we choose based on the margin. We are not merely in "absolute" positions, i.e. heaven and hell, but we are often in between, and moving (key concept) from one towards another. If you have a million dollars, but are losing one hundred thousand dollars a day, you are glum, because at present rates you'll be broke in ten days. If you're a million in the hole, but gaining a hundred thousand per day, if present rates continue, you'll be "even" in ten days, and rich in a few beyond that, so you are happy with anticipation. "Relative" (i.e. motion) can be nearly as important as "absolute" (i.e. place).

If a judge tells a criminal, "Because of mitigating circumstances, I've decided to sentence you to three years instead of the possible seventeen", surely the criminal and his lawyer will look at each other and smile. Because determination of place is not just "absolute", it's also "relative".

Jesus showed us how to "move" out of debt, how to "gain" more of the good land. But I think that this didn't fit with Lee's static "dark room", so he largely glossed over such teachings.

YP0534 · 10-29-2008, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I don't see where in the Bible that this "dark room" existed. But in Lee's universe, if you didn't overcome, you went into the dark room.

aron, I think the "outer darkness" is vague in the Bible itself because the goal of God's rich inheritance should be our "carrot" and no one is very interested in exploring all the contours of the "stick"

I enjoy Him, I seek after Him and I hope and aspire to but don't necessarily expect to avoid the "dark room" at all. (Paul said, "not that I have attained.) If I go to a "dark room" it is God's loving mercy to me to do so and to meet my need through that discipline. If I am faithful and meet Him when He returns fully fit for all He intends for me, there will be no "dark room" for me to be concerned about.

In fact, one thing I picked up since exchanging on these boards the past few months was the fact that the time in the "outer darkness" is most likely to be proportional to our need for additional growth and discipline and I think Lee at least implied that you'd be stuck there for the entire 1,000 years.

But that's purely speculative based upon the principle of God's justice, another topic, like God's love, that Lee wasn't a strong proponent of. Exactly what the Bible means by "outer darkness" is not clear. Not saying that could not be used to advantage. Just saying the vagueness didn't originate with him. I feel pretty confident though in saying that any "dispensational punishment" any one of us is due will be according to mercy, grace, love and justice. And I don't think we'll be dealt with so harshly for not knocking on doors in the precisely prescribed matter.

When I was growing up, my mother had a discplinary tool known in the household as "the purple belt." A horrible wide vinyl thing in a lavender just about this color

and all she needed to say was "I'll get the purple belt" and I straightened up. It's a little vague to make a reference in that fashion but, after all, if I was doing what I needed to be doing it, it never got metioned at all.

countmeworthy · 10-29-2008, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

.....In fact, one thing I picked up since exchanging on these boards the past few months was the fact that the time in the "outer darkness" is most likely to be proportional to our need for additional growth and discipline and I think Lee at least implied that you'd be stuck there for the entire 1,000 years.

Exactly what the Bible means by "outer darkness" is not clear. Not saying that could not be used to advantage.

I would like to add my ..02 worth here...

So I'll start with a couple of scriptures:

1 John 1:5b
...God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.

James 1:17
Whatever is good and perfect comes down to us from God our Father of lights (who created all the lights in the heavens). He never changes or casts a shifting shadow.

Based on these scriptures alone.....there is NO DARKNESS in our GOD !! NIL..ZIPPO--NADA. There IS
NO OUTER DARKNESS in HIM!!! NONE whatsoever!!!
There is no Outer darkness during the thousand year REIGN!!!

The outer darkness is outside His Kingdom!.. Outerdarkness is HELL! Inner or outer Darkness is outside of His Light. There is not even a gilmpse of SHADOW in Him!

1 John 1:7
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

When we stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ, all of our sins will be under the Blood..washed and Cleansed. We will be judged according to our works. what He called us to do...not our sins! We will be rewarded accordingly.

Back to the topic of Outerdarkness...so why does the Word call it 'outerdarkness'...not just complete Darkness or Innerdarkness?

I have a study on this but in a nutshell.....here is my understanding.

There are 5 different chambers of hell...but I'll write of only 2 for now.

1)The Lake of Fire--which will be the final place of eternal torment after the Millenial kingdom where Satan, the Beast, the False Prophet and unbelievers will end up in.

2) Hell where unbelievers who die in this lifetime go to before they are judged at the Great White Throne., which occurs after the Millenial Kingdom.

Sadly, there are people in hell and who will end up in the lake of fire who considered themselves servants of God...be it through their religious works or their own self-righteous works. They are in outer darkness, a holding cell if you will, where they are weeping and gnashing their teeth, waiting to be sentenced to an eternal prison of torment for eternity.

Lee had a Catholic view of the outer darkness...not the BIBLICAL view.

aron · 10-29-2008, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

aron, I think the "outer darkness" is vague in the Bible itself because the goal of God's rich inheritance should be our "carrot" and no one is very interested in exploring all the contours of the "stick"

The countours of the stick provide us with an experiential roadmap out of darkness. People who expect to get zapped with the Holy Spirit when they call on Jesus, and all their problems go away forever, may be disappointed. God still has some redeeming work to do. The "fewer" stripes being preferable to "many" stripes are not merely held in abeyance for some future dispensation; they are seated within our consciences, moment-by-moment.

Many saints get discouraged because they don't feel up to some arbitrary "overcomer" bar which, often as not, someone like Witness Lee has painted in the sand. But Jesus told us in His parables to take a step toward the Father. You'd be surprised how quickly the distance between us melts away. The vague, contourless "dark room" concept traps people; it paralyzes them. That was my experience. God is detailed in His justice; He is also detailed in His mercy, in showing us how to avoid displeasing Him. I believe that if Lee had seen these "details" his acolytes wouldn't be suing one another and "quarantining" one another. But he didn't, and they are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

I enjoy Him, I seek after Him and I hope and aspire to but don't necessarily expect to avoid the "dark room" at all. (Paul said, "not that I have attained"). If I go to a "dark room" it is God's loving mercy to me to do so and to meet my need through that discipline. If I am faithful and meet Him when He returns fully fit for all He intends for me, there will be no "dark room" for me to be concerned about.

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

In fact, one thing I picked up since exchanging on these boards the past few months was the fact that the time in the "outer darkness" is most likely to be proportional to our need for additional growth and discipline and I think Lee at least implied that you'd be stuck there for the entire 1,000 years.

I agree, and I don't think the Bible bears that out. It is something I am looking at, hopefully with clear eyes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

But that's purely speculative based upon the principle of God's justice, another topic, like God's love, that Lee wasn't a strong proponent of. Exactly what the Bible means by "outer darkness" is not clear. Not saying that could not be used to advantage. Just saying the vagueness didn't originate with him.

No, the vagueness didn't originate with him. But he thought he had a clear sky, and I disagree. He glossed over things which didn't "fit" his teachings. I don't pretend to be a teacher, but have come to realize that if I am dependent on LSM material for my understanding I will perforce have to ignore some parts of the Bible that are inconvenient for their theology. And I didn't come this far to start lopping off "troublesome" verses. So I am forced to reexamine the Scriptures.

YP0534 · 10-29-2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

No, the vagueness didn't originate with him. But he thought he had a clear sky, and I disagree. He glossed over things which didn't "fit" his teachings. I don't pretend to be a teacher, but have come to realize that if I am dependent on LSM material for my understanding I will perforce have to ignore some parts of the Bible that are inconvenient for their theology. And I didn't come this far to start lopping off "troublesome" verses. So I am forced to reexamine the Scriptures.

yup

I'm right there with ya',

I believe "Clear Sky" is a brand of bottled liquid hubris...

aron · 10-31-2008, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

The countours of the stick provide us with an experiential roadmap out of darkness. People who expect to get zapped with the Holy Spirit when they call on Jesus, and all their problems go away forever, may be disappointed. God still has some redeeming work to do. The "fewer" stripes being preferable to "many" stripes are not merely held in abeyance for some future dispensation; they are seated within our consciences, moment-by-moment.

"...in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them..." ~Rom. 2:15 (NASB)

The conscience bears witness. This corresponds to what I call a "state", a complementary notion to what Timotheist has covered in his discussion of "place", i.e. heaven, hell, sheol, hades, paradise.

My suspicion is that there is more or less a one-to-one correlation between "states", i.e. a conscience void of offense (see Paul in Acts 24:16, e.g.) versus full off accusing offenses, the "many" or "few" stripes mentioned in Luke chapter 12, and the assignation of "place", as in "outer darkness" versus "Marriage feast of the Lamb".

The Lord gave what seem to me to be detailed, explicit, repeated instructions regarding this in His teachings, and in His parables. God is righteous, and He cannot overturn His righteousness. It is the foundation of His throne (Ps 89:14). So in His mercy He has given us detailed instructions on how to avoid unrighteousness.

Timotheist · 10-31-2008, 06:18 AM

The main point of the parable of the sower is to point to four "states", only one of which is the "unbeliever", the one who never receives the seed.

The other three describe three types of "believers".

I call these the "backslider", the "fence-sitter" and the "faithful".

