Witness Lee honored in US House of Representatives

Originally posted by sonship
Good morning. Get a good night's sleep?
So what do we have today here ?

[quote] You apparently have become so indoctinated by Lee's teachings that you have become like the Jehovah's Witnesses, who get their understanding from the Watchtower. Neither you or the JW's can actually see what the scripture is actually saying because of all the propaganda. [ ...[text shortened]... k God raised up these two men from Mainland China to bring the hungry saints into the last days.

To each his own.

Originally posted by sonship

Jesus, the Son of God, is the expressed image of God the Father and we are able to know the Father through the Son is true. However, to teach that Jesus, the Son of God, is God the Father becomes a heresy that must stop.

No it should be seen as the Word being God and becoming flesh should be seen.

It should be seen and other passa ...[text shortened]... or the sake of keeping objective creedal formulas in a higher place than the words of the Bible.

"The opposition comes also from people like yourself who place creeds above the Bible."

I don't get it sonship.

To be concise, are you saying the scripture teaches that the Father became the Son? That because the Word of God reveals that the Godhead is three distinct persons, yet God is one, that we can then say with scriptural authority what the scriptures don't actually say, namely, that the Father, for all intents and purposes hung on the cross and was "made sin" for us?

Don't you think that that is taking it a bit too far? Don't you think that there is a reason for the distinctions between the revealed members of the Godhead for purposes of the functions of the will of God?

Unless I completely misunderstand the intent of your posts, I think you have developed some creeds of your own. Just sayin'!

Originally posted by josephw

To be concise, are you saying the scripture teaches that the Father became the Son? That because the Word of God reveals that the Godhead is three distinct persons, yet God is one, that we can then say with scriptural authority what the scriptures don't actually say, namely, that the Father, for all intents and purposes hung on the cross and was "made sin" for us?

Don't you think that that is taking it a bit too far? Don't you think that there is a reason for the distinctions between the revealed members of the Godhead for purposes of the functions of the will of God?

Yes, the distinctions between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are revealed. We do not believe that the Father suffered on the cross which is called Patripassionism, a teaching that arose in the 3rd century. It means "Father suffered".

The Bible never says that the Father suffered at crucifixion. But with crucifixion as well as incarnation all Three of the Trinity were involved. And though certain actions are attributed particularly to one of the three of the Trinity, the involvement always includes all Three.

Though it never says that the Father suffered, it does say that "God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself " (2 Cor. 5:18-19) . The Father was involved and not separate in this operation.

Though it never says that the Father shed blood, it does say that the church was "purchased with His [God's] own blood" (Acts 20:28).
The Father was involved in the redemptive death of the Son.

This ever present involvement of the other Two of the Three in each step and stage of God's salvific operation makes separation impossible. God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. It does not say one third of God was in Christ. So the Father as God was in Christ reconciling the world to God though distinction is made as to who suffered.

The entire Triune God is involved always in each stage of God's process even though certain actions are particularly ascribed to one of the Three distinctly.

Take for example again His death -

" ... Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself to God ..." (Hebrews 9:11)

Christ the Son, God the Father, and the eternal Spirit are all involved in this redemptive act. Yet it only attributes the death to the Son and not the Father and the Spirit.

Some assume that coinherence and involvment of Three in every operation of the Triune God has to mean Patripassianism. But we Christians should adhere to the biblical statements showing an internal coinherence and co-involvement of Father - Son- and Holy Spirit and also recognize distinction also spoken of.

That Christ cried of God forsaking Him has to reveal distinction between Father and Son -

In Christ’s crucifixion God forsook Him economically (Matt. 27:45-46), but as the divine only begotten Son of God, He was still coinhering with the Father and the Spirit essentially. In this sense, what happened in the crucifixion of Christ is truly a mystery, the depths of which we cannot fully penetrate; we can only affirm what the Bible affirms.

God, not one third of God, but God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.

