The Wisdom of Witness Lee

@sonship said
@FMF

This is sheer dodging.

What evidence do you have to back your claims about yourself?

You have said on more than one occasion over the years that these things do not mean anything to you one way or the other.

What evidence do you offer that anything pertaining to the words of Jesus or the Christians' experience of Him means something to you n ...[text shortened]... f salvation, and the Bible cannot be trusted.

You run with that and see how it works out for you.

What evidence do you have to substantiate the claims you make about yourself? That you type out or copy paste reams of dogma doesn't count.

@sonship said
You won't be the first atheist to assign an F grade in "representing Jesus" to some Christian disciple he wanted to shut up.

You have made claims and assigned stuff to YOURSELF. It's not me who is doing it. You are not being asked to "shut up". Quite the opposite, you are being asked for evidence that "Jesus is flowing through" you. You've also been claiming for ten or more years that you are "becoming like Jesus". What evidence of this is there? What changes in you have there been that are perceptible to people who have known you over this time?

@sonship said
You see no evidence of Christ living in me?

What evidence do you claim there is for people to see?

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

The critic writes:

'Objective justification is actual because there is righteousness within us,

Nothing new there.

"But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the [human] spirit is life because of righteousness" (Rom. 8:10)"

That's the New Testament.
Now Witness Lee's footnote in the Recovery Version Bible.
On "the spirit is life because of righteousness"

The regenerated human spirit, in contrast to the fallen human body. This spirit is not the Spirit of God, for the spirit mentioned here is life only under the condition that Christ is in us. For the spirit of God to be life, no particular condition is required. Hence, the spirit's being life because of righteousness can refer only to our human spirit, not the Spirit of God."

The amounts to Christ being in the believer as divine life.
That amount to the indwelling Christ being righteousness by which the human spirit in man is enlivened, quickened, made alive, regenerated. Inside the human believers Christ AS righteousness enlivens him spiritually within.

The critic sounds a false alarm.
The critic continues:

indeed the righteousness of the God-man in both His divine and human natures,

Nothing new there either.
First John 2:1 referring to the entire being of Jesus Christ says He is "Jesus Christ THE RIGHTEOUS".

"My little children, these things I write to you that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for those of the whole world" (1 John 2:1)

As to His two natures He is fully "The Righteous"
Witness Lee's footnote on 1 John 2:1 on the word "Righteous" reads:

Our Lord Jesus is the only righteous man among all men. His righteous act (Rom. 5:18) on the cross fulfilled the righteous requirement of the righteous God for us and all sinners. Only He is qualified to be our Advocate, to care for us in our sinning condition and restore us to a righteous condition that the relationship between us and our Father, who is righteous, may be appeased."

So the critic sounds another false alarm with the false insinuation that Witness Lee somehow undervalues the total righteousness of Christ.

And the critic continues:

and our union with Him admits us into His righteousness for our justification. In this sense, God justifies our organic union with Christ.

This has already been addressed. But consider another New Testament verse of First Corinthians 1:30 plus Witness Lee's note on it.

But of Him [God] you are in Christ Jesus, who became wisdom to us from God, both righteousness and sanctification and redemption.

That as it is written, He who boasts let him boast in the Lord." (1 Cor. 1:30,31)

An accompanying footnote from Witness Lee on verse 30:

Christ became wisdom to us from God as three vital things in God's salvation: (1) righteousness (for our past), by which we have been justified by God, that we might be reborn in our spirit to receive the divine life (Rom. 5:18); (2) sanctification (for our present), by which we are being sanctified in our soul, I.e. transformed in our mind, emotion, and will, with His divine life (Rom. 6:19,22); and (3) redemption (for our future), i.e., the redemption of our body (Rom. 8:23), by which we will be transfigured in our body with His divine life to have His glorious likeness (Phil. 3:21). It is of God that we participate in such a complete and perfect salvation, which makes our entire being- spirit, soul, and body - organically one with Christ and makes Christ everything to us. This is altogether of God, not of ourselves, that we may boast and glory in Him, not in ourselves."

[my bolding]

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

The critic continues exposing s/he doesn't understand sanctification as being a matter of position and disposition.

The critic:

Objective justification is NOT forensic in the sense that it is based on a righteousness that is external or alien to us and is externally imputed to us by God without regard for any righteousness within us.'
(Justification of Life)

I think there is misunderstanding and suspicion that Lee says Christ as righteousness was "external" or "alien".

But the New Testament speaks of full salvation as being reconciled to God and being saved in the sphere of His indwelling life.

For if we being enemies, were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more we shall be saved in His life, having been reconciled." (Rom. 5:10)

As to the sinner's position he has been justified and being in a righteous standing has be reconciled to the perfect Righteous God. But there follows this standing a dispositional saving of "much more" in the realm of Christ's life filling up his life in a dispositional way.