The OT uses these words: "called", "chosen". and "faithful":

0) The Egyptians are the uncircumcised, unsaved ones.
1) "Called" refers to the Israelite who was called out of Egypt.
2) "Chosen" refers to the Levite who was chosen to be a priest.
3) "Faithful" refers to the sons of Zadok who were the faithful priests.

All the Israelites partook of Passover (redemption) but then fell into three groups.

Then in the eternal destiny the four states are described as:

0) The second death
1) The Nations
2) The Servants
3) The Bride

The Nations were called (saved) but not chosen (to be priests/kings)
The Servants are the chosen Levites who will serve as priests and kings
But the faithful Bride has a special distinction.

When I read the parable of the sower and place myself among the four states discussed, I place myself in the third category: I am a servant, but I am not always a faithful servant.

Given this background information, reread the parable of the guest who came to the wedding without his formal wedding clothes. He is cast into the outer darkness and the punchline is "Many are called but few are chosen".

This person is not an unbeliever, as many would assert. He was called, but he was not chosen. He will eventually be released from the darkness and will join the eternal destiny as one of the Nations.

aron · 10-31-2008, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

The Nations were called (saved) but not chosen (to be priests/kings)

The Servants are the chosen Levites who will serve as priests and kings

But the faithful Bride has a special distinction.

I am not quibbling with your terminology, but doesn't "saved" connote regeneration? Eating the fruit of the tree of life?

We believers were forgiven, redeemed, justified, reconciled, and regenerated; we are being transformed and conformed to the image of Christ, and will be ultimately glorified. I always shorthand this to be "saved". What you are referring to with the Nations is clearly something different, no?

I don't point this out to raise contention. I have given "the Nations" little thought, other than the usual two or three common references culminating in Rev. 22, "The leaves of the tree are for the healing of the Nations", etc.

Calling someone "saved" seems to overlap, perhaps uncomfortably for some, the experiences of the believers.

YP0534 · 10-31-2008, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I am not quibbling with your terminology, but doesn't "saved" connote regeneration? Eating the fruit of the tree of life?

We believers were forgiven, redeemed, justified, reconciled, and regenerated; we are being transformed and conformed to the image of Christ, and will be ultimately glorified. I always shorthand this to be "saved". What you are referring to with the Nations is clearly something different, no?

I don't point this out to raise contention. I have given "the Nations" little thought, other than the usual two or three common references culminating in Rev. 22, "The leaves of the tree are for the healing of the Nations", etc.

Calling someone "saved" seems to overlap, perhaps uncomfortably for some, the experiences of the believers.

A source for overlapping can be found in scripture, I believe.

Quote:

1Ti 4:10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

See:
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...82&postcount=1

Timotheist · 10-31-2008, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

We believers were forgiven, redeemed, justified, reconciled, and regenerated; we are being transformed and conformed to the image of Christ, and will be ultimately glorified. I always shorthand this to be "saved". What you are referring to with the Nations is clearly something different, no?

Fair question, which calls for clarification.

I assign the word "saved" to denote regeneration unto eternal life. This is consistent with Luke's version of the sower parable, where only those who do not receive the seed are not "saved".

Eternal life is given to many, even those who believe and walk away.

However, sanctification is not a given, for that requires action on our part.

Clothing, especially robes, denotes holiness, sanctification. Those who are sanctified are like the Levites, wearing white robes.

The guest who showed up without his robe was "saved", but unsanctified. After the sojourn in the outer darkness (sanctification the hard way), he will enjoy eternal life as one of the nations.

But he will not see God's face. That reward is reserved for the sanctified:

Rev 22:3 and His bond-servants shall serve Him; 4 and they shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads. 5 And there shall no longer be any night; and they shall not have need of the light of a lamp nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God shall illumine them; and they shall reign forever and ever.

HEB 12:14 Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.

aron · 11-02-2008, 03:59 AM

YP,

1 Timothy 4:10 seems like an appropriate answer to my query. Salvation is alluded to by mentioning the Savior, then "all men" would seem to naturally include "the Nations". So to me that covers Timotheist's earlier point about "the Nations" getting "saved", which had bothered me somewhat. Thanks for the verse.

Timotheist · 11-02-2008, 05:18 AM

My take on the makeup of the Nations:

1) They include those "regenerated believers" who did not achieve an acceptable level of sanctification.

2) They also include "non-believers" who are saved nonetheless. The sheep taken from the goats, and any that are part of the second resurrection whose names are found in the book of life. (to me this cover semi-righteous people who lived in a generation which did not hear the gospel)

aron · 11-04-2008, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

I assign the word "saved" to denote regeneration unto eternal life. This is consistent with Luke's version of the sower parable, where only those who do not receive the seed are not "saved".

Eternal life is given to many, even those who believe and walk away.

However, sanctification is not a given, for that requires action on our part.

The guest who showed up without his robe was "saved", but unsanctified. After the sojourn in the outer darkness (sanctification the hard way), he will enjoy eternal life as one of the nations.

A very interesting take on the gospel. You can be sure that your interpretation is not within the "mainstream gospel".

The believer who is not faithful to the call of sanctification is dispensationally disapproved, but eventually enjoys eternal life as one of the nations?

I am highlighting this notion, with a question mark, not to make fun of your idea, but to stress how novel it is to me, and I would suspect to most others as well.

I read some of your idea of the Bride being prepared during the Millenial Kingdom, not before it, on the "Heaven and Hellenism" thread. I will try to do it justice by a careful examination.

aron · 11-04-2008, 08:08 AM

Some might argue that the parables about rejecting the kingdom and being displaced into some type of "outer darkness" only refer to the unbelieving Jews, and by extension to the (later) unbelieving Gentiles.

John 1:11 "He came to His own, yet those who were His own did not receive Him."

One interpretation might be that the warning of punishment, of being cut off, of weeping and gnashing of teeth must refer only to the (Jewish - i.e. His own) scribes and pharisees who opposed Him. And as much as the Gospels bear a "universal" character, the warnings must then likewise refer only to those who reject the good news of salvation today, and not to believers who are not sufficiently sanctified.

This is further strengthened by Matthew 21, vv. 33-46. It is a parable about a vineyard owner who "leased it out to vinedressers and went abroad" (v 33). The stewards of the vineyard behaved miserably and were eventually punished. The story concludes with verses 45 and 46. "And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking concerning them. And though they sought to seize Him, they feared the crowds becase they held Him as a prophet."

But look at Luke 19, vv. 11-27. "And as they were listening to these things, He spoke a further a parable, because He was near Jerusalem and they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately." (v. 11)

He then goes on to tell a story about a man going away "to a distant country" and gave his slaves some coins and told them to do business. Some did well and were rewarded. Some did poorly and were cut off. And the enemies who opposed the master were slain. There are three classes there. One is rewarded, one is cut off, and one perishes.

This parable was not told to the chief priests and Pharisees. This was told to the faithful followers, who were expecting a quick payout from their loyalty to the new leader. He told them they had a hard journey ahead, and to be wary and not squander the gift which God had bestowed upon them. If they managed the "wealth" poorly, they would suffer.

I cannot but see how this parable is also pertaining to me, a believer. It may not speak specifically of "stripes", but rather the removal of a potential gain, yet the principle is the same. That is why I am coming to the realization that the "place" is not as important as what you do with what you are given. The "Gospel of salvation" to me has a very practical and immediate application of clear principle. This principle is repeated again and again in the gospels, both to the opposing scribes and to the faithful disciples.

Timotheist · 11-04-2008, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Some might argue that the parables about rejecting the kingdom and being displaced into some type of "outer darkness" only refer to the unbelieving Jews, and by extension to the (later) unbelieving Gentiles.

John 1:11 "He came to His own, yet those who were His own did not receive Him."

The great fallacy of the manistream gospel is that it only recognizes 2 states: "saved" vs "unsaved", "believer" vs "unbeliever". The more correct gospel recognizes 4 states.

Is it safe to say that just because a Jew rejected (did not believe in) Jesus means that he is "unsaved"? I do not think so !

There are many verses in the OT that refer to the coming salvation of the Jews, even the worst ones (gasp)! For example:

EZE 36:22 "Therefore, say to the house of Israel, `Thus says the Lord GOD, "It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went. 23 "And I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst. Then the nations will know that I am the LORD," declares the Lord GOD, "when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight. 24 "For I will take you from the nations, gather you from all the lands, and bring you into your own land. 25 "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 "Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 "And I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances. 28 "And you will live in the land that I gave to your forefathers; so you will be My people, and I will be your God. 29 "Moreover, I will save you from all your uncleanness;

This does NOT say that Jews will be divided into "saved" and "unsaved".

The story of the rich Jew and the poor Jew (Lazarus) recorded in Luke is also mistakenly understood to refer to "saved" and "unsaved" Jews. The rich Jew is now suffering in Hades, but this is not the second death. He will be resurrected and saved according to the OT promises and given a new heart.

RO 11:25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own estimation, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
"THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 27 "AND THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."

aron · 11-05-2008, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

The great fallacy of the manistream gospel is that it only recognizes 2 states: "saved" vs "unsaved", "believer" vs "unbeliever". The more correct gospel recognizes 4 states.

Is it safe to say that just because a Jew rejected (did not believe in) Jesus means that he is "unsaved"? I do not think so !

