- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Folks that Witness Lee said no one or ones can participate in the Godhead - "Father - Son - Holy Spirit" was evidenced multiple times right out of his own mouth.
An accusation stated:
Witness Lee used the expression “four-in-one” to express the marvelous reality that the Triune God and the believers in Christ mutually indwell one another (John 14:20; 17:21, 23). However, some have misrepresented this “four-in-one” mutual indwelling to falsely claim that Witness Lee makes the church part of the Godhead.
Witness Lee's writing on 1 and 2 Samuel
=======================================
From Life-study of 1 and 2 Samuel,
Message Twenty-five, pp. 166-167
DEIFICATION—
BECOMING GOD IN LIFE AND IN NATURE
BUT NOT IN THE GODHEAD
This brings us to the matter of deification—God's intention to make the believers God in life and in nature but not in the Godhead. Athanasius referred to deification when at the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 he said, “He [Christ] was made man that we might be made God.” Although the term deification is familiar to many theologians and Christian teachers, during the past sixteen centuries only a small number have dared to teach regarding the deification of the believers in Christ.
I have not been influenced by any teaching about deification, but I have learned from my study of the Bible that God does intend to make the believers God in life and in nature but not in the Godhead. For instance, 1 John 3:2 says, “Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not yet been manifested what we will be. We know that if He is manifested, we will be like Him because we will see Him even as He is.” This verse clearly reveals that we will be like God.
God makes us like Him by imparting His life and nature into us. Second Peter 1:4 says that we have become “partakers of the divine nature.” John 1:12-13 says that we were born, regenerated, by God with His life. As God's children we are “baby gods,” having God's life and nature but not His Godhead. The Godhead is unique; He is the only One who should be worshipped.
We have been born of God and today, having God's life and nature, we are partially like Him. One day, when He comes, we will be wholly and entirely like Him.
It was wonderful for David to be a man according to God's heart, but it was not sufficient. God wants those who can say, “I am not just a person according to God's heart. I am God in life and in nature but not in His Godhead.” On the one hand, the New Testament reveals that the Godhead is unique and that only God, who alone has the Godhead, should be worshipped. On the other hand, the New Testament reveals that we, the believers in Christ, have God's life and nature and that we are becoming God in life and in nature but will never have His Godhead.
======================================
This quotation proves that any speaking by Lee of four-in-one God was not tampering with the Trinity but as saying as the Scripture says the church is in God the Father and Christ Jesus the Lord (1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:2)
Now whine about cutting and pasting.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@divegeester
Good.
I don't want to be above the terms of service.
Get the PMs going too.
Now controversial is controversial, not necessarily unbiblical.
You Divegeester teach a modalistic concept of God that Jesus Christ will put away the office of being the Son of God after the millennium. Meanwhile the Bible you are twisting says -
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yes, even forever." (Heb. 13:8)
Meanwhile the New Testament says God saying to the Son "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever."
"But of the Son, Your throne, O God, is FOREVER AND EVER . . ." (Hebrews 1:8a)
Look no further for a false teaching from Divegeester which is not just constraversial but against the New Testament as well.
@sonship saidI think you would be better off just reading the contents of the two links I posting, and winding your prideful neck in a little bit.
@divegeester
Good.
I don't want to be above the terms of service.
Get the PMs going too.
Now controversial is controversial, not necessarily unbiblical.
You Divegeester teach a modalistic concept of God that Jesus Christ will put away the office of being the Son of God after the millennium. Meanwhile the Bible you are twisting says -
[
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
So I post just two, only two, links to why Lee and his LC denomination is considered a cult and how his erroneous doctrines drove division… and you take 4 ranting posts to call me and “idiot” and “liar”.
Yes the name "idiot" is mean. I don't know if it is your intelligence that is your problem. But you have one.
So I'll take back the idiot insult.
Now the early church was called a sect and Paul its ring-leader.
Peter and John were called trouble makers.
These charges alone prove nothing except some people don't like the possible moving of the Holy Spirit.
Meanwhile - you say the Son of God puts away His office as the Son of God after the millennium. That is proved a BOGUS teaching. Controversial to some yet controversial PLUS not what the Bible SAYS.
Look in the mirror for a divisive cult propagated by YOU.
Oneness Pentecostalism has its naysayers too.
I give groups a benefit of a doubt usually if they claim to be brothers in Jesus Christ.
But the Son has a throne FOR ETERNITY. So if He puts AWAY His office as Son of God than HOW could He have a throne "forever and ever" ?
Stand in front of a mirror and welcome yourself to your cult WAY out of the mainstream of Christian doctrine.
@sonship saidSo your main defence is that I’m a “liar” then?
@divegeester
[
Yes the name "idiot" is mean. I don't know if it is your intelligence that is your problem. But you have one.
So I'll take back the idiot insult.
@sonship saidYou asked for evidence of “just one” issue with Lee’s ministry; I’ve told you that there is literally a plethora of stuff on the web and from good sources.
@divegeesterI think you would be better off just reading the contents of the two links I posting, and winding your prideful neck in a little bit.
Yea, yea. Whoever does not agree with you and unitarian oneness Pentecostalism has a pride problem.
Got it.
Did you read the content of the two links I posted?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@divegeester
"A plethora" of stuff none of which you can be conversant on yourself to state as a case of bad teaching.
Dr. Melton's article I will take another look at. By the way he was one of the expert witnesses ON BEHALF of defending Witness Lee in a liable law suit which Lee won.
That's an unusual source for your "plethora" of proofs of unbiblical teaching. But I will take a look at Dr. Melton's quite objective comments to see what he may have said which you find proof of extra-biblical teaching.
My two questions still remain as criteria:
1.) Does your "controversy" prove incorrectness according to the Bible?
2.) How serious is the alleged error [IF there be one] to the overall foundation of essential Christian doctrine ?
YOU say "the Son of God" is TEMPORARY ( a temporary office). THAT is a major error to essential Christology. Do you think for a moment Ron Rhodes, Walter Martin, or Norman Geisler (critics of Brother Lee and the local churches) would side with YOU on that
unbiblical teaching?
None of them would for a second.
@sonship saidDid you read the content of the two links I posted?
@divegeester
"A plethora" of stuff none of which you can be conversant on yourself to state as a case of bad teaching.
Dr. Melton's article I will take another look at. By the way he was one of the expert witnesses ON BEHALF of defending Witness Lee in a liable law suit which Lee won.
That's an unusual source for your "plethora" of proofs of unbiblical ...[text shortened]... rches) would side with YOU on that
unbiblical teaching?
None of them would for a second.
Would you like me to find some more? There is piles of stuff on the web explaining how Lee went off the rails doctrinally.
@sonship saidI dont need, neither do I care, to answer your stupid questions. I cannot think of one person in the last 15 years that agreed with all the doctrines you promoted. Not one. Everyone has had disagreements with you and all you respond with ts ridiculous, biased and false interpretations of the bible. So in your little mind, you are right and the rest of the world is wrong
Very good hiding behind other's coattails Rajk999 when you can't answer something.
@sonship saidComments like these make you look very foolish. I guess you cannot do better.
Others actually mention the name Witness Lee more than I do.
When I respond then they complain about too much cut and paste, long posts or that I am exalting someone.
Others mention the name Witness Lee is a derogatory manner. The man was a false teacher and promoted doctrines contrary to the teachings of Christ. You praise Witness Lee and promote his teachings, and at the same time you speak of the teachings of Jesus Christ in a derogatory manner. The number of times his name is called is irrelevant.