Witness Lee has a note here in the Recovery Version: [paragraph spacing is mine]

Verse 10 of this chapter points out that God's full salvation revealed in this book consists of two sections: one section is the redemption accomplish for us by Christ's death, and the other section is the saving afforded us by Christ's life. The first four chapters of this book discourse comprehensively regarding the redemption accomplished by Christ's death, whereas the last twelve chapters speak in detail concerning the saving afforded by Christ's life.

Before 5:11, Paul shows us that we are saved because we have been redeemed, justified, and reconciled to God. However, we have not yet beem saved to the extent of being sanctified, transformed, and conformed to the image of God's Son.

Redemption, justification, and reconciliation, which are accomplished outside of us by the death of Christ, redeems us objectively; sanctification, transformation, and conformation, which are accomplished within us by the working of Christ's life, save us subjectively. Objectively redemption redeems us positionally from condemnation and eternal punishment; subjective salvation saves us dispositionally from our old man, our self, and our natural life,"

If the critic disagrees that God's full salvation here shows a positional aspect and then a dispositional one I would ask the critic what would Paul mean then by saying "MUCH MORE we will be saved in His life".

He may misunderstand Witness Lee to have taught that the positional salvation is so OUTSIDE man that it doesn't require the believer to be born of the Spirit, born again or receive Christ. This could only be purposely misunderstood in my opinion.

We already examined that "the [human] spirit is life because of righteousness" (Rom. 8:10). The benefit of even positional justification is brought into man because the Spirit becomes one with the human spirit.

This could be explored some more. Further remarks may follow.

@divegeester

Sonship you have been telling me for as long as I can remember that the triune God consists of three distinctly separate persons.

Very interesting that you should supply this quote from Witness Lee. The quote being:

Witness Lee said:
“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”

Three brief observations meant in all sincerity:

1.) Of all the things I have written here about the nature of God, I would think that this quotation to a Unitarian like yourself would be the least objectionable. I would tend to think that it LEANS toward what you have argued for a long time.

2.) I have said distinct but NOT separate Persons.

You are misremembering that I wrote at any time "distinct AND SEPARATE." I have not. When using the word "Persons" have written "DISTINCT BUT NOT SEPARATE".

Verify it. Go back as far in the archives as you feel you need to go.

3.) In using the word "Persons" I have written that for lack of a better word in our limited human language we may BORROW the word "Persons" in speaking of the Triune God. BUT if we stress "Persons" too much and too far in tends to lead to a tritheistic understanding of three Gods.

So Witness Lee and other expounders of the Bible may use the word "Persons." But this is because hardly any other word in human language could express such a profound mystery of the nature of God.

Three "Persons" - distinct but not separate. Each lives within the other.

@divegeester

Sonship I feel you would be off independently studying Watchmsn Nee’s work.

I am not sure what this sentence means.

Witness (does his self given name mean “martyr”?) Lee seems to have gone off the narrow path quite a way.

I do not read or speak Chinese. But I think martyr might also be a translation of that word. I knew of a brother by the name of Martyr Ho.

Many of the Chinese believers adopted such bible names when becoming believers in the Gospel. Probably some just adopted "Chistianized" names when exposed to the Western influence.

Faith Wong,
Faithful Luke,
Watchman Nee,
Titus Chu,
Silas Wu,
Sarah Chang
Abraham Chang,
Livingstone Wu,
Peace Wong,
Witness Lee
etc.
etc.

@FMF

What evidence do you claim there is for people to see?

A Christian should live more and more like Jesus as evidence of Jesus living in them.

This is obvious from too much of the New Testament and from Christ's teaching Himself

Matthew 5:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

This does not mean all Christians are instantaneously mature from the first moment they get saved.

This also do not imply their light is irresistible.

Jesus obviously manifested God in a man. And to say the least, not all welcomed His life or believed Him.

@sonship said
A Christian should live more and more like Jesus as evidence of Jesus living in them.

What is the evidence that you do?

@divegeester

Me:

Very interesting that you should supply this quote from Witness Lee.

You:

Where did I “provide that quote” ?

I mean you supplied it as a matter for discussion.

Very interesting that you [Divegeester] should supply this quote from Witness Lee. The quote being:
Witness Lee said:
“The traditional explanation of the Trinity is grossly inadequate and borders on tritheism ... etc. etc.

@FMF

What is the evidence that you do?

That's not for me to boast about.
Nor is it for me to grovel in embarresment at failures at times.

I told you before from Proverbs.

Let another praise you, and not your own mouth;
a stranger, and not your own lips. (Prov. 27:2)

In essence I think you are asking: "Sonship open your mouth and boast for us. Then we can complain about all the bad things you did we didn't like of which we intend to cause you to feel a failure and ashamed."

While we're at this though, I would revise something I have said to you.

I said that I would rather die then have the kind of mind you have.
However, I would be willing to wake up in the morning even with your kind of mind if I knew that Jesus Christ would again shine into it and give mercy.

I think I could trade places with anyone as long as the love and truth of Christ reached me in that state. After all, I'd be better off dead then going back to the unbelieving mind I once had also.

It all depends on if God would have merciful saving grace extended to me.
If I was sure of that, I'd hope in His salvation and nothing else.