EZE 36:22 "Therefore, say to the house of Israel, `Thus says the Lord GOD, "It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went. 23 "And I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst. Then the nations will know that I am the LORD," declares the Lord GOD, "when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight. "

This does NOT say that Jews will be divided into "saved" and "unsaved".

RO 11:25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own estimation, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,
"THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION,
HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." 27 "AND THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."

Interesting phraseology here. "For the sake of My name...Because of My covenant..." (see my underlines).

We are saved, ultimately, not because of who we are, but because of who God is. One day it pleased Him to place His name in a certain spot, and to covenant Himself with a people. Now, in spite of the best efforts of said covenanted people, God is carrying out His plan of salvation. This "overcoming covenant" pertains to christians as well as Jews.

Genesis 6:3 says, "For the Spirit will not always strive [struggle] with man forever..." the RcV footnote says that God will eventually forsake man. I say no; instead God will eventually become a human man (Christ Jesus) and through this man will make peace with all the human race, and through this redeemed, transformed and glorified people God will have dominion in all creation.

The struggle is there, but it is not an eternal one, because eventually God will win. There will be peace, and rest, and eternal joy.

Isaiah 57:16-18
"For I will not contend forever,
Nor will I always be angry;
For the spirit would faint before Me,
And the souls which I have made
Because of the iniquity of his unjust gain I was angry,
And I struck him; I hid Myself and was angry;
And he went on, turning away in the way of his heart.
I have seen his ways
And will heal him;
And I will lead him and restore comfort to him
And to his mourning ones...."

Notice that here we have both "striking" and "healing". It is dispensational; it is not eternal.

I had, like Timotheist, also noticed this trend in the OT: God's initial call and blessing, man's turning away and degradation, God's rebuke and chastisement, and eventually a reconciliation and restoration. I don't think this pattern disappears in the NT. On the contrary. Look at the form the letters to the seven churches in Asia (Rev. 2 & 3) takes. There is a greeting and acknowledgement, a stinging rebuke, and a call for repentance and healing.

If we say that those who don't heed the call to "overcome" in the seven epistles in Revelation are sent to the lake of fire for eternity, that seems to be a rather narrow reading. God saves us, not because of who we are, but because of His name, and because of His covenant. Nonetheless, we as believers would do well to consider the long and detailed record of His dispensational dealings with those whom He has covenanted with. God is righteous, and holy, and will get what His way, eventually.

We believers who have entered into covenant with God through faith in His Son Jesus Christ would do well to carefully consider all of His words.

aron · 11-07-2008, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I am not interested in ideas of Heaven or Hell so much as what lies in between, i.e. the process of salvation. Heaven seems to me to be a conceptual, future 'destination', whereas what I am concerned with right now is the journey of faith. My contact with christianity and its teachings is in line with Timotheist's proposal that they can become destination-oriented, heaven-fixated, which distracts them from the things of today.

I have been thinking that "overcoming" is not just living righteously; it is a living that inspires others to live righteously.

Overcoming is not something done in isolation; it is done in assembly with others.

I was jogged into this mode of thinking by the second half of a verse, Daniel 12:3, which says, "And those who have insight will shine like the shining of the heavenly expanse, and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars, forever and ever."

I was thinking about the process of turning others to righteousness. You can't really go to someone else and say, "Be righteous"; you have to live in a reality of light which shines into their darkness and exposes them to the point where they turn.

I am interested in those "points of turn", often categorized in nomenclature such as "repentance", "forgiveness", and so forth. Someone is moved from one "state" to another. From anxiety to peace, from addiction to freedom, from anger to love, from judgment to mercy.

Those are events which happen in real time, and although the end result is placement in one of Timotheist's conceptual "states", it is the here and now which is my present concern.

With the LSM "outer darkness" teaching, promulgated by Lee, if you didn't get over some arbitrary "overcomer" bar you were in darkness for a thousand years, weeping and gnashing of teeth. The phrase we used was "raptured or martyred" -- those were the tickets to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. I remember being told that Watchman Nee would be there; he died in prison in China and thus was technically "martyred".

But what about Lee? He didn't "make it" according to the LSM interpretation. Is he to be "schooled" with the disobedient for 1,000 years? The arbitrariness of the LSM interpretation doesn't make sense to me.

And I especially grieve for the young ones, who pretty much all received the Lord Jesus as their savior when they were 10 or 11 or 12; today they are in the world, condemned in their consciences because they don't think they are good enough to overcome. Thus the teaching they received condemns them to some static realm of punishment, and they have resigned themselves to it. They have given up. They can't see the experiences in their daily life in marginal terms, i.e. movement from "bad" to "less bad" and from "good" to "better". They are stuck in a black box, given to them by Lee and company, and they can't get out.

YP0534 · 11-07-2008, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

With the LSM "outer darkness" teaching, promulgated by Lee, if you didn't get over some arbitrary "overcomer" bar you were in darkness for a thousand years, weeping and gnashing of teeth. The phrase we used was "raptured or martyred" -- those were the tickets to the Wedding Feast of the Lamb. I remember being told that Watchman Nee would be there; he died in prison in China and thus was technically "martyred".

But what about Lee? He didn't "make it" according to the LSM interpretation. Is he to be "schooled" with the disobedient for 1,000 years? The arbitrariness of the LSM interpretation doesn't make sense to me.

Just a word of correction here, if you will indulge me.

Lee's "raptured or martyred" duality only applies to those who are alive at the Lord's coming.

"Overcoming" describes generally the condition of properly-qualified believers (whatever that means, exactly).

Those are not the same thing.

According to Paul's first letter to the Thessalonians, the dead in Christ rise first before the ones that remain are caught up into the air. After this, there is the judgment of the believers and the millennium.

The whole matter is covered graphically in great detail in Lee's "Chart of the 70 Weeks" found in the revised Recovery Versions.
http://www.recoveryversion.org/charts_maps/70weeks.html

"Overcoming" is the qualification for participation in the "marriage feast" and it is determined at the "judgment seat of Christ". "Martyrdom" is apparently one way of arriving at "overcoming." "Rapture" (at the "hidden in the cloud" stage) is evidence of one "overcoming." But these matters are distinct.

Apparently, Lee had somehow determined that for those who might remain physically alive at the Lord's coming, they wouldn't be judged favorably at the judgment seat if they weren't either raptured pre-trib or martyred during it. I've never been certain that he was ever clear on that issue and I am fairly well convinced otherwise at this point. But Lee most certainly never spoke clearly on the issue of the possibility of there being overcoming, non-martyred dead in Christ, so confusion on the point is understandable.

In line with our exchanges on God's justice, aron, the Bible appears to testify that some who remain alive and some who have died in Christ, both of which categories are not pre-trib raptured or martyred ("technically" or not), will nevertheless be approved to join with Him in the marriage feast.

Why do I say this? Because, it's nonsensical that the Lord would require either being born at the right time (the END time) or violent death in order to qualify to enter into His Sabbath rest. To the extent that Lee might have suggested that, I believe we should reject it.

In other words, the dead in Christ await their judgment at the judgment seat before anyone could determine their "overcoming" status. As for those alive at His coming, martyrdom or early rapture will be certain proof of that overcoming status, true, but it will still await final determination at the judgment seat before entry into the celebration. And even those of us who merely suffer through the tribulation without passing through death should be at least theoretically capable of obtaining righteous judgment rather than being subject to an arbitrary cut off rule of law, don't you think?

I obviously don't advocate aiming for doing the minimum in following Him and hoping to squeak by in the judgement, but I don't think Lee thought it all through very well, or, if he did, he didn't articulate it very well any place that I have ever seen.

Lee's position would basically have to be that all spiritual growth stops during the tribulation unless it is either through, or results in, martyrdom and that's just awfully inorganic to match my daily experience, at the very least.

Grace to you this day!

Timotheist · 11-07-2008, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I have been thinking that "overcoming" is not just living righteously; it is a living that inspires others to live righteously.

Overcoming is not something done in isolation; it is done in assembly with others.

I was jogged into this mode of thinking by the second half of a verse, Daniel 12:3, which says, "And those who have insight will shine like the shining of the heavenly expanse, and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars, forever and ever."

I was thinking about the process of turning others to righteousness. You can't really go to someone else and say, "Be righteous"; you have to live in a reality of light which shines into their darkness and exposes them to the point where they turn.

Amen.

Here is a confirming passage:

JER 23:1 "Woe to the shepherds who are destroying and scattering the sheep of My pasture!" declares the LORD. 2 Therefore thus says the LORD God of Israel concerning the shepherds who are tending My people: "You have scattered My flock and driven them away, and have not attended to them; behold, I am about to attend to you for the evil of your deeds," declares the LORD. 3 "Then I Myself shall gather the remnant of My flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and shall bring them back to their pasture; and they will be fruitful and multiply. 4 "I shall also raise up shepherds over them and they will tend them; and they will not be afraid any longer, nor be terrified, nor will any be missing," declares the LORD.

JER 23:5 "Behold, the days are coming," declares the LORD,
"When I shall raise up for David a righteous Branch;
And He will reign as king and act wisely
And do justice and righteousness in the land. 6 "In His days Judah will be saved,
And Israel will dwell securely;

So in the days of Israel's salvation both Christ and a group of 'shepherds' will work in unison to tend the flock.

