Witness Lee's Local Church Cult

Originally posted by gswilm
[b] The Error of Insisting on three 'Persons' as a Litmus Test of Orthodoxy.

http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/Geisler-Rhodes/Persons-as-test-of-orthodoxy.html

A sample of the article:

Augustus H. Strong, whom Geisler and Rhodes referred to as "the noted Baptist theologian," said:

The term ‘person’ only appro ...[text shortened]... them, who shall constrain him to use them? I cannot.9

sonship (from gswilm's ID)[/b]

Of course we must not confuse the three "PERSONS" of the Holy Trinity with people, but "Persons" is the best word we have to identify the emotional ability of love within the Godhead.

Originally posted by RJHinds

The Creed declares:

What quality the Father has, the Son has, and the Holy Spirit has.

I suppose that the REASON the creed states that is because the Word of God states something -

"All that the Father has is Mine; for this reason I have said that He receives of Mine and will declare it to you." (John 16:15)

Witness Lee gave first and greater attention to what is written in the Holy Bible. And for this some would be cult fighters made a rush to judgment. Maybe the things Witness Lee spoke didn't have enough of the "traditional flavor" they were use to.

Our reception of the truth should indeed be cautious. But it should be cautious not according solely to what is traditional, but what the Scriptures state.

I sense that you may be getting weary of these lessons from me. Perhaps, you are having some reconsideration. I don't know.

However you DID start this thread with its accusatory tone "Witness Lee's Local Church Cult" . So my rebuttals to your accusatory thread title will probably continue.

Retracting your accusation of "Cult" might persuade me to curtail some further rebuttals and comments, maybe.

Therefore, the Father is Spirit, the Son is Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is Spirit. And the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, and the Holy Spirit is Lord.

Thankyou for agreeing then that "The Lord is the Spirit" as Witness Lee was condemned for teaching.

That is unless you think the Father is one Spirit, the Son is another Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is yet a THIRD Spirit.

It should be noted that the titles "the Spirit of God" is used seamlessly and interchangeably with "the Spirit of Christ" (Romans 8:9-11) .

And "the Spirit of Christ" is a title used seamlessly and interchangeably with "Christ" there.

"Yet if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not of Him. But if Christ is in you, ..." (Rom. 8:9c,10a).

But we are not finished yet. In the same passage "Christ" Himself and "the Spirit of Christ" are also used seamlessly and interchangeably with the title "the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead" .

Examine how seamlessly and interchangeably Paul passes from one title to the next to the next -

" ... if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Yet if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not of Him. But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the spirit [human spirit] is life because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, ..." (See Romans 8:9-11)

The Spirit of Christ is also the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead. He is the SAME Spirit. He is the Spirit of God. He is the Spirit of Christ. He is Christ Himself, and He is the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead.

He who raised Jesus from the dead is the Father -

" ... just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father .." (Rom. 6:4)

Why don't you write the writers of the Open Letter against Witness Lee and tell them that you have come to see that indeed "Now the Lord is the Spirit" as Paul wrote and as Witness Lee repeated?

You did write above -

Therefore, the Father is Spirit, the Son is Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is Spirit. And the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, and the Holy Spirit is Lord.

And you go on to write -

But we must not forget this from the creed:

We must not forget from the plain words of the Bible, firstly, I say.

That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity, neither blending their persons nor dividing their essence.

And no signer of the Open Letter has been able to prove to me that Brother Witness Lee taught against worship of one God and the trinity in unity.

Now for no blending? Let's see what the Bible says first. What would you call this besides BLENDING -

"In that day you will know that I am in My Father , and you in Me, and I in you." (John 14:20)

I do not know why the word mingling or even "blending" [/b] could not be used here. Christ is in the Father. But the believers are in Christ. And while He is in the Father and the believers are in Him, He Himself (Christ) is ALSO in them.

This is a divine recursion. This is certainly a mingling of God with man. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are mingled from eternity.
The saved are mingled with the Triune God not from eternity but though salvation.

If Christ is in the Father and the believers are in Christ but at the same time Christ is IN the believers ... why then we and the Triune God are all "blended" and mingled up together.

Instead of condemning a Christian teacher for encouraging the mingling of God and man we should be noticing that what is being affirmed is what the word of God states.

Do you instead desire to have only objectively three separated Persons - Father - Son - Holy Spirit ?

Witness Lee usually was heard saying that the Three of the Trinity were distinct but not separate. I find this to be a very helpful utterance that does not violate the revealed truths of the Bible.

If the Word was with God and the Word WAS God, then how can you insist there is no "blending" of the Father and the Son in the Trinity ?

For the person of the Father is a distinct person, the person of the Son is another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another.

And it is a pure LIE of someone that Witness Lee did not teach, as the Bible teaches, the relationship between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit revealed Three _______.

Here is a portion of a message given by Witness Lee from the book of Genesis about Abraham offering up his son Isaac. Lee said this was a type of the Father offering up His only Son Christ.

This portion of ministry proves Witness Lee fully comprehended and taught that the Father and the Son were distinct.

Isaac typified Christ. We have seen that Abraham answered God's call to go to Mount Moriah to offer Isaac. This is history. However, if we view this matter from the perspective of God's revelation, we shall see that what Abraham did to Isaac is a vivid picture of what the Father did to His beloved Son. When Abraham journeyed to Mount Moriah with Isaac, two young servants accompanied him. On the third day, Abraham put the two servants aside, saying, "I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you" (v. 5). From that point on, the story was different. It was no longer a story of four people—the father, the son, and the two servants; it was now a story of Abraham and his son Isaac. Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and laid it upon Isaac, who bore it to the top of Mount Moriah. Compare this with John 19:17, which says, "And bearing the cross Himself, He went out to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha." Isaac walked the same path on the way to Mount Moriah that the Lord Jesus later walked on the way to Golgotha. Before Christ bore the cross and walked to Calvary, Golgotha, Isaac bore the wood for the burnt offering and walked along the same way. And Jesus was crucified on the same mount where Isaac was laid on the altar. Thus, we see that Abraham was a type of the Father, and Isaac, with the wood upon him, was a type of the Only Begotten Son of God. Isaac was brought as a lamb to the altar. Jesus was also "brought as a lamb to the slaughter" (Isa. 53:7).

. Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and laid it upon Isaac, who bore it to the top of Mount Moriah. Compare this with John 19:17, which says, "And bearing the cross Himself, He went out to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha." Isaac walked the same path on the way to Mount Moriah that the Lord Jesus later walked on the way to Golgotha. Before Christ bore the cross and walked to Calvary, Golgotha, Isaac bore the wood for the burnt offering and walked along the same way. And Jesus was crucified on the same mount where Isaac was laid on the altar. Thus, we see that Abraham was a type of the Father, and Isaac, with the wood upon him, was a type of the Only Begotten Son of God. Isaac was brought as a lamb to the altar. Jesus was also "brought as a lamb to the slaughter" (Isa. 53:7).

As Abraham and Isaac were climbing Mount Moriah, Isaac said, "Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" (v. 7). Abraham replied, "My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering" (v. 8). Here we see that the son fellowshipped with the father. Do you not believe that while Jesus was bearing the cross on the way to Calvary He fellowshipped with the Father? And do you not believe that the Father talked with His Son? I do. If you say that the Bible does not tell us of this, I would say that Genesis 22 tells us so. We need to have the sight and the listening ear to hear the heavenly conversation on the way to Mount Moriah. Abraham and Isaac typified the Father and the Son, and their fellowship on the way to Mount Moriah was a vivid picture depicting how Jesus the Son fellowshipped with the Father as He was bearing the cross to Calvary. Although we do not have a clear explanation of this in plain words in the New Testament, we do have the picture in the Old Testament, and a picture is better than a thousand words. The picture in Genesis 22 portrays something which words cannot explain. Although the writers of the New Testament did not describe the loving fellowship between the Father and the Son on the way to Calvary, it is clearly portrayed in the picture in Genesis 22.

The picture in Genesis 22 portrays something which words cannot explain. Although the writers of the New Testament did not describe the loving fellowship between the Father and the Son on the way to Calvary, it is clearly portrayed in the picture in Genesis 22. How we all need to see this picture. As we shall see, nearly every point regarding the type in Genesis 22 is covered in John 1.

...

My bolding.

Let us consider now some details of Isaac as a type of Christ. Isaac was Abraham's only son (vv. 2, 12, 16). This typifies Christ as God's only Son (John 3:16). Isaac was Abraham's beloved son (v. 2), and Christ was the Father's beloved Son in whom He delighted (Matt. 3:17). In 22:5 we see that Isaac took his father's will, and in Matthew 26:39 we see that Christ chose the Father's will. In the picture in Genesis 22, we see that Isaac, a full-grown man, was obedient unto death (vv. 9-10).

Likewise, when the Lord Jesus was about to die, He said, "Not as I will, but as You will" (Matt. 26:39). In Philippians 2:8 we are told that Christ was obedient unto death. Look again at the picture: Isaac was obedient unto the altar. He not only followed the father to the foot of the mount; he also obeyed him in taking up the wood and in being bound. He did not resist. Even when the father laid him on the altar, took the knife, and stretched out his hand to slay him, he did not rebel. He was obedient unto death. If we consider all these aspects of Isaac as a type of Christ as portrayed in the Old Testament, we shall see that they were sovereignly arranged, matching the clear word of the New Testament revelation.

Maybe you should write the signers of the Open Letter criticizing Witness Lee and tell them to go read this message on Genesis from his "Life Study of Genesis". It was messages 57 and 58 given in the late 1970s.

Originally posted by sonship

The Creed declares:

What quality the Father has, the Son has, and the Holy Spirit has.

I suppose that the [b]REASON the creed states that is because the Word of God states something -

"All that the Father has is Mine; for this reason I have said that He receives of Mine and will declare it to you." (John 16:15) [/b ...[text shortened]... nd the Son on the way to Calvary, it is clearly portrayed in the picture in Genesis 22. [/quote]

Lee is criticizing Christians who believe in the Trinity Doctrine when he makes the following statement:

"They think of the Father as one Person, sending the Son, another Person, to accomplish redemption, after which the Son sends the Spirit, yet another Person.... To split the Godhead into three separate Persons is not the revelation of the Bible...."

Witness Lee, Life Messages, p. 164

I believe the following is enough for me to identify Mr. Lee as a cult leader. Even though he may actually know the true teachings of Christianity, he chooses to revel in his false teachings.

"THE SON IS THE FATHER, AND THE SON IS THE SPIRIT ....and the Lord Jesus who is the Son is also the Eternal Father. Our Lord is the Son, and He is also the Father."

Witness Lee, Concerning the Triune God, p. 18-19.

"The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not three separate Persons or three Gods; they are one God, one reality, one person."

Witness Lee, The Triune God to Be Life to the Tripaetite Man, 1970, p. 48.

The word "person" is used to describe the three members of the Godhead because the word "person" is appropriate. A person is self-aware, can speak, love, hate, say "you," "yours," "me," "mine," etc. Each of the three persons in the Trinity demonstrates these qualities.

We must not overlook the following statement from a former student of Mr. Lee"

"The doctrinal matters are harder to pin on them, because Lee has said just about everything and its opposite. I even remember him bragging in trainings about being able to contradict himself and get away with it. The example I recall is him advocating tritheism in one long message, and in the next, modalism. He said both were biblical. He seemed to revel in the nonsense of it all."