Concerning the Triune God’s operation in accomplishing redemption, Witness Lee said:

An eternal redemption was accomplished by the blood of the Son of God through the eternal Spirit (Heb. 9:12, 14; 1 John 1:7). The blood He shed on the cross was not only the blood of Jesus the Man, but also of the Son of God. First John 1:7 tells us that the blood of Jesus the Son of God cleanses us from all sin. The blood of Jesus the Man qualifies His redemption for us as men. He was a genuine man who died for us and shed genuine blood for us. But the efficacy of His redemption has to be secured by His divinity and it has been secured for eternity by Him as the Son of God. Therefore, His redemption is the eternal redemption (Heb. 9:12) because this redemption was accomplished not only by the blood of Jesus the Man but also by the blood of Jesus the Son of God, which the Apostle Paul even called "God’s own blood" (Acts 20:28). This is marvelous!12

The mutual coinherence of the Three of the Triune God is eternal. Though there is distinction in what we might call "personality" and distinction in action, all of the Trinity is always involved in any action of any one of Them. So separation is impossible to conceive.
Thomas F. Torrance wrote:

The Son and the Father were one and not divided, each dwelling in the other, even in that ‘hour and power of darkness’ when Jesus was smitten of God and afflicted and pierced for our transgressions.14

It is very mysterious. It is difficult to utter or even compare with ANY physical reality.

Did the Son separate from the Father in being incarnate? Scripture says the sent one came from with the Father. He came from the Father bringing the Father with Him.

John 8:16 - "But even if I do judge, My judgment is true, for I am not alone, but I and the Father who sent Me."

Verse 29 - "And He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him."

John 16:32 - "If God has been glorified in Him, God will also glorify Him in Himself, and He will glorify Him immediately."

Father and Son are involved in every action. Yet actions are particularly atttributed to perhaps One and not the other.

So while we would not say that the God who cannot die died, and the divine Father who cannot suffer suffered, we maintain that the Father was coinhering the Son at death being God reconciling the world to Himself.

It is not easy. Who raised Jesus from the dead ?

On one hand God the Father raised Him from the dead (Acts 2:24; 32, 10:40; Gal. 1:1) .

But the Son is also said to have raised Himself up (John 2:19; Acts 10:41; 1 Thess. 4:14)

But the Holy Spirit was also involved in the resurrection of the Son (Rom. 1:4; 1 Pet. 3:18)

We see Christ saying that He is departing the world to go to the Father.
" ... I am going to the Father and you no longer behold Me." (John 16:10)
" ... I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28)

Yet the Word who was God (John 1:1) surely did not cease to be God when He died upon the cross.

Do you believe that the Word Who became flesh, and was with God, and WAS God, upon the cross was for that moment no longer God? I do not believe that He was no longer God when He cried at that His God had forsaken Him.

In operation, in process of salvation, certain acts are attribruted at times only to One of the Three of the Godhead. Yet all three are involved in every action. At not time is there the action of one that does not involve the working of the other two.

As a man, the eternal Son of God, who is the embodiment of the fullness of the Godhead, passed through human living, was crucified, entered into resurrection, and was exalted to be Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). In each of these stages of His existence in humanity, the Son of God was still coinhering with the Father and the Spirit; at no time was He separate from Them. To claim otherwise would be to claim that the essential nature of God changed. That would be a great heresy.

Two very weighty questions there, one very brief reply. More must be said here latter.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] To be concise, are you saying the scripture teaches that the Father became the Son? That because the Word of God reveals that the Godhead is three distinct persons, yet God is one, that we can then say with scriptural authority what the scriptures don't actually say, namely, that the Father, for all intents and purposes hung on the cross and was "mad ...[text shortened]... uote]

Two very weighty questions there, one very brief reply. More must be said here latter.

Not weighty really. These questions have been around for ages. There are many schools of thought. Unfortunately the theologians have all but striped all meaning from the text, and have laid waste the simple truth of God's Word.