Who are these shepherds? Odds are they are the overcomers of this age.

aron · 11-08-2008, 10:04 AM

Thanks for the correction!

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

Lee's "raptured or martyred" duality only applies to those who are alive at the Lord's coming.

"Overcoming" describes generally the condition of properly-qualified believers (whatever that means, exactly).

Those are not the same thing.

I think I was trying to wrap too many points into my post, and strayed into territory where I'm not well-qualified. I was immersed into the LSM-promulgated teachings only for a few years, and was not a careful student. I haven't read any of this material for a number of years, and am going by memory, which is scanty and ill-formed.

That being said, I opened this thread because at one point a simple and clear and helpful interpretation of the Word of Salvation came to me through WL's ministry. It was about "salvation being by grace, a gift of God" (Eph. ch. 2) versus "reward being according to works" (Rev. ch. 22). This greatly helped me, because I had at that point, due to my many imperfections, begun to doubt my "salvation" experience in believing into Jesus.

The easy-believism, get-out-of-jail-free brand of Protestant theology that I encountered didn't address my many lingering problems, and the "works" school of theology put me right back where I was before meeting Jesus: uncertain and doubtful, trying to be good and failing miserably.

So encountering Lee's teachings was a great help to me. I remember them today because they were 1) simple and clear, 2) effective and applicable, and 3) pointing me directly to the Bible.

I am trying to address what is to me a deficiency in this "works vs grace" theology that I was exposed to. The "70 weeks" stuff and the "dark room" are examples of the things I never grasped, either being vague or overly complicated. I don't get it, can't remember the points, can't apply them to my daily living.

I keep bringing up the "many stripes" vs. "few stripes" point from Luke ch 12 v 47, as analogous to the five cities/ten cities reward parable in Luke ch 19:11-27, as an extension of this interpretation, and a necessary amendment. It is, to me, simple, clear, direct, applicable to my daily living, and looking at the Word. But Lee liked the vague "dark room". This is where he and I must part company.

YP0534 · 11-08-2008, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Thanks for the correction!

And thank you for receptivity to my poor attitude.

It was really a great opportunity for a little speaking, frankly, not so much to say "Lee taught thus and so and you have mixed that up on him" but to admit that it's pretty mixed up sometimes the way he taught it and none currently on the LSM dole seems inclined to work on cleaning up his messes.

On that other thread, KTS and I have exchanged about lacunae in Lee's ministry. Here, you have identified a few places where Lee is less than "crystal" clear, no pun intended.

Frankly, the legacy of Lee is that there's really a lot of unfinished business in the study of God's word and the current adulation which makes a pretense of Lee having some species of earthly perfection in manner and teaching does harm on a number of levels.

Lee got many important things right, a good number of important things wrong, and some things just didn't seem to occur to him at all.

I think it's helpful to sort babies and bathwater and I'm not well qualified to make such judgments all on my own.

I appreciate the fellowship here.

aron · 11-08-2008, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

Frankly, the legacy of Lee is that there's really a lot of unfinished business in the study of God's word and the current adulation which makes a pretense of Lee having some species of earthly perfection in manner and teaching does harm on a number of levels.

Lee got many important things right, a good number of important things wrong, and some things just didn't seem to occur to him at all.

I'll try to give some details to what I've been alluding to thus far: the gaps in the Nee/Lee ministry in covering/interpreting the scriptural record regarding compensation. My disclaimers from earlier still stand: there may be ample and clear exposition from Lee, and others, that I have missed.

The "mainstream gospel" of heaven and hell as ultimate destinations for all was amended and more closely aligned with the gospel record, in my view, by Lee/Nee pointing out the matter of "reward" commensurate with "works". But this point of compensation was left quite unfinished, and the idea of reward or punishment according to works was left as a kind of static end-state comparable with heaven or hell. It was vague, fixed (yer in or yer out) and somewhat threateningly arbitrary. I have earlier asserted that Lee made good use of this vagueness, dangling it front of the gathered flock, to keep the intimidated sheep obedient to his whims, which were presented as the latest "Move of the Lord."

But on reading independently in the Word, I seemed to find not merely a record of absolute (heaven/hell, reward/punishment) end-states, but also many references, reinforcing one another, of relative motion within and between these states.

I remember great stress being laid on the "great chasm, which no man can pass over", separating Lazarus in comfort with the rich man in torment (Luke 16:26). But that is in a relatively static end-state. We who are alive should remember that we can, and do, move all the time. We are not fixed; we are in motion constantly, either going forward or backward.

Look at the man in the wedding feast in Luke 14. If you try to assume a higher place than is yours, you get demoted. This is relative motion; you are not expelled to a place of darkness, of weeping and gnashing of teeth. But you are removed from honor because you usurped what was not yours. Likewise, the one who takes the last place may be called up higher (vv 7-11).

On the negative side of the ledger, when the accounts are settled, there is relative motion as well. I have mentioned the "many lashes" versus "few lashes" in Luke 12:47-48. A supporting parable is of the unrighteous steward, in Luke 16, vv 1-8. At the end of the parable the master's debtors are still in debt, and the steward is still going to get expelled. But the master praises the shrewd moves of the steward, who has improved his relative position, by improving the relative positions of the other debtors. According to Lee, a thousand years of discipline is just that. Like heaven and hell, it's fixed, immutable. But Luke 16:6 says owing fifty measures of oil is better than owing one hundred.

This is what I mean by simple, clear, common sense. Any ten year-old can see it's better to owe fifty than one hundred. But the theologians with thier fixed states gloss over this, because it doesn't fit their static theology. And here I include Lee with the theologians whom he loved to denigrate. He glides past Luke 16:1-8 like it doesn't exist.

There's more, but I'll stop here. My assertion is that the "When we all get to heaven" of traditional christianity has been replaced by "When we consummate the New Jerusalem" by the LSM'ers; it is an unhealthy and vain fixation, a distraction by a fictitious and speculative future that never will exist, because they are not paying attention to today, and the relative motion, too often backward, with which we all are continually engaged.

aron · 11-08-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

I would like to add my ..02 worth here...

So I'll start with a couple of scriptures:

1 John 1:5b
...God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.

Yes, but the light shined into the darkness, and the darkness could not overcome it. John 1:5. I am speaking here about the process, experientially, of the darkness getting expelled from us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

James 1:17
Whatever is good and perfect comes down to us from God our Father of lights (who created all the lights in the heavens). He never changes or casts a shifting shadow.

No, but we are called to change. To repent. To turn back to God. This, to me, is a continual process, and we should never be content until we hear "Well done". Until then, we labor and strive to purge all darkness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

The outer darkness is outside His Kingdom!.. Outerdarkness is HELL! Inner or outer Darkness is outside of His Light. There is not even a gilmpse of SHADOW in Him!

1 John 1:7
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

When we stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ, all of our sins will be under the Blood..washed and Cleansed. We will be judged according to our works. what He called us to do...not our sins! We will be rewarded accordingly.

While we were yet sinners, Christ loved us and died for us. ~Rom. 5:8. Now, while we are yet floundering, flailing and faltering disciples, He continually comes to us and forgives us and shines into our hearts and fortifies us for the journey ahead. Unless some of our readers are already perfected.

Those who deem themselves already perfected might remember the word that Jesus spoke to the religious ones: "Now that you say, We see; your sin remains." ~John 9:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

Back to the topic of Outerdarkness...so why does the Word call it 'outerdarkness'...not just complete Darkness or Innerdarkness?

I have a study on this but in a nutshell.....here is my understanding.

There are 5 different chambers of hell...but I'll write of only 2 for now.

1)The Lake of Fire--which will be the final place of eternal torment after the Millenial kingdom where Satan, the Beast, the False Prophet and unbelievers will end up in.

2) Hell where unbelievers who die in this lifetime go to before they are judged at the Great White Throne., which occurs after the Millenial Kingdom.

Sadly, there are people in hell and who will end up in the lake of fire who considered themselves servants of God...be it through their religious works or their own self-righteous works. They are in outer darkness, a holding cell if you will, where they are weeping and gnashing their teeth, waiting to be sentenced to an eternal prison of torment for eternity..

This may be right but it is too confusing and I don't understand it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

Lee had a Catholic view of the outer darkness...not the BIBLICAL view.

The problem is, there are 48 Biblical views out there, at least. Anyone can wave a few verses around, or even 14 or 40 if they are really good. To satisfy me, it has to be complete, and coherent. I think Lee made forward progress from the "mainstream gospel", but when he couldn't go on any further he claimed to have found the "High Peak" and he denied anyone permission to go on. Later, his disciples quarantined anyone who tried. THAT sounds vaguely Catholic to me, but the "I'm right and everyone else is damned" view is not limited to the Catholics, unfortunately.

Timotheist · 11-09-2008, 04:27 AM

Permit me my simple definitions of these terms:

1) Death and Hades -- Temporary places for dead souls before the resurrection. Lazarus rests in "death", the rich Jew is in "Hades"

2) Outer Darkness -- Temporary punishment for the living (after the first resurrection)

3) Lake of Fire -- the second death for both unsaved men and fallen angels, and permanent.