I don't believe this student was lying, because from what I have seen the shoe fits Mr. Lee.

All I am doing is defending my Christian faith.

Many churches use singular arguements in defending their church. One line that defines their church as being "God's" church.

Just as all the scripture is all (40+ books) one Word. So the philosiphy of a church must agree with All of the one Word.

"I have not come to do away with the Law, but to fulfill the Law."

Originally posted by RJHinds

Lee is criticizing Christians who believe in the Trinity Doctrine when he makes the following statement:

"They think of the Father as one Person, sending the Son, another Person, to accomplish redemption, after which the Son sends the Spirit, yet another Person.... To split the Godhead into three separate Persons is not the revelation of the Bible...."

Witness Lee, Life Messages, p. 164

I believe the following is enough for me to identify Mr. Lee as a cult leader. Even though he may actually know the true teachings of Christianity, he chooses to revel in his false teachings.

I don't think that isolated paragraph is sufficient to identify Witness Lee as a cult leader. Nor would I take any isolated criticism by you, that a orthodox Christian must believe in a 6,000 year old universe makes you a cult leader.

You may not agree with Witness Lee's statement there. I don't think that disapproval is enough to identify him as a false teacher leading a cult.

Here is the statement in its context:

Erroneous Concepts of the Trinity

The traditional explanation of the Trinity is grossly inadequate and borders on tritheism. When the Spirit of God is joined with us, God is not left behind, nor does Christ remain on the throne. This is the impression Christianity gives. They think of the Father as one Person, sending the Son, another Person, to accomplish redemption, after which the Son sends the Spirit, yet another Person. The Spirit, in traditional thinking, comes into the believers, while the Father and Son are left on the throne. When believers pray, they are taught to bow before the Father and pray in the name of the Son. To Split the Godhead into these separate Persons is not the revelation of the Bible, but the doctrine of the Nicene Creed.

When I was in Rome, I saw two paintings in the Vatican. One was of an old, bearded man sitting down, with a young son standing at his side, and a dove flying overhead. This picture, we were told, represented the three Persons in the Trinity. There was another painting right next to it, similar to it, with an old man sitting, a young man standing, and a dove flying above; however, this one also had a young woman standing there. Here were four persons, with Mary included! Should we not battle against such teachings until there is no place for them?

[See Life Messages, Vol. 2 (#42-75), Chapter 19, Section 2,
My bolding]

http://www.ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooksDsp.cfm?id=30FDFD60EE

Church historian Phillip Schaff admitted the problem of some teachers sounded Tri-Theistic.

"Many passages off the Nicene Fathers have unquestionably a Tri-Theistic sound."

[History of the Christian Church, Vol. III, AP & A Edition, p.276]


You continue:

"THE SON IS THE FATHER, AND THE SON IS THE SPIRIT ....and the Lord Jesus who is the Son is also the Eternal Father. Our Lord is the Son, and He is also the Father."

Witness Lee, Concerning the Triune God, p. 18-19.

First of all, in that publication I would point out some of the the other major section headings:

A MYSTERY OF MYSTERIES

WE CANNOT UNDERSTAND, BUT WE CAN ENJOY

GOD IS ONLY ONE

GOD SPEAKS AS "I" AND ALSO AS "US"

THE MATTER OF THE FATHER, THE SON,
AND THE SPIRIT

ALL THREE—
THE FATHER, SON, AND SPIRIT—ARE GOD

THE SON IS THE FATHER,
AND THE SON IS ALSO THE SPIRIT [RJHind's reference]

THE SON WHO PRAYS
IS THE FATHER WHO LISTENS

THE REASON GOD IS THREE-IN-ONE

THE FATHER, SON, AND SPIRIT ARE ALL IN US

"CHRIST IS THE SPIRIT"—
THE SCRIPTURAL SAYING

IT IS WHOLLY A MATTER OF THE SPIRIT

So this book has a rather well rounded approach to the mystery and experience of God.

Here in the very same book Witness Lee spoke of Hebrews 1:8,9 which could be considered to speak of "God's God"

Furthermore, Hebrews 1:8-9 says, "Of the Son he saith...O God...thy God...." First it says, "Of the Son he saith...O God." This means the Son is God. But later it says "thy God." This is rather difficult to explain! Since the Son is called "O God," why does it also say "thy God"? According to our mental understanding, this simply means "God's God." Based upon this concept, it is no wonder that not long ago I received a book saying that this passage speaks of two Gods. Actually, it is not speaking here of two Gods, but of one God from different aspects. From the aspect of the Son being God, He is God; therefore, it says "O God." And from the aspect of the Son being man, God is His God; therefore, it says "thy God." We must see the various aspects of our Lord. On one hand, He is God, and on the other hand, He is also man. As God, He is God; as man, God is His God. On one hand, He is the One who prays, and on the other hand, He is also the One who listens to the prayer. He is both.

And here in the same book Witness Lee spoke of the Triune God having the aspect of "three-in-one" AND "one-in-three" [EDITED] showing his approach is quite balanced to the entire revelation of Scripture.

The Triune God—the Father, Son, and Spirit—has the aspect of being three-in-one and also the aspect of being one-in-three. As the three-in-one, He is "I," as the one-in-three, He is "us." From the aspect of the three-in-one, "the Word was God"; from the aspect of the one-in-three, "the Word was with God" (John 1:1). From the aspect of the three-in-one, "the Lord is the Spirit"; from the aspect of the one-in-three, it is "the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:17). From the aspect of the three-in-one, the Son and the Father are one (John 10:30; 14:7-11); from the aspect of the one-in-three, the Son is with the Father (1:1-2), the Son shares the glory with the Father (17:5), the Son is the beloved of the Father (v. 24), the Son has become one with the Father (vv. 11, 21-22), and the Son takes the same action with the Father (14:23).