2 Timothy 2:23
But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

1 Timothy 1:4
Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: [so do].

Today God is building His church, and Christ is being formed in the believer.

This ridiculous debate! Just sayin'. 🙂

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] To be concise, are you saying the scripture teaches that the Father became the Son? That because the Word of God reveals that the Godhead is three distinct persons, yet God is one, that we can then say with scriptural authority what the scriptures don't actually say, namely, that the Father, for all intents and purposes hung on the cross and was "mad ...[text shortened]... uote]

Two very weighty questions there, one very brief reply. More must be said here latter.

You are placing the teachings of Witness Lee about the Creeds and the Holy Bible.

You are placing the teachings of Witness Lee about the Creeds and the Holy Bible.

You have not shown that to be true.

You have shown that you can twist the Bible to make "Now the Lord is the Spirit" mean that the Lord is NOT the Spirit.

And you have shown that you can twist the Bible so that the Son being called Eternal Father does not mean He should be called Eternal Father.

And you have shown that you can twist the Scripture so that "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" does not mean that the last Adam became the Holy Spirit that gives life and is called "the Spirit of life" .

Originally posted by sonship

You are placing the teachings of Witness Lee about the Creeds and the Holy Bible.

You have not shown that to be true.

You have shown that you can twist the Bible to make [b]"Now the Lord is the Spirit" mean that the Lord is NOT the Spirit.

And you have shown that you can twist the Bible so that the Son being called Eternal ...[text shortened]... the last Adam became the Holy Spirit that gives life and is called "the Spirit of life" .[/b]

I did not twist the scriptures at all. I provided you with orthodox Christian interpretation of the scriptures. The heretical interpretation by Mr. lee is that Jesus is His own Father and the Holy Spirit. Mr. Lee used certain text out of context and took figures of speech literally to contradict the clear word of scripture in his attempt to put forth his false doctrine.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did not twist the scriptures at all. I provided you with orthodox Christian interpretation of the scriptures. The heretical interpretation by Mr. lee is that Jesus is His own Father and the Holy Spirit. Mr. Lee used certain text out of context and took figures of speech literally to contradict the clear word of scripture in his attempt to put forth his false doctrine.

You did several twistings.

You twisted the title Eternal Father away from the Son (Isa. 9:6 ) because your creed can't take it.

You twisted the identity of the Lord from the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 3:17), because it boggles your mind and offends something in some creed.

You short changed First Corinthians 15 to be only about physical resurrection, saying "life giving Spirit" had only to do with physical resurrection.

Perhaps, I would not call your treatment of 1 Corinthians 15, a twisting. But it was short sighted and superfiscial.

Now you complain about Witness Lee's use or none use of the word Person/s.

So let's see.

The Father is a Person.
The Son is a Person.
The Holy Spirit is a Person.
And of course God is a Person.

So how many Persons is that? That is four "Persons."

Yet you criticize Witness Lee because he, teaching from the Bible, that the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit being Three, yet are one God.

So use of the word "Person" cannot be taken to the point that you are sure a Christian can be detected as orthodox or not by its usage.

I have no problem understanding that Witness Lee spoke just as faithfully about the distinction of the Son from the Father and the Holy Spirit from the Son. He just did no have a lopsided approach to the mystery of God.

You have a lopsided approach based mostly on objective doctrine rather than a map into subjective experience which the church so badly needs.

Originally posted by sonship
You did several twistings.

You twisted the title Eternal Father away from the Son [b](Isa. 9:6 ) because your creed can't take it.

You twisted the identity of the Lord from the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 3:17), because it boggles your mind and offends something in some creed.

You short changed First Corinthians 15 to be only about physical re ...[text shortened]... objective doctrine rather than a map into subjective experience which the church so badly needs.[/b]

Jehovah's Witness - Witness Lee - Cult

I believe Witness Lee is talking nonsense and is teaching heresy.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Jehovah's Witness - Witness Lee - Cult

I believe Witness Lee is talking nonsense and is teaching heresy.