"Those who are Christ's" will be resurrected from Death and Hades at the first resurrection. But some of these will not participate in his kingdom, and will be 'outside'.

The rest will be resurrected from Death and Hades at the 2nd resurrection. Then Death and Hades will be thrown into the Lake of Fire.

We as Christians have no need to fear the second death (unless we align ourselves with Satan in the last days). But we should be aware that Hades and the Outer Darkness serve to discipline the wicked and unfaithful believer.

It is these warnings that are almost completely lost in the mainstream gospel, stressing only our need to love God but not to fear Him. There needs to be the proper balance, just as in any healthy family with a righteous father figure.

Timotheist

PS

I avoid the use of the word "hell", due to the inconsistent use of this term in the KJV. The KJV uses this single word to describe all three, but inconsistently. The translators of the KJV brought their heaven/hell bias into their translation. The NASB is much better.

aron · 11-09-2008, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

Permit me my simple definitions...

Thanks, Timotheist, simple is better. I like when expositions are simple, clear, based on Scripture and not conjecture, are internally consistent, and complete (e.g. they use all the parables, and not just those which agree with their themes).

I am trying to do the same. Here is another go:

1) Faith matters. "These things were written that you might believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God, and in believing might have life in His name." ~John 20:31. "But as many as received Him, to them He gave authority to become children of God, to those who believe on His name." ~John 1:12.

2) Faith is different from works, or deeds. Ephesians 2 tells us that faith is a gift from God, it is not of works that no man should boast. This is how we are saved, by believing into Jesus the Son of God. Revelation 22 tells us that we will be recompensed according to our works. For we believers, works do matter; not for our salvation, but for compensation.

3) God is detailed in His dealings with His children. We have examples from the Old Testament, referred to in 1 Corinthians 9 and 10, to remind the wayward and backsliding christians that many who heeded God's call to come out of Egypt were not qualified to enter into the promised land. I think Hebrews chapter 4 is also applicable here. Coming out of Egypt qualifies us to enter the promised rest; it does not guarantee it. Compensation can be negative or positive. The parables of the master and servants(stewards, slaves) show both.

4) God is detailed and fine; nothing escapes His view. Witness Lee was general and vague about God's dealings. I hold that this prevents those who are struggling from escaping from darkness. They don't have a "road map" out. God says owing 50 is better than owing 100. Lee didn't care; there was just some vague "overcomer" status (Which I guess meant being in a "vital group" and being "one" with the latest "flow" out of Anaheim). But relative positions, and relative motion (forward or backward) do, in fact, matter very much to us who are in the "here and now" of today, rather than nebulous future promises of "darkness" or "reward".

5) Lastly, compensation is very much connected to relations, and relationships. Look at Matthew 18:31, in the parable of the unforgiving servant. The fellow servants went and reported what happened to the Master. Based on this testimony of others, the servant was called on the proverbial carpet, and expelled to a place of chains. If we turn others to righteousness, we will be rewarded. If we stumble others, we will be dealt with. At the judgment seat, there will not only be our testimony, and God's judgment, there will be the testimony of others; how we conducted ourselves among them. By the testimony of others (the record of our relations with them) we will be punished or rewarded.

To conclude, there is nothing that I can see that guarantees we the believers to be designated "overcomer". There is no magic "overcomer pill" to make someone set for life. If Paul could not lay hold (Phil 3:12), but had to struggle forward, I think so do we. But there are things we can do today to move forward. We can't guarantee any "absolute" end-state, beyond believing into the Lord Jesus Christ. But as believers, we can always improve our relative position, whether to increase God's pleasure in His saving work in us, or to lessen His displeasure at our many failings. And this is intrinsically connected to our relations to our fellows, both our families at home, our co-workers on the job, our fellow believers we congregate with, people we meet on the street, etc. We either help them or stumble them. We either become vehicles for wounding or healing. We either facilitate gathering or scattering.

I don't believe those who talk about consummating the New Jerusalem, about the processed Triune God, about dispensing and High Peak truths and the Body and all the rest of it, would have quarantined fellow believers for being "different" if they knew how much relationships matter to the God who placed us all here.

aron · 11-10-2008, 07:04 AM

Suppose you travel to a distant country, and upon entry you find yourself in the consular office, waiting to get your entrance permit stamped. The clerk informs you of the rules, and consequences of disobedience:

"You know we don't like bank robbery here. If you rob our banks we'll put you in jail, many years. 20 years in prison for robbing banks."

You assure the clerk that bank robbery is not on your agenda. He continues: "Any kind of robbery. Pickpockets, shoplifting, all 20 years in our prison. No release." Again, you reassure him of your intentions to behave.

Then he says, "Driving laws, very strict here. Speeding, failure to signal, crossing yellow lines, 20 years in prison". Now you're startled. You stammer, "Um, well, I suppose I'll take a cab..."

He goes on and on, unabated: "Also, jaywalking, not following directions, not tipping, being rude, staring at women, not saluting our leaders..." Now you're thinking, a) These people are crazy, and b) When's the next plane out of here?

My problem with the "1,000 years of darkness" interpretation of Lee et al is that it seems capricious and arbitrary, and it also violates the Bible's repeated use of proportionality.

"To whom much is given, much is required" ~Luke 12:48

"Judge not, that ye be not judged" ~ Matt. 7:1

"Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" ~Matt. 6:12

"If you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" ~Matt. 7:15

"And as ye would that men do to you, do ye also to them likewise" ~Luke 6:31

"Should you not also have forgiven your fellow servant, even as I forgave you?" ~ Matt. 18:33

There is a commensurability, a proportional reciprocity, that is built into the teachings of the Bible (A notable exception to this is the parable of the vineyard workers in Matt. 20:1-16, who are surprised by the generous terms given to a few latecomers. But different reciprocal agreements can be unequal, without violating the principle of righteousness). The participles "evan as" or "so also" or "neither will" in the verses above signal that the first part of the sentence is equivalent to the second. As you do, so shall it be done to you. Simple, clear, and sensible.

Even in variation, we see a common theme. The parable of stewards in Matthew chapter 25, vv. 14-30, has varying wealth amounts distributed, with varying results and commensurate rewards. The parable of stewards in Luke chapter 19 has equal wealth distributed to all; when the master returns the slaves have varied in their ability to use the wealth, and they are rewarded accordingly.

I feel that Lee violates this proportionality with his "1,000 years of darkness" interpretation of the believers who fall short of the mark. In his view it doesn't matter if you commit murder or jaywalking; you are disciplined exactly the same. I don't think this holds up to common sense, fairness, justice, or the record of the Bible. But it seems to be a great control mechanism! Once the listeners buy into his few verses, and agree to downplay or ignore other verses, he has them in a pretty obedient position. Which seems to me to be what this "teacher" wanted, deep down, all along.

Forgive me if I seem a little crass but I am judging the "tree" by its "fruit". Lee and now his "blended" acolytes have serious control issues. And the 1,000 years of darkness is a big stick to hold over the heads of those who have bought into the system.

It doesn't make sense, it doesn't square with the record in the Bible, and I suspect their motives here; they don't want to see the truth because it is not convenient to their ends, which are to have control over other people.

YP0534 · 11-10-2008, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Forgive me if I seem a little crass but I am judging the "tree" by its "fruit". Lee and now his "blended" acolytes have serious control issues. And the 1,000 years of darkness is a big stick to hold over the heads of those who have bought into the system.

It doesn't make sense, it doesn't square with the record in the Bible, and I suspect their motives here; they don't want to see the truth because it is not convenient to their ends, which are to have control over other people.

Quote:

Jhn 16:2 They shall put you out of the synagogues; but the hour is coming that every one who kills you will think to render service to God;

It's enough to call out our common sinful nature and the mistaken doctrines and leave it at that. Too many "men of God" of all stripes go awry on account of these two things and it boggles my mind every time I see it. But it also always reminds me who the enemy really is.

By which I mean, I don't think the bad doctrines are necessarily post-hoc justifications for evil motives. I think it more likely that the bad doctrines lead to bad behaviors, which are in turn carried out by the sinful nature.

I guess I could be wrong about this but I tread cautiously about judging matters of the heart.

It's not really my job.

aron · 11-10-2008, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YP0534

I don't think the bad doctrines are necessarily post-hoc justifications for evil motives. I think it more likely that the bad doctrines lead to bad behaviors, which are in turn carried out by the sinful nature.

I guess I could be wrong about this but I tread cautiously about judging matters of the heart.

It's not really my job.

Good point. I've made it myself elsewhere, but in this case I ignored caution and thus went awry.

To all: please forgive the unnecessary fulminating at the end of my last post. Were even my assessments to be "true", i.e. somewhat accurate, as to motives and goals of others, I'd not be the one qualified to bring them forth.

kisstheson · 11-10-2008, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Good point. I've made it myself elsewhere, but in this case I ignored caution and thus went awry.

To all: please forgive the unnecessary fulminating at the end of my last post. Were even my assessments to be "true", i.e. somewhat accurate, as to motives and goals of others, I'd not be the one qualified to bring them forth.