Continue below.

Originally posted by RJHinds

You continue:

"The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not three separate Persons or three Gods; they are one God, one reality, one person."

Witness Lee, The Triune God to Be Life to the Tripaetite Man, 1970, p. 48.

What is wrong with that?

The Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit are not three God's for sure.

Would you argue that they are three "separate Persons" ?
It is hard indeed to say the Bible shows them as "separate".

Says Witness Lee only?
No, but says other careful teachers of the Scripture:

IE. Tertullian (A.D. 160-220) who we think was the first to be recorded using the word "Substance" and "Person" in regard to the Trinity. In his new words to attempt to explain the mystery he introduced them into the language of the Church. Tertullian wrote in "Against Praxeas (a Modalist, II -

... in the case of this heresy [Modalism], which supposes itself to possess the pure truth, in thinking that one cannot believe in One Only God in any other way than by saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the very selfsame Person. As if in this way also One were not All, in that All are of One, by unity [that is] of substance; while they mystery of the dispensation [economy] is still guarded which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from Whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

[My bolding]

Notice that Tertullian said the "HE" referring to God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit "is one God".

It was never easy for anyone to speak how God could be three-in-one and one-in-three.

Did Witness Lee ever speak of "three Persons" in his long career? Yes.

1.)

THE VISION OF THE MARK OF GOD'S ECONOMY

The economy of God with its mark was unveiled at the beginning of this book, but after reading all the foregoing chapters, it is still possible to miss this economy. In simple words, God's economy is to work Himself into us, and in order to accomplish this, He must do it in three Persons —the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.

(my bolding)

2.)

On the day of resurrection and on the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit of Jesus, the Spirit who includes all the aforementioned elements, came into and upon the early Christians (John 20:22; Titus 3:5-6). On the one hand, this Spirit comes into us, and on the other hand, He comes upon us. In this way God in His three Persons mingles Himself with us.

3.)

God never intended to give us the doctrine of the Trinity in the Scriptures. The doctrine of the Divine Trinity only involves us in many different concepts. But the Scriptures do reveal how God accomplished His divine economy in three distinct persons.

These instances all came from the book "The Economy of God" by Witness Lee. Notice that though Lee said on more than one occasion "three Persons" he did not say "three [SEPARATE] Persons".

You continue:

The word "person" is used to describe the three members of the Godhead because the word "person" is appropriate. A person is self-aware, can speak, love, hate, say "you," "yours," "me," "mine," etc. Each of the three persons in the Trinity demonstrates these qualities.

It may be useful. But it should not be pressed so far as to make it your litmus test of cult leader detection.

We must not overlook the following statement from a former student of Mr. Lee"

"The doctrinal matters are harder to pin on them, because Lee has said just about everything and its opposite. I even remember him bragging in trainings about being able to contradict himself and get away with it. The example I recall is him advocating tritheism in one long message, and in the next, modalism. He said both were biblical. He seemed to revel in the nonsense of it all."

The Bible itself says paradoxical things. The Bible says something and something which sounds like an opposite.

The Bible speaks of free will and also predestination.
The Bible speaks of the Father raising the Son from the dead and the Son raising Himself from the dead.
The Bible speaks of one God and yet a God who is the Father, God who is the Son, and God who is the Holy Spirit. And says they all exist at the same moment from eternity to eternity.

The Bible also says the Word BECAME flesh and the last Adam BECAME a life giving Spirit.

Jesus said the He did not come to the world to judge the world.
And Jesus said that it was for judgement that He came into the world.

Jesus said the he who was not against Him was with Him.
And Jesus said he who was not with Him was against Him.

By pouring out one's heart in ministry over many years it is no surprise that a servant of God also would be caught making seemingly contradictory statements.

I don't believe this student was lying, because from what I have seen the shoe fits Mr. Lee.

As is seen above your "shoe" could also fit on the whole Bible and on the ministry of Jesus Christ.

All things considered, Witness Lee was very orthodox. The Trinity is a difficult and perhaps impossible paradox to fully explain. But for sure there is ONE God. And He is three-one not so that we may have a perplexing doctrine but that we may experience and enjoy God.

Witness Lee brought thousands of us into a deeper enjoyment and experience of the mysterious ONE Triune God.

The tendencies of the slanderous suspicions [EDITED] of some of your critics seems to be for some other reasons.

All I am doing is defending my Christian faith.

I am also defending that I am not a part of a cult or following a false teacher.

If your faith is that there are three separate Gods, then I think you do not understand the Christian faith well. I can go along with an occasional usage of the phrase "three Persons" but I don't have to agree with "three [SEPARATE] persons" and certainly not three Gods.

You follow your conscience and we in the local churches will follow our consciences too. We're not a cult of false teachings because a teacher labored to present a balanced presentation of the exceedingly mysterious revelation of God in the Bible.

Originally posted by sonship
You continue:

"The Father, the Son, and the Spirit are not three separate Persons or three Gods; they are one God, one reality, one person."

Witness Lee, The Triune God to Be Life to the Tripaetite Man, 1970, p. 48.

What is wrong with that?

The Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit are not three God's for sure.

Would you a ...[text shortened]... to present a balanced presentation of the exceedingly mysterious revelation of God in the Bible.

You don't seem to get what I am defending. I am defending the Christian Creeds of the undivided Christian Church, NOT the Roman Catholic denomination.

Also you are deliberately misrepresenting my position. I said nothing about (SEPARATE) Persons in the TRINITY.

