- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@sonship
Everybody who cannot rebut teachings I write here now resorts instead to what I would call "Witness Lee shaming."
Notice that each failure to refute sound biblical teaching now invariably ends in something like - "Yea, but you follow that awful Witness Lee." That's some one who died in 1997.
The feeble excuse used by at least three posters here has not escaped my notice.
All you guys wanting to bring up Witness Lee are more interested in gossip then sound discussion of Christian doctrines.
@sonship saidThis reminds me of the song " You and me against the world" ..,... lol. Google it.
@sonship
Everybody who cannot rebut teachings I write here now resorts instead to what I would call "Witness Lee shaming."
Notice that each failure to refute sound biblical teaching now invariably ends in something like - "Yea, but you follow that awful Witness Lee." That's some one who died in 1997.
The feeble excuse used by at least thre ...[text shortened]... ng up Witness Lee are more interested in gossip then sound discussion of Christian doctrines.
You are on the wrong side of the fence. Your side is heading for damnation because Christ is not with you.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Rajk999
It is very hard to take you seriously anymore.
Its been a long time since I found anything you pointed out as an issue worth the time and effort to dignify.
You're just not a serious critic to reckon with.
@sonship saidYeah .. your calling on Jesus 10,000 times really set you apart from the rest. You are in a class by yourself, and now people can take you more seriously.. 😀
@Rajk999
It is very hard to take you seriously anymore.
Its been a long time since I found anything you pointed out as an issue worth the time and effort to dignify.
You're just not a serious critic to reckon with.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Rajk999
Stop mocking calling on the name of the dear Lord Jesus Christ.
And don't begrudge that the heavenly Father has a simple way men and women can GET TO KNOW the Lord Jesus.
I did not mean "10 times" to turn people off.
But I once had a terrible toothache. All I could do was hold my head and call 'Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, ... Jesus". And as a result of my desperation the Holy Spirit began to flow in me, uphold me, and enable me. It was wonderful.
Like the Psalmist I found out - "I love the Lord because He hears My voice, my supplication, because He inclines His ear to me; Therefore I will call upon Him all my days." (Psa. 116:1,2)
The Lord knows what is in your heart. And the Lord Jesus HEARS your voice.
It is not to be despised people.
@sonship saidYou seem to be declaring yourself the winner. I don't subscribe to the beliefs in the supernatural that both you and Rajk999 do, but I am interested in how religion can provide a code for living. Rajk999's "ministry" is about that. Your "ministry", on the other hand, seems to be little more than convoluted take-it-or-leave-it epistemology - a complete absence of ontology - all wrapped up in your narcissistic forum persona.
It is very hard to take you seriously anymore.
Its been a long time since I found anything you pointed out as an issue worth the time and effort to dignify. You're just not a serious critic to reckon with.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
@sonship saidI pointed out two in the post you were replying to!
@divegeesterThe are dozens!
In eight to ten years you haven't pointed out one.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
@sonship saidOf course not, you are just off piste with it.
I did not mean "10 times" to turn people off.
As Ghost of a Duke has pointed out Witness Lee was heavily influenced by numerology, a angle of study which I believe is filled with red herrings and false insight, and which I also feel is a road to error.
When you specify “10 times” it smacks of numerology.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
As Ghost of a Duke has pointed out Witness Lee was heavily influenced by numerology,
No he didn't.
He tried to. And you gullibly fell for it.
Notice here that even the Lord Jesus referred to numbers in a way that they on this occasion they had some symbolic significance.
Mark 8:18-21
"Having eyes, do you not see? and having ears, do you not hear? And do you not remember?
When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets filled with broken pieces did you take up? And they said to Him, Twelve.
And when I broke the seven for the four thousand, how many baskets filled with broke pieces did you take up? And they said, Seven.
And He said to them, Do you not yet understand? "
I don't think Jesus was practicing numerology here. He was drawing attention to some symbolic spiritual significance to numbers. Brother Lee sometimes did the same as well as many other Bible teachers.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
@sonship saidNo, Jesus wasn't practicing numerology. That's the point. Only Witness Lee does that by applying weird significance to numbers that have no significance. When Jesus speaks of five loaves he means five loaves.