Amen, dear brother Aron. As one who has needed to be publicly corrected multiple times on these discussion forums, I appreciate your plea for forgiveness. For my part, everything is good between you and me.

I am very thankful that this is a place where we can be so open and genuine. In addition, I am also very thankful for the perfecting we receive whenever we cross the line! All this is as it should be.

I have been learning more and more these days that due to the weakness of the flesh, it is SO easy to become the very thing we witness against. This is a very "real and present danger" related to what we are doing here. The flesh is so weak and our enemy is so subtle! How great is our need to be constantly turning to our dear Lord in all matters, large and small.

Maybe I shouldn't share this, since it was a personal dealing, but the Lord reminded me in a strong way the other day about my former habits when I first began posting: I used to spend a lot more time praying over all my posts and I used to wait at least four to five hours after composing a post before I actually submitted it, in order to give the Lord time to convict me of any problems in the content, tone, or spirit of my posts. Sadly, I have drifted a long way from those former habits. May He have mercy on us all and may He strengthen us all into our inner man.

Timotheist · 11-10-2008, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I feel that Lee violates this proportionality with his "1,000 years of darkness" interpretation of the believers who fall short of the mark. In his view it doesn't matter if you commit murder or jaywalking; you are disciplined exactly the same. I don't think this holds up to common sense, fairness, justice, or the record of the Bible. But it seems to be a great control mechanism! Once the listeners buy into his few verses, and agree to downplay or ignore other verses, he has them in a pretty obedient position. Which seems to me to be what this "teacher" wanted, deep down, all along.

The Proportionality aspect of the outer darkness seems to be expressed in Matt 18:

34And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due. 35So shall also my heavenly Father do unto you, if ye forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

I don't know of any passage that asserts that the punishment of the wicked servants must last for the entire 1000 years. I do think it is meant to denote that the wicked servant loses his servant status once he is released.

aron · 11-13-2008, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

The Proportionality aspect of the outer darkness seems to be expressed in Matt 18:

34And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due. 35So shall also my heavenly Father do unto you, if ye forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

I don't know of any passage that asserts that the punishment of the wicked servants must last for the entire 1000 years.

Recently, the thought occured to me: If you have regrets then you can't enter into the kingdom, because the kingdom is a place without regrets. If we are detailed and thorough in our repentance, we can be free from the disqualifying pangs of regret. One brother told me, shortly after I was saved, that repentance is different from regret. Regret is uncorrected error, while repentance is corrected error.

We sinners have made many, many mistakes, both before and after meeting the Lord Jesus. So we repent our seven times seventy, and the Lord surely restores us each time.

Because we can thoroughly and repeatedly repent of our failures and lacks, because we can come to the Lord, helpless and destitute (we can come to Him as we are because God's love approached sinful man in the Person of His Son), we are cleansed and forgiven and restored and strengthened, and we joyously go on. Then we are qualified to speak an encouraging and forgiving and restoring word to the struggling sinner nearby, rather than giving them the vitriol we might otherwise think they deserve (Or, if we had been the "polite" sort, we might have nodded and smiled at the sinner, while "storing" the poison in our special "dark locker" deep within).

This is our process of "paying all that is due", as alluded to in Matt. 18:35. We are surrounded by sinners, many of them seeming to be worse than we, according to our biased and subjective accounting methods. But instead of cursing and condemning them, we can forgive them, even as we have been forgiven. And thus our redemption is sealed by the Holy Spirit. We can forgive because we were forgiven while we were yet sinners, and now this spirit rests within and upon us. And our exercise of this forgiveness is proof to all the universe that we have the "mark of the Spirit" upon us.

But the caution here is that if we exercise this forbearance 435 times but on the 436th time we say "Enough!" and stretch out our hand to smite, the Big Boss will be displeased. Or, if we forgive most of our debtors, but reserve a few especially sinful ones whom we really think deserve some good old-fashioned smiting, then again we miss the crucial word "all" in Matt. 18:35. Our God is detailed and fine, and we should not think this little bit of darkness will slip by unnoticed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

I do think it is meant to denote that the wicked servant loses his servant status once he is released.

Well, I have been a wicked servant many times and have been released, and always have been told by the Master, "Get back to work". But some tell me this is the "age of grace", so maybe your point is right. In any event, we are wise not to assume we can abide continually in uncorrected error. At the very least, error disqualifies the servant from sitting up at the "head of the table" in the Wedding Feast, where they might otherwise have been. The Master tells them to go sit lower down (cf Luke 14:9).

aron · 11-17-2008, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

The Proportionality aspect of the outer darkness seems to be expressed in Matt 18:

34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due. 35 So shall also my heavenly Father do unto you, if ye forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

Who is this "you", that the Lord is speaking to in Matt. 18:35? The easy answer is that Jesus is speaking to Peter. Peter is the one who came up to Him in verse 21 with the question, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" Jesus replied, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven."

The Lord was speaking to Peter, but the rule, I daresay, applied to all the hearers, the disciples. So does the parable that follows. And then in verse 35, at the end of the parable, Jesus says that what happened to the unforgiving slave will happen to each one, if they don't forgive his brother from their hearts. Jesus says, "...if ye forgive not every one his brother from your hearts." Jesus is speaking to every one.

Why is this noteworthy? Because if we the disciples of Jesus do not forgive each one his brother(sister) from our hearts, then the Father will not forgive us either. So here we have the looming prospect of unforgiven disciples, which kind of puts a kibosh on the "I've believed into Jesus and now I'm going to heaven" notion, doesn't it?

I daresay we are redeemed into the next age only to the extent that we are redeemed in this one.

Luther recovered the idea of the rights of the believer. To every one who believes is given the authority (right) to be a child of God (John 1:12). Nee & Lee recovered the idea of the responsibility of the believer. If you (disciples, believers) do not forgive, neither will the Father forgive you (Matt. 18:35).

Jesus spoke on this also, at the end of His famous "Lord's Prayer": "For if you forgive men their offenses, your heavenly Father will forgive you also; but if you do not forgive men their offenses, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your offenses." (Matt. 6:14,15)

Believing into the Lord Jesus was merely the initiation of a process of salvation. Today I need to be saved from resentments, judgmentalism, envy, striving against others, restlessness, being nosy, gossipping, being factious and divisive, being anxious, being ungrateful, being proud and vain and selfish, and so forth. To what extent I am unable to be freed from these earthly, death-tinged bonds, to that extent the heavenly Father cannot allow me into His house. And to what extent these undealt-with soulish and/or fleshly forces within me create behaviors which cause stumbling for others, to that extent I am storing up the Father's righteous wrath, and I forfeit the blessings due me as a son of God.

I cannot live an unredeemed life and expect to wave my "Get out of jail free" card, like a Monopoly game contestant, at the moment of reckoning. If I am wise I will treat today as the moment of reckoning; I will repent and be healed. O Lord, may it be so!

Timotheist · 11-17-2008, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I daresay we are redeemed into the next age only to the extent that we are redeemed in this one.

I daresay this statement, though simply stated, is very true.

Redemption gets us out of Eqypt. A long sojourn in the wilderness, where we are perfected and tested with varying levels of success, get us varying levels of reward.

Here is a little truism:

The blood of Christ can cleanse us from sin, but we have to do the washing.

aron · 11-18-2008, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timotheist

The blood of Christ can cleanse us from sin, but we have to do the washing.

I was thinking about the process of leaving Egypt forever, and coming fully into the call of the heavenly Father. It seemed to me that there are two mutually reinforcing aspects of this transit, for those of us who have heard the call in the person of the Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

First, we have to be thorough. If we forgive our neighbor 489 times (seventy times seven less one), and yet we judge at the 490th offense, we stumble before we reach the goal. We must be willing to forbear to the end, to the last iota, the last jot and tittle.

If we deal with our anger, but not our pride, we fall short of the promised rest. If we deal with our pride but not our anger, likewise we fall. So we must be thorough as our Father is thorough. While it is still called "today" we must assume we have not yet laid hold, but have to press on. If we are magnanimous and broad with ten thousand of our fellows, but pinched and narrow with one, we must put down our gift and go make peace first, before we can offer the gift (Matt 5:24). God is thorough, and exact, and we must match Him in this exactitude, if we are presume to match Him as His reigning counterpart.

Second, and related, we must abide. We have begun a journey; we must finish it. "The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play" (1 Cor. 10:7). The call out of Egypt, to believe into the Firstborn Son, is not yet the arrival at our promised destination. We must first abide in our journey, though it be troubling at times. We don't want to be enticed and snared in the wilderness. Before He departed, the Lord Jesus told the disciples, "Keep my commandments" (John 14:15,21), and "Abide in Me" (John 15:4).

We who have responded to the Father's call do not want to be like the son who said, "Sir, I will", but he did not go (Matt. 21:30). To "go" is to turn, and repent, and return all the way home to the Father, not merely to make vain declarations as if we have laid hold. It is noteworthy that the last book of the Bible repeatedly tells the believers in the gatherings in Asia to repent (Rev. chs 2 & 3). They were not worse than we; no, the journey for us all is one of repentance, of being cleansed and healed and restored.