Let me repeat the main portion of the Creed that the cult leader Mr. Lee disagrees with below:

Now this is the catholic (universal) faith:

That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity, neither blending their persons nor dividing their essence. For the person of the Father is a distinct person, the person of the Son is another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another.

Christian truth compels us to confess each person individually as both God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords.

First, this Universal Christian Creed says we are not to blend their Persons, which Mr. lee does when denies that God is three Persons, but only one Person.

Second, this Universal Christian Creed says that each of these three persons are DISTINCT from one another. That means they are not the SAME Person. The cult leader Mr. Lee says the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the same person.

Second, this Universl Christian Creed says we are to confess each person individually as both God and Lord....

That settles it for me that the Father is a distinct and individual Person and the Son is a distinct and individul Person and the Holy Spirit is a distinct and individual Person and we are not to blend these three Person into One Person. They are not the SAME Person.

This prove to me that Mr. Lee is a false teacher and is teaching false doctrine.

Originally posted by RJHinds

You don't seem to get what I am defending. I am defending the Christian Creeds of the undivided Christian Church, NOT the Roman Catholic denomination.

I understood that. I am saying that FIRST we defend the statements of the Holy Bible.

The local churches are not "anti-creeds". We hold the creeds of Christiandom to be subservient to the pure utterances of the Scripture.

Also you are deliberately misrepresenting my position. I said nothing about (SEPARATE) Persons in the TRINITY.

I don't think I misrepresent that you oppose a teacher QUOTING and teaching that the Son given is the eternal Father according to Isaiah 9:6. You DID oppose that teaching.

I don't think I misrepresented that you oppose a teacher QUOTING and teaching that "the Lord is the Spirit" according to Second Corinthians 3:17.

Pesky fellow I know I am. But YOU started this thread accusing Witness Lee of being a cult leader. I have been meeting with the local churches for many years. I have been posting here for about half a decade perhaps. I didn't bring up Witness Lee too much except I gave credit to where it is due when I quoted him.

Mostly, I have simply taught what is in the Bible and what Christians experience.

So now you get lots of replies instead of me just lying down and you walking over us.

Let me repeat the main portion of the Creed that the cult leader Mr. Lee disagrees with below:

There you go again. So you see, further debunking is called for to refute your ... innacurcies (politely put).

Now this is the catholic (universal) faith:

Incidently, I did not ever think that your use of the word "catholic" meant specifically the Roman Catholic Church. I think YOU think I assumed that because of one of the quotations I used.

I understand you usage of the phrases with catholic in them. (EDITED]

That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity,

Yes, "we" Christians do, including all of us meeting as local churches.

neither blending their persons nor dividing their essence. For the person of the Father is a distinct person, the person of the Son is another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another.

And the Son given is the Eternal Father according to Isaiah 9:6 in addition to the Father sending the Son and the Son praying and obeying the Father.

So we do not believe something EXTRA. We wish to embrace the whole scope of the divine revelation. And that even though it is really hard to explain in human language.

The Spirit came and decended on Jesus as a dove - an obvious distinction. HOWEVER on the other side of the truth "Now the Lord is the Spirit".

We who have sat under Witness Lee's teaching do not believe something EXTRA. We desire to enbrace with faith the entire scope of God's revelation of Himself.

For this you accuse us of being a cult.

Incidently, the term "cult" is a hard one to pen down. Generally it could be used to mean any group that you do not like or trust.

At any rate, I am okay about being persecuted as a "cult" when I desire to stand upon the WHOLE counsel of God rather than a piece of it for the sake of a limited creedal formula (however how helpful in some regards).

Christian truth compels us to confess each person individually as both God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords.

What are you now saying that we in the local churches do not know?

You are teaching me nothing new. If you were to attend a Lord's Table meeting of one of the local churches, you would probably hear the saints praying to the Lord Jesus and also addressing the Father too.

You're not telling me anything that we have not enjoyed and practiced for decades.

And why not? The Bible tells us about calling "Abba Father" on some occasions (Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal.4:6)

So if Jesus cried "Abba" and the Apostle Paul tells us of the experience of Christians calling "Abba Father" as well as them calling on the name of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. 1:2) then we pray to both the Father and to Jesus.

We also want to enjoy that AND the truth that the Son given to us is the Eternal Father and the Lord is the Spirit.

Once again. We do not believe something EXTRA. Maybe you need to believe MORE. Or else you would not accuse us of being a cult because we want to believe MORE of what the Bible teaches, even up to the whole plenary revelation of this God.

"The creed forbids you to say the Son is the Father." That's what I hear you saying.

"The creed forbids you to say the Lord is the Spirit." That's what I hear you saying.

Some creed may forbid this but the Word of God allows us.

First, this Universal Christian Creed says we are not to blend their Persons, which Mr. lee does when denies that God is three Persons, but only one Person.

I never heard of "The Universal Christian Creed". But to accuse brother Witness Lee of denying three Persons, but only one Person is not accurate. I quoted to you instances going back to the late 1970s where he spoke about "three distinct Persons".

He did not press the matter of three Persons to the point that it would lead to three Gods. Lee has always been concerned with the experience of the Christians under his ministry. And it is quite helpful to realize that we are not like the Moslems who only have an OBJECTIVE God far away. Rather the Father, Son, and Spirit are indwelling us day by day.

So we can see why Witness Lee emphasized that the Triune God is one God who is in us to be our very life. We should be concerned for experience and life and not just formal accurate theology in an objective way.

Now since you so soon forgot, I quote again Witness Lee using on occasion the phrase "three distinct Persons" going back to the 70s.

Two great Mysteries in God's Economy

Is this the Father’s name, the Son’s name, or the Spirit’s name? If the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three distinct persons, how could three distinct persons have just one name? The Lord wisely spoke in this way. If He had said, “baptizing them into the Father and the Son and the Spirit,” this would have caused the disciples to understand that these are three separate Beings.