@divegeester
As Ghost of a Duke has pointed out Witness Lee was heavily influenced by numerology,
No he didn't.
He tried to. And you gullibly fell for it.
Notice here that even the Lord Jesus referred to numbers in a way that they on this occasion they had some symbolic significance.
Mark 8:18-21
"Having eyes, do you not see? and having e ...[text shortened]... al significance to numbers. Brother Lee sometimes did the same as well as many other Bible teachers.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@ghost-of-a-duke saidNeither Christ nor the better Bible teachers who draw spiritual symbolism using numbers are allegorizing anything which cannot be deduced in plainer words usually.
No, Jesus wasn't practicing numerology. That's the point. Only Witness Lee does that by applying weird significance to numbers that have no significance. When Jesus speaks of five loaves he means five loaves.
You as a carnal minded atheist are expected to find "weird significance" with the plain biblical teaching that there is God. Its no surprise that you find lots of other things in the Bible of "weird significance". That's your unbelieving spiritual blindness.
"Weird significance" is the expected reaction from you on the entire Bible. "Weird significance' is likely to be your evaluation to plenty of things expounded by Bible teachers.
Anyone has the right to not agree with the exposition of typology or symbolism.
What can be deduced with symbolism Lee never allows to be more important that plainer teaching. Symbolism is only meant to enhance what is clearly taught elsewhere.
No one is going to make a major problem out of someone not agreeing that the sevens in Revelation are constructed with three plus four with a certain meaning or that twelve as three times four carries a certain meaning.
What can be taught by the significance of numbers here and there can be taught without this symbolism in plain words. You going after low hanging fruit. You're trying to pick things to complain about which are not that critical to agree with.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
@sonship saidI think not.
No one is going to make a major problem out of someone not agreeing that the sevens in Revelation are constructed with three plus four with a certain meaning or that twelve as three times four carries a certain meaning.
What can be taught by the significance of numbers here and there can be taught without this symbolism in plain words. ...[text shortened]... ing fruit. You're trying to pick things to complain about which are not that critical to agree with.
"The unique Creator, God, is triune, signified by the number three. Since the creation is represented before God by four living creatures (Revelation 4:6-9), the number four signifies creatures, especially man. Hence, three plus four means that God is added to the created man, and thus His purpose is being accomplished. The church is not only the creature, but the creature with the Creator as the Triune God dispensed into her. She is the real number seven: the real three, the Triune God, added to the real four, created man. Therefore the number seven denotes completion in God’s move, first in the old creation and then in the new creation, the church."
(The Recovery Version: Footnotes of Revelation)
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
I know that footnote.
And again I wrote [with some clarification] concerning your objection -
Anyone has the right to not agree with the exposition of typology or symbolism.
What can be deduced with symbolism Lee never allows to be more important [than the] plainer teaching [of Scripture]. Symbolism is only meant to enhance what is clearly taught elsewhere.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Ghost. I don't feel it necessary to argue further over this matter of Witness Lee employing symbolism of certain numbers at certain places in the Bible to help understand God's economy. You're welcomed to have another opinion about the value of that.
I have no problem with this method of ministry. I know others have employed it. I know it might be abused overly say in the case of Charles Taz Russell a founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses in his fascination with numerology.
I do not think Witness Lee abused or overly stressed significance of numbers to a distraction or to teach anything not plainly elsewhere taught in the Scripture.
And this is like a Catch-22 exchange. Because the more I debate with you about this, the more you will exploit it as me blindly following a supposed autocratic leader.
So this, like Divegeester's debates on hell, is like a Catch-22 trap that can, in the minds of some, be used to establish the accusations made.
Ie.
"He loves eternal punishment and to talk about it." [paraphrase]
"He has blind thoughtless allegiance to an autocratic tyrant charlatan of a cult leader." [paraphrase]