If we abide in the salvation process, we may indeed look with hope to the Lord's return. Wherever we are on the journey, while it is yet "today", if we make forward progress toward the goal, we can be grateful for the labor of the day.

aron · 11-27-2008, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I have been thinking that "overcoming" is not just living righteously; it is a living that inspires others to live righteously.

Overcoming is not something done in isolation; it is done in assembly with others.

An amendment, upon further reflection: overcoming is dependent upon only one thing, and that is one's relationship with the Lord. We either have a relationship with the Holy One of God or we don't. He either says, "I know You; come to the Father", or He says, "I don't know You. Depart from here".

But quantity of compensation depends on our relationships with others. Whether we get five cities to rule over or ten; whether we get few stripes or many, this is dependent upon our relations with others.

I think that is a little more balanced than my previous statement.

cityonahill · 12-02-2008, 02:26 PM

This is a great thread...some really deep discussions...

I can already see that I have some different views(coming from the "mainstream"), but rather than hash them out here, I may start a new thread so as to not change the subject.

10-24-2008, 08:21 AM	#1
aron Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Natal Transvaal Posts: 5,631	The gospel of salvation I am interested in the process of salvation, as presented in the Bible. For me it came to the fore when Timotheist presented his "Heaven and Hellenism" thread of how the pseudo-christian concepts of Heaven and Hell have emerged and changed over time due to non-biblical, primarily Greek influences. I am not interested in ideas of Heaven or Hell so much as what lies in between, i.e. the process of salvation. Heaven seems to me to be a conceptual, future 'destination', whereas what I am concerned with right now is the journey of faith. My contact with christianity and its teachings is in line with Timotheist's proposal that they can become destination-oriented, heaven-fixated, which distracts them from the things of today. Secondly, they are touched with non-biblical influences which have accrued over time. Timotheist was good enough to point some of this out. I am not trying to mirror him, however, in looking at the idea of salvation as it has progressed over time in its various adherents, christian and otherwise. I would rather look at what the Bible says. I think a historical review is useful; it is even essential at some point to see "how we got to here". But at the same time I have neither time nor intellectual resources to do so and thus will concentrate on the teachings of the Bible. "...I buffet my body and make it my slave, lest perhaps having preached to others, I myself may become disapproved." ~1 Cor. 9:27 Then to chapter 10: "For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.....but with most of them God was not well pleased, for they were strewn along in the wilderness." ~vv. 1 - 5. My thesis is that the christian experience, presented in the Bible, is not merely to believe into Jesus and be loosed from the pangs of Hell. The christian experience is to be placed into a pool of hopeful applicants, a few of whom will be selected as "overcomers", or use what terminology or imagery that you will. The Bride, The Millennial Kingdom, The Wedding Feast. Whatever the imagery, it augers for the christian experience as not an arrival at some sought-for condition (i.e. heaven) but rather the initiation of a process which will hopefully one day place the recipient in the special status of 'approved'. This is versus First Corinthians chapter 9 verse 27, where the believer is unfortunately 'disapproved'. I know some christians say this is teaching a kind of purgatory. I saw a website "bcbsr dot com" where the author raises the "P" word. He says the Nee/Lee teachings confuse 'disapproved believers' who are under dispensational punishment with what are actually unbelievers getting eternally condemned. But Moses fell in the wilderness, and he is there with Christ on the mountain in transfiguration (Matt ch. 17). So Moses did not make it into the "Good Land", and was disapproved, yet did not end up in flames for eternity with the devil and his angels. There seems to be some "in between" that Paul is referring to when he mentions "disapproved" in chapter 9, verse 27. Chapter 10, verse 6 says "These things occurred as examples to us..." so the "falling in the wilderness" must be a warning to christians, not to unbelievers. That is my take, anyway. First Corinthians 9 & 10 forces me to consider the place in between "Heaven and Hell". Which is where I am today, working out my own salvation, with fear and trembling (cf Philippians 2:12). And I do have some serious challenges to Lee's teaching on this "place between", which I shall hopefully address shortly, as time permits. Peace to all.

10-28-2008, 10:42 AM	#2
aron Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Natal Transvaal Posts: 5,631	Re: The gospel of salvation Ephesians 2:8,9 says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works that no one should boast." Revelation 22:12 says, "Behold, I come quickly, and My reward is with Me to render to each one as his work is." One verse says salvation is by grace, not of works, and the other verse says a reward is coming to each one of us according to our works. It seems that "salvation" and "reward" are different things. Salvation is not according to works, and reward is according to works. Now, most of what Timotheist refers to as the "Mainstream Gospel" crowd would ascribe to this. They recognize, for example, the parable of the talents. One faithful servant got jurisdiction over ten cities because his talents were invested wisely; another got five cities because he gained half as much for his labor (Luke chapter 19; vv 11-27). The reward is commensurate with the works. This is in full accordance with Revelation 22:12, above. But what about the other side; what about "negative" compensation for negative works? First Corinthians chapter 10, as cited in the previous post, says "all came out of Egypt...all passed through the sea...all were led for forty years in the wilderness, fed manna every morning, visited with pillar of fire and pillar of smoke...but with most of them God was not pleased..." Is it possible that at the end of our christian journey the righteous God will be "not pleased" with us? God is merciful, yes; it is by His mercy that I was taken out of the pool of blaspheming sinners and placed into the pool of christian race-runners. Salvation is by faith, it is a gift from God. But this gift includes a race. This gift includes a master who leaves me with talents and expects a return on His investment. The Mainstream Gospel seems to say (I am paraphrasing my years of exposure here, pardon the simplification) that the "reward" for works goes from zero and up; it is all positive. No negatives involved. But I say that God is not only merciful, He is also righteous; if we have negatives involved in our works, there will be negatives involved in compensation. Luke 12: 47, 48: "That slave who knew his master's will and did not prepare or do according to his will, will receive many lashes; but he who did not know, yet did things worthy of stripes, will receive few lashes. To everyone to whom much has been given, much will be expected..." This also is in full accordance with Revelation 22:12, and it is on the negative side. Some may say this refers to sinners in eternal torment, but it doesn't read that way to me. If you are in eternal punishment, what is the difference between "few" and "many" lashes? I strike a man once per hour for eternity, he gets an infinite number of smacks. If I strike a man once per day for eternity, he also gets an infinite number. There is no "few" and "many" with infinity. There is a dispensational aspect to these verses. And they are on the "negative" side of the "reward" ledger.

10-29-2008, 05:47 AM	#3
aron Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Natal Transvaal Posts: 5,631	Re: The gospel of salvation One day I was with a brother, watching a video of a Witness Lee message. WL was standing behind a lectern and talking about something, I don't remember what. Evidently the subject included some kind of the "negative recompense" I have been discussing in my previous two posts, because at one point, Lee said, "There is a dark room. Go there." He was paraphrasing the "righteous master" condemning the "unrighteous servant" who had squandered his stewardship. I don't remember the exact context. But I indelibly remember the words: "There is a dark room. Go there." I remember it because when speaking those words he simultaneously made a jabbing motion, palms down, fingers extended, like he was pushing garbage off the surface of a table. Like he was poking someone in the ribcage, pushing them away. And I remember it also because both I and the brother with me both laughed nervously. My companion said, "Wow." And we could hear the audience murmer and stir uncomfortably. I think Lee was a master at crowd control. He would pause, then whirl suddenly. He would slowly draw out intonations: "Weellllll....", then puncture the silence with a forceful word. He would gaze out over the assembly with a look of happy expectation, snapping his head back and forth, birdlike. And he would make jabbing motions with his hands and arms, using them as extensions of his words, to give them more force. We all have mannerisms; I am not singling out Lee here. But his were for control, as were many of his teachings. This brother, I believe, had serious "control issues". And his "dark room" teachings were a glaring and pernicious example of this. I don't see where in the Bible that this "dark room" existed. But in Lee's universe, if you didn't overcome, you went into the dark room. I believe he was deliberately vague about this, because it gave him power over the listeners. It was the "boogie man" he could wave in front of the huddled sheep, that if they didn't follow the "New way", the "God-ordained way", which he was naturally the mouthpiece of, then it's "Off to the dark room for you". I don't remember hearing him say that it was for one thousand years, but that was the impression I got. It was the thought in my head for years. "If I am not subject to the elders who are (naturally) subject to Brother Lee I get tortured in a dark room for 1,000 years. If I'm not "one" with the current "move" of "the Body" then it's off to beatings and unimaginable horrors for a thousand years." This is worse than the Purgatory of Catholicism, in some ways. At least you could make a large cash payment and get out of purgatory. Why, even your unrighteous uncle, or cousin, could get sprung, if you had cash enough! The Sistine Chapel was going up and the Pope needed dough. Remember Johannes Tetzel? "When the coin in the offering box rings, the soul to heaven springs!" Well, with Lee, you got a lifetime of indentured servitude, hoping to avoid the dark room. No cash payment was big enough to get you out. Lee was deliberately vague, because it suited his ends. But he was wrong, I believe. The Bible shows us how to move, to get ourselves out of darkness. And you don't need Witness Lee or the Local Churches. You just need the truth. The truth is what sets us free. And the truth is in the Bible. For me, I found the truth in the teachings of Jesus, especially in the parables.