Life Study of Genesis

Regarding the matter of the Trinity, according to the Bible we believe in the one God, the Triune God—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. We believe exactly in what the Bible says. But some say, in their definition of the Trinity according to their concept, that the "Father, Son, and Spirit are three distinct persons in the nature of one God." Then what about this one God?

[my bolding]

Second, this Universal Christian Creed says that each of these three persons are DISTINCT from one another.

Then here you are saying what Witness Lee taught. He always said the Three of the Triune God were distinct but not separate.

You are not teaching me ANYTHING here. What you are excited about I did get to know under the ministry of Witness Lee years ago. And of course I noticed this from my own reading of the Holy Bible.

Now it is not always easy to explain the Trinity. You seem to think that it should be by adhering to a creed. But any creed may not well embrace all that the Scripture has to say.

I do not believe that the Nicene Creed spoke of "the seven Spirits of God" mentioned in the book of Revelation. And I am not sure that all the books had entered into the New Testament canon by that time either.

So Creeds are limited.

That means they are not the SAME Person. The cult leader Mr. Lee says the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the same person.

Here again human language gets us into some trouble as we wrestle with the nature of God with our limited minds.

Virtually the same Person is the Father to you as the Holy Spirit.
Virtually the same Person is the Son to you as the Father.
Virtually the same Person is the Holy Spirit to you as the Son.

I bet that you can detect NO DIFFERENCE in your experience of God.

Here Paul, speaking experiencially, shows that no difference in Person can be detected by the Christians in the indwelling of God.

"But you are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Yet if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not of Him. But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the spirit is life because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortals bodies through His Spirit who indwells you." (Rom. 8:9-11)

You have to let the Word of God speak and your Creed take a back seat. There is NO experiential difference in this passage of the believers' enjoyment of the indwelling God.

The Spirit of God is the same Person and the Spirit of Christ is the same Person as Christ is the same Person as the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead.

Your creed is limited. The Bible does not speak a lie. The One God indwelling the saints has interchangeable titles -

1.) "The Spirit of God"
2.) "The Spirit of Christ"
3.) "Christ"
4.) "The Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead"

It is the same "Person". So no wonder the prophet said that "unto us" a born child is called the Mighty God and a Son given is called Eternal Father.

Lift the word of God ABOVE your Creed and you will do better.

[quote]
Second, this Universl Ch.....

It is the same "Person". So no wonder the prophet said that "unto us" a born child is called the Mighty God and a Son given is called Eternal Father.

Lift the word of God ABOVE your Creed and you will do better.

Second, this Universl Christian Creed says we are to confess each person individually as both God and Lord....

You are not telling me anything which is not our practice learned under the ministry in the local churches.

There is ONE Lord (Eph. 4:5) and He lives in the Christians.
And the Bible also speaks of "the Lord and His Christ" (Revelation 11:15)

Witness Lee knew the Bible better than you did.
I think I know the Bible better than you also.
However, the main point I make is that the Bible transcends your Creed.

Can you show me a passage saying the Lord is NOT the Spirit as clearly as it says "Now the Lord is the Spirit" ?

Why not embrace ALL that the Scripture says not truncating vital truths for the sake of preserving a limited Creed?

That settles it for me that the Father is a distinct and individual Person

Can you quote me a passage where the Bible describes the Father as specifically "individual Person" ?

I can quote you a passage where the Son given is called Eternal Father - Isaiah 9:6.

Or do you think the Son is only CALLED Eternal Father but is not REALLY the Eternal Father? If so why do you believe that He is the "Prince of Peace" but is not, but only CALLED the "Prince of Peace" ?

Does your Creed allow me to call Jesus "Prince of Peace" ?
If so why doesn't it allow me to call the Son the Eternal Father ?

and the Son is a distinct and individul Person and the Holy Spirit is a distinct and individual Person and we are not to blend these three Person into One Person. They are not the SAME Person.

Can you show me a passage where it clearly says that the Son is an individual Person not to be blended with the Holy Spirit ?

Your Creed may insist on that. But does the Bible itself insist on that?

Can you detect any difference between the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit in your experience ? I cannot.

This prove to me that Mr. Lee is a false teacher and is teaching false doctrine.

It demonstrates to me that you lean towards a Tri-Theistic heresy of three "separate" Gods. You are behaving like a three-fold Moslem for whom God is only an objective Person far away "up there".

What about the Triune God indwelling us with no way for us to detect that they are separated ?

How close is the Life of God to God Himself? I would say that the life of God that was with the Father is so close to the Father as to be inseparable.

See First John 1:1-3 - "And the life was manifested and we have seen and testify and report to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us."

It is very hard to say that the eternal life that was with the Father was a separate Person from the Father. The life that is with a person is too close indeed TO that person.

Originally posted by sonship

You don't seem to get what I am defending. I am defending the Christian Creeds of the undivided Christian Church, NOT the Roman Catholic denomination.

I understood that. I am saying that [b] FIRST we defend the statements of the Holy Bible.

The local churches are not "anti-creeds". We hold the creeds of Christiandom ...[text shortened]... word of God ABOVE your Creed and you will do better.

[quote]
Second, this Universl Ch.....[/b]

I already informed you that the Hebrew scholars disagree with Mr. Lee on his understanding of Isaiah 9:6 where the KJV has "The everlasting Father" for the translation of the Hebrew. I looked it up myself in the Gesenius HEBREW-CHALDEE LEXICON of the OLD TESTAMENT. It has those exact combination of Hebrew letters used in the Hebrew scriptures and translates it as meaning perpetual father (of his country).