I believe you're scrapping the bottom of your barrel of ignorance.

Thus I expect your posts to get shorter and shorter.

Originally posted by sonship
I believe you're scrapping the bottom of your barrel of ignorance.

Thus I expect your posts to get shorter and shorter.

Why do you believe a post must be long to be true?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Why do you believe a post must be long to be true?

I don't. You're finished with anything of substance here.

Now back to the OP of this thread. Witness Lee and Watchman Nee honored in the US Congress - excerpts

Inside mainland China the number of ``hidden'' believers following
the ministry of Nee and Lee has continued to grow despite the Chinese
government's often extreme measures to suppress and openly persecute
them. Historically, members of the churches in China who appreciate the
ministry of Nee and Lee have been among the most harshly persecuted.
Thousands have been imprisoned, countless beaten, and many even
martyred. It is estimated today that there may be two million believers
and thousands of local churches in China that draw their spiritual
nourishment and supply from the ministry of Nee and Lee.

Rather than slander the names of two faithful men of God, China should
take national pride that two of its own, neither of whom were political
in either their message or their leadership of the flock, have had
extraordinary impact far beyond the Chinese-speaking world.
Mr. Speaker, I call upon the Chinese government today to release all
those being held simply because of their faith in Christ and to abandon
this national campaign to discredit and distort the record of two brave
followers of the One who came with the message of salvation,
forgiveness and peace, and instead, to celebrate with us the
contributions of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee to believers the world
over.

Originally posted by sonship
I don't. You're finished with anything of substance here.

Now back to the OP of this thread. Witness Lee and Watchman Nee honored in the US Congress - excerpts

Inside mainland China the number of ``hidden'' believers following
the ministry of Nee and Lee has continued to grow despite the Chinese
government's often extreme measures to supp ...[text shortened]... h us the
contributions of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee to believers the world
over.

If they were harshly persecuted in China does not mean they must have been teaching total truth about Christianity as you seem to be implying. Christians with orthodox beliefs are also being harshly persecuted and even killed in many Islamic countries.

Christians "Most Persecuted Group in World"
Muslim Persecution of Christians, February 2014

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4365/christians-most-persecuted

Originally posted by RJHinds
If they were harshly persecuted in China does not mean they must have been teaching total truth about Christianity as you seem to be implying. Christians with orthodox beliefs are also being harshly persecuted and even killed in many Islamic countries.

Christians "Most Persecuted Group in World"
Muslim Persecution of Christians, February 2014

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4365/christians-most-persecuted

If they were harshly persecuted in China does not mean they must have been teaching total truth about Christianity as you seem to be implying. Christians with orthodox beliefs are also being harshly persecuted and even killed in many Islamic countries.

No one denies that other Christians are being persecuted elsewhere. There is no reason to jump to the conclusion that only saints in the local churches suffer oppression.

And I don't suggest that Catholics being caused to suffer severely, say, in the Mideast means that we Christians should all burn incense to statues of Mary.

But when the plain teaching of Nee and Lee are reviewed carefully rather than in the kangaroo court sloppiness of some people, the solid orthodoxy is not only revealed but even exposing to much traditional Christianity.

Basically, for over a week, what I have heard from you is that you don't LIKE some things the way they were said. Nothing heterodox or heretical has been proved as having been introduced by Witness Lee.

Originally posted by sonship

If they were harshly persecuted in China does not mean they must have been teaching total truth about Christianity as you seem to be implying. Christians with orthodox beliefs are also being harshly persecuted and even killed in many Islamic countries.

No one denies that other Christians are being persecuted elsewhere. There is no reas ...[text shortened]... e said. Nothing heterodox or heretical has been proved as having been introduced by Witness Lee.

That's your opinion. And I have mine.