10-31-2008, 06:18 AM	#10
Timotheist Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 424	four states The main point of the parable of the sower is to point to four "states", only one of which is the "unbeliever", the one who never receives the seed. The other three describe three types of "believers". I call these the "backslider", the "fence-sitter" and the "faithful". The OT uses these words: "called", "chosen". and "faithful": 0) The Egyptians are the uncircumcised, unsaved ones. 1) "Called" refers to the Israelite who was called out of Egypt. 2) "Chosen" refers to the Levite who was chosen to be a priest. 3) "Faithful" refers to the sons of Zadok who were the faithful priests. All the Israelites partook of Passover (redemption) but then fell into three groups. Then in the eternal destiny the four states are described as: 0) The second death 1) The Nations 2) The Servants 3) The Bride The Nations were called (saved) but not chosen (to be priests/kings) The Servants are the chosen Levites who will serve as priests and kings But the faithful Bride has a special distinction. When I read the parable of the sower and place myself among the four states discussed, I place myself in the third category: I am a servant, but I am not always a faithful servant. Given this background information, reread the parable of the guest who came to the wedding without his formal wedding clothes. He is cast into the outer darkness and the punchline is "Many are called but few are chosen". This person is not an unbeliever, as many would assert. He was called, but he was not chosen. He will eventually be released from the darkness and will join the eternal destiny as one of the Nations.

11-02-2008, 03:59 AM	#14
aron Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Natal Transvaal Posts: 5,631	Re: four states YP, 1 Timothy 4:10 seems like an appropriate answer to my query. Salvation is alluded to by mentioning the Savior, then "all men" would seem to naturally include "the Nations". So to me that covers Timotheist's earlier point about "the Nations" getting "saved", which had bothered me somewhat. Thanks for the verse.

11-02-2008, 05:18 AM	#15
Timotheist Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 424	The Nations My take on the makeup of the Nations: 1) They include those "regenerated believers" who did not achieve an acceptable level of sanctification. 2) They also include "non-believers" who are saved nonetheless. The sheep taken from the goats, and any that are part of the second resurrection whose names are found in the book of life. (to me this cover semi-righteous people who lived in a generation which did not hear the gospel)

11-04-2008, 08:08 AM	#17
aron Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Natal Transvaal Posts: 5,631	Re: four states Some might argue that the parables about rejecting the kingdom and being displaced into some type of "outer darkness" only refer to the unbelieving Jews, and by extension to the (later) unbelieving Gentiles. John 1:11 "He came to His own, yet those who were His own did not receive Him." One interpretation might be that the warning of punishment, of being cut off, of weeping and gnashing of teeth must refer only to the (Jewish - i.e. His own) scribes and pharisees who opposed Him. And as much as the Gospels bear a "universal" character, the warnings must then likewise refer only to those who reject the good news of salvation today, and not to believers who are not sufficiently sanctified. This is further strengthened by Matthew 21, vv. 33-46. It is a parable about a vineyard owner who "leased it out to vinedressers and went abroad" (v 33). The stewards of the vineyard behaved miserably and were eventually punished. The story concludes with verses 45 and 46. "And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking concerning them. And though they sought to seize Him, they feared the crowds becase they held Him as a prophet." But look at Luke 19, vv. 11-27. "And as they were listening to these things, He spoke a further a parable, because He was near Jerusalem and they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately." (v. 11) He then goes on to tell a story about a man going away "to a distant country" and gave his slaves some coins and told them to do business. Some did well and were rewarded. Some did poorly and were cut off. And the enemies who opposed the master were slain. There are three classes there. One is rewarded, one is cut off, and one perishes. This parable was not told to the chief priests and Pharisees. This was told to the faithful followers, who were expecting a quick payout from their loyalty to the new leader. He told them they had a hard journey ahead, and to be wary and not squander the gift which God had bestowed upon them. If they managed the "wealth" poorly, they would suffer. I cannot but see how this parable is also pertaining to me, a believer. It may not speak specifically of "stripes", but rather the removal of a potential gain, yet the principle is the same. That is why I am coming to the realization that the "place" is not as important as what you do with what you are given. The "Gospel of salvation" to me has a very practical and immediate application of clear principle. This principle is repeated again and again in the gospels, both to the opposing scribes and to the faithful disciples.

11-09-2008, 04:27 AM	#27
Timotheist Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 424	Death and Hades, Outer Darkness, Lake of Fire Permit me my simple definitions of these terms: 1) Death and Hades -- Temporary places for dead souls before the resurrection. Lazarus rests in "death", the rich Jew is in "Hades" 2) Outer Darkness -- Temporary punishment for the living (after the first resurrection) 3) Lake of Fire -- the second death for both unsaved men and fallen angels, and permanent. "Those who are Christ's" will be resurrected from Death and Hades at the first resurrection. But some of these will not participate in his kingdom, and will be 'outside'. The rest will be resurrected from Death and Hades at the 2nd resurrection. Then Death and Hades will be thrown into the Lake of Fire. We as Christians have no need to fear the second death (unless we align ourselves with Satan in the last days). But we should be aware that Hades and the Outer Darkness serve to discipline the wicked and unfaithful believer. It is these warnings that are almost completely lost in the mainstream gospel, stressing only our need to love God but not to fear Him. There needs to be the proper balance, just as in any healthy family with a righteous father figure. Timotheist PS I avoid the use of the word "hell", due to the inconsistent use of this term in the KJV. The KJV uses this single word to describe all three, but inconsistently. The translators of the KJV brought their heaven/hell bias into their translation. The NASB is much better.

11-10-2008, 07:04 AM	#29
aron Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Natal Transvaal Posts: 5,631	Reciprocity and Proportionality Suppose you travel to a distant country, and upon entry you find yourself in the consular office, waiting to get your entrance permit stamped. The clerk informs you of the rules, and consequences of disobedience: "You know we don't like bank robbery here. If you rob our banks we'll put you in jail, many years. 20 years in prison for robbing banks." You assure the clerk that bank robbery is not on your agenda. He continues: "Any kind of robbery. Pickpockets, shoplifting, all 20 years in our prison. No release." Again, you reassure him of your intentions to behave. Then he says, "Driving laws, very strict here. Speeding, failure to signal, crossing yellow lines, 20 years in prison". Now you're startled. You stammer, "Um, well, I suppose I'll take a cab..." He goes on and on, unabated: "Also, jaywalking, not following directions, not tipping, being rude, staring at women, not saluting our leaders..." Now you're thinking, a) These people are crazy, and b) When's the next plane out of here? My problem with the "1,000 years of darkness" interpretation of Lee et al is that it seems capricious and arbitrary, and it also violates the Bible's repeated use of proportionality. "To whom much is given, much is required" ~Luke 12:48 "Judge not, that ye be not judged" ~ Matt. 7:1 "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" ~Matt. 6:12 "If you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" ~Matt. 7:15 "And as ye would that men do to you, do ye also to them likewise" ~Luke 6:31 "Should you not also have forgiven your fellow servant, even as I forgave you?" ~ Matt. 18:33 There is a commensurability, a proportional reciprocity, that is built into the teachings of the Bible (A notable exception to this is the parable of the vineyard workers in Matt. 20:1-16, who are surprised by the generous terms given to a few latecomers. But different reciprocal agreements can be unequal, without violating the principle of righteousness). The participles "evan as" or "so also" or "neither will" in the verses above signal that the first part of the sentence is equivalent to the second. As you do, so shall it be done to you. Simple, clear, and sensible. Even in variation, we see a common theme. The parable of stewards in Matthew chapter 25, vv. 14-30, has varying wealth amounts distributed, with varying results and commensurate rewards. The parable of stewards in Luke chapter 19 has equal wealth distributed to all; when the master returns the slaves have varied in their ability to use the wealth, and they are rewarded accordingly. I feel that Lee violates this proportionality with his "1,000 years of darkness" interpretation of the believers who fall short of the mark. In his view it doesn't matter if you commit murder or jaywalking; you are disciplined exactly the same. I don't think this holds up to common sense, fairness, justice, or the record of the Bible. But it seems to be a great control mechanism! Once the listeners buy into his few verses, and agree to downplay or ignore other verses, he has them in a pretty obedient position. Which seems to me to be what this "teacher" wanted, deep down, all along. Forgive me if I seem a little crass but I am judging the "tree" by its "fruit". Lee and now his "blended" acolytes have serious control issues. And the 1,000 years of darkness is a big stick to hold over the heads of those who have bought into the system. It doesn't make sense, it doesn't square with the record in the Bible, and I suspect their motives here; they don't want to see the truth because it is not convenient to their ends, which are to have control over other people. __________________ "Freedom is free. It's slavery that's so horribly expensive" - Colonel Templeton, ret., of the 12th Scottish Highlanders, the 'Black Fusiliers'

12-02-2008, 02:26 PM	#39
cityonahill Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 67	Re: The gospel of salvation This is a great thread...some really deep discussions... I can already see that I have some different views(coming from the "mainstream"), but rather than hash them out here, I may start a new thread so as to not change the subject. __________________ "If anyone is confident that they belong to Christ, they should consider again that we belong to Christ just as much as they do..."(2 Cor. 10:7)