I agree with your earlier statement that God can use cult leaders to teach us things. I learned many things from the Jehovah's Witness cult and I am sure you have also learned from Lee's Local Church cult. But we must not let the propaganda blind us from the truth. We must continue to study to make ourselves approved.

I don't wish you to misunderstand that I am saying there are three different Spirits in the Godhead. I am simply maintaining the teachings of the Church that there are three different Persons made of one Spirit in the Triune God. That is, God is Spirit, the Son is Spirit, and the Holy Ghost is Spirit. Satan and his angels are also spirit beings, but of a different spirit.

If Christ Jesus the Son of God is the very same Person as the Holy Spirit and the very same Person as the Father, why did He say I will ask the Father to send ANOTHER comforter, the Holy Spirit, if they are all the SAME? It does not make sense for Jesus to speak of ANOTHER, if He were actually talking about His very own Spirit within Him as Mr. Lee falsely teaches.

And why must the Son ask the Father anything, if He is that very Father. It is nonsens to believe Jesus was saying He was going to ask Himself to send Himself to the disciples. Mr. Lee is suggesting that Jesus is a deceiver, like Satan.

Do you see why that student of Mr. Lee's said that he taught tritheism and then modalism, saying they were both Biblical, and seemed to revel in the nonsense of it all?

Originally posted by RJHinds

I already informed you that the Hebrew scholars disagree with Mr. Lee on his understanding of Isaiah 9:6 where the KJV has "The everlasting Father" for the translation of the Hebrew. I looked it up myself in the Gesenius HEBREW-CHALDEE LEXICON of the OLD TESTAMENT. It has those exact combination of Hebrew letters used in the Hebrew scriptures and

Just so you know, I have been through debates with orthodox Jews about Isaiah 9:6's "Father of eternity" on the Jews4Jesus Forum. They have plenty of reasons for agreeing with Witness Lee's critics that the Father God of the Tanakh simply cannot be the referent of the son. They don't believe God became a man in Jesus Christ. Right?

But I think you as a Christian DO. Right?
Normal Giesler (some of whose other books I've read I think are pretty good) was the main ringleader of your Open Letter, with Ron Rhodes.

Below are his criticisms and the responses of the co-workers to those criticisms in detail. Why don't you spend some time to read them?

Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes claim that Witness Lee’s statement that “the Son is the Father” based on Isaiah 9:6 is modalistic. In their critique they attempt to explain how the name “Eternal Father” does not mean what it plainly says. When the same arguments were advanced over thirty years ago, Witness Lee thoroughly dismantled them in the booklet What a Heresy—Two Divine Fathers, Two Life-giving Spirits, and Three Gods!2 Geisler and Rhodes completely ignore the points made by Witness Lee in that booklet and simply rehash the same accusations. In examining the present critique, it is instructive to compare Witness Lee’s treatment of the words of the Bible with that of Geisler and Rhodes and to see where each approach leads.

Witness Lee starts from the conviction that the Bible means what it says. His hermeneutic is based on God’s eternal purpose and plan, that is, His economy. He saw that in God’s economy the coinherence of the Triune God is a model of the believers’ relationship with God in Christ. Geisler and Rhodes, on the other hand, start from the presumption that the words of the Bible cannot mean what they say. On that basis they:

Errantly insist that the Father in the Godhead is not mentioned in the Old Testament;

Response - http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/Geisler-Rhodes/Christ-and-the-Father.html#NewTestament

Negate the word “Father” in Isaiah 9:6, relying on a rabbinical paraphrase to undergird their preconceptions;

Response - http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/Geisler-Rhodes/Christ-and-the-Father.html#FatherofEternity

Support their interpretation using a rabbinical paraphrase that changes key passages in Isaiah;

Response - http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/Geisler-Rhodes/Christ-and-the-Father.html#Targums

Contradict Geisler’s own statements concerning the identity of Yahweh; and

Response - http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/Geisler-Rhodes/Christ-and-the-Father.html#ContradictoryStatements

Subvert the plain meaning of the Bible to promote a doctrine lacking any power to edify its readers.

Response - http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/Geisler-Rhodes/Christ-and-the-Father.html#SensusLiteralis

And some people also stagger in unbelief that a child born could be the Mighty God.
Jehovah's Witnesses are among those unbelieving of Jehovah the Mighty God becomming a born child.

They can say that the Eternal Father there is some OTHER Father. But I think it should be taken as the same Divine Father as is indicated elsewhere in the same book of Isaiah:

I agree with your earlier statement that God can use cult leaders to teach us things.

I don't remember saying that. Quote me if you think I made that point.
I may have referenced some teacher who was also known for supporting some OTHER questionable matters of Christian theology.

I don't think I made a specific point about learning from cult leaders.
And you really haven't defined what a "cult" is yet.

Cont. latter:

Originally posted by RJHinds

I don't wish you to misunderstand that I am saying there are three different Spirits in the Godhead. I am simply maintaining the teachings of the Church that there are three different Persons made of one Spirit in the Triune God. That is, God is Spirit, the Son is Spirit, and the Holy Ghost is Spirit. Satan and his angels are also spirit beings, but of a different spirit.

If Christ Jesus the Son of God is the very same Person as the Holy Spirit and the very same Person as the Father, why did He say I will ask the Father to send ANOTHER comforter, the Holy Spirit, if they are all the SAME? It does not make sense for Jesus to speak of ANOTHER, if He were actually talking about His very own Spirit within Him as Mr. Lee falsely teaches.

And why must the Son ask the Father anything, if He is that very Father. It is nonsens to believe Jesus was saying He was going to ask Himself to send Himself to the disciples. Mr. Lee is suggesting that Jesus is a deceiver, like Satan.

Do you see why that student of Mr. Lee's said that he taught tritheism and then modalism, saying they were both Biblical, and seemed to revel in the nonsense of it all?

What Witness Lee taught was that both Tr-Theism and Modalism were extremes and to be avoided.

What Witness Lee taught was that on either side of the revelation of God in the Bible were two opposing extremes that Christians should avoid -

Tri-Theism having three Gods and Modalism saying God could only be One of the three at ONE TIME or one single "mode".

Do you understand ?
Do you believe me or think I am being innacurate?

I sat under those teachings for years and heard him talk about the mystery of the Triune God. He emphasized experience and enjoyment of God and he confessed that the mystery could not be fully explained.

To the critics this book by Ron Kangus was released (in the late 1970s) to show that the two extremes were to be avoided.

Modaliam, Tritheism, or the Pure Revelation of the Triune God by Ron Kangus.

http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/booklets/modalism.html

A sample:

As the church Fathers discussed the inner nature of the Trinity, they attempted to avoid the extreme of modalism on the one hand and the extreme of tritheism on the other. As they sought to formulate an adequate definition of the Trinity, they themselves were often accused of being either modalists or tritheists, depending upon their emphasis, at any given time, of one aspect of truth at the expense of the other. Their difficulty lay in trying to avoid sounding modalistic while speaking of the fact that we have one unique God, and to avoid sounding tritheistic while speaking of the three Persons and Their economy.37 “Many passages of the Nicene fathers have unquestionably a tritheistic sound, but are neutralized by others which by themselves may bear a Sabellian construction; so that their position must be regarded as midway between these two extremes.” 38 [my bolding]

Originally posted by sonship

I don't wish you to misunderstand that I am saying there are three different Spirits in the Godhead. I am simply maintaining the teachings of the Church that there are three different Persons made of one Spirit in the Triune God. That is, God is Spirit, the Son is Spirit, and the Holy Ghost is Spirit. Satan and his angels are also spirit beings, but ...[text shortened]... ition must be regarded as midway between these two extremes.” 38 [my bolding]

[/b]

How come RJHinds doesn't list the number of experts that call his cherished young earth creationism crack pot science and bad theology as well ?

How come he doesn't as easily link us to a handy website announcing that his views on a 6,000 year old universe are the occasion of suspicion for many people from both science fields and Christian theology as well ?

I try not to link to false teachers. There are plenty of them around. But I will point out that the early Chrtistian Chruch believed in a young earth of less than 6,000 years old during their time.

Most of the Church Fathers interpreted Genesis 1 in a plain and straightforward way, as actual history. The six days were 24-hour days. Ephraim (Ephrem) the Syrian (306–373) and Basil of Caesarea (329–379) argued for the literal sense of Scripture against the distortions of allegory. Basil said twenty-four hours fill up the space of one day. Even Ambrose of Milan (330–397), mentor of Augustine, believed each day consisted of twenty-four hours, including both day and night. In addition to this, the Fathers believed that the earth was less than 6,000 years old.

Medieval (AD 600–1517) theologians, until later years, followed Augustine. They viewed creation as instantaneous, and the six days as a literary framework. An example is Anselm of Canterbury (c. 1033–1109).

Bede (c. 673–735) moderated Augustine’s view. He believed creation had occurred instantaneously but was formed over six 24-hour days. Others, such as Andrew of St. Victor (c. 1110–1175), rejected Augustine’s view and interpreted Genesis 1 literally.

The medieval church continued to believe that creation was sudden, not gradual, and occurred fewer than 6,000 years in the past. As interpreters began returning to a literal reading of Scripture, they began restoring the literal view of the days of creation.

The Reformation leaders (AD 1517–1700) believed the Bible is the final authority (sola scriptura). The Reformers rejected allegorization and returned toward a literal, grammatical-historical interpretation. Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564) argued that the earth was created in six 24-hour days, fewer than 6,000 years in the past.

Luther said, “We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago.” He also rejected Augustine’s view and said that “Evening and morning became one day” meant that Moses was “speaking of the natural day, which consists of twenty-four hours.”

Calvin believed that God’s creation was completed not in a moment but in six days. He concluded, based on Genesis 1:5, that God Himself took six days to accommodate His works to the capacity of men. Creation occurred little more than five thousand years in the past, not innumerable ages.

The Westminster Confession (1647) clearly affirmed that God created the world and all things in it “in the space of six days” (chapter 4, paragraph 1). “In the space of six days” was based on Calvin’s Genesis 1:5 comment. In Annotations upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (the Westminster Annotations, 1645), the Westminster authors specified concerning Genesis 1:5 that in the latter part of the verse, the word day is the natural day, consisting of twenty-four hours. This Presbyterian Confession, with its traditional view of creation, was also adopted by British and American Congregational and Baptist denominations.

https://answersingenesis.org/christianity/church/the-early-church-on-creation/

I believe Witness Lee is teaching truth mixed with error. That was the way that old serpent, the Devil, deceived Eve. Perhaps Witness Lee is indwelt with the spirit of the Devil.

Originally posted by CalJust
Members of this forum may have noticed that I am fairly tolerant and inclusive of other people's views, interpretations and opinions. This extends also to the Witness Lee movement, or called here the LC movement.

I readily concede that the doctrine of the Trinity is a hugely complex one. There seem to be many contradictory verses in the Bible, (e.g. some ...[text shortened]... ymore either.

But after all is said and done, if that is what floats your canoe, row with it!

When i look at the Trinity, it reminds me of a candle. (Not physically of course) The candle. We see Jesus, like the wax. We are most familiar with Him and can relate with Him the most. Jesus is the Word of God, become flesh. The Holy Spirit, is like the fire. Somewhat of a mystery. And the Father, like the wick. Jesus only reveals just a little about the Father.

Each a part of the other, yet individual.