Questions of Reliability and/or Authorship

LOL!I like this combination of statements.

A person without faith in God cannot be an expert on how faith in God works.

Paul reached the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel."To me, less than the least of all saints, was this grace given to announce to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel" Eph. 3:8) Preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel correspods very much to Christ's teaching in John 15. He is the true vine and the disciples are the branches. Without Him they can do nothing. That is nothing worthwhile to God's eternal purpose.All the riches of the divine life are available to the disciples who abide in Christ as branches abide in the vine. Situations and circumstances will change drastically. But the believers will always have sufficiency by remaining in close fellowship with Him. That is abiding in Him.All the unsearchable and inexhaustible riches of Christ's life to those who abide in Him is the gospel.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Some interesting passages from Paul on women:1.) "I commend to you Pheobe our sister, who is a deaconess of the church which is in Cenchrea" (Rom. 16:1)This is Paul's first positive recommendation in a long list in Romans 16. Paul was big on service. He commends the example of this sister."That you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints and assist her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been the patroness of many, of myself as well." (v.2)Whatever she needs help her! She is of noble status and separated unto God totally for service to the whole church. Perhaps she allowed the church to meet in her home. A patroness is a protectoress. This denotes one who sustains, helps, supplies. This woman received this noble recommendation because she attained such a model example of service to the church in Cenchrea.2.) "Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in the Lord" (ROm 16:3).It is interesting to me that Paul mentioned the famale name of the wife ahead of the male name of the husband.That they were his fellow workers probably means that they were an apostolic couple an apostolic wife and husband team. They "risked their necks", that is willing to be martyred for the ministry.The wife's name is mentioned first.3.) "Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who were also in the Lord before me." (Rom. 16:7)Some scholars agree that Junia is a female name. If so here we have a woman who was note among the apostles. She had reputation along with Andronicus, among the apostles.You may draw your own conclusions. I think it indicates that perhaps she too was of the status of an apostle. She could not have attained noteworthiness among the apostles for no reason. Paul singles her out with Andronicus as his fellow prisoners. They must have been imprisoned for the ministry.He also recommends that they were experienced with Christ before he was thus showing great respect. I would not doubt if it showed some amount of submission also.4.) "Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother as well as mine." (Rom 16:13)Why would Paul single out this woman as being his mother as well as the mother of Rufus? Probably because she cared for him. She may have prayed fervently for Paul's missionary journeys.Perhaps in the kingdom to come all the work accomplished by the Apostle Paul will be accredited to the faithful prayers of this "mother".Prayers that touch the throne of God are prayers of authority. Prayers from sisters of faith which bind the devil and move the throne of God to act upon the earth are prayers of authority. This is greater authority than having to give a speech to an audience.How do we know? Perhaps all the success of the Apostle Paul will one day be revealed to be because of the fervent prayers of some elderly sister on behalf of God's work on earth.The problem is that people want to concentrate in looking authoritative in the eyes of man. What is really needed is the authoritative faithful prayers that move God's throne on behalf of His will on the earth.I expect to be very surprised in that day as to where the real source of the blessing on God's work was.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

In Genesis 18 we have three men appear to Abraham. One of them the patriarch addresses as "my Lord". The Hebrew Scriptures says that this was the appearance of Jehovah God to Abraham. Some have some tortured logic to suggest that this appearance of God to Abraham was not the appearance of the three men. However it is totally absurd for Abraham to be sitting and looking down at God on the ground or between his legs and then rise up and race away from that vision to pay homage to three men.The appearance of Jehovah God had to do with the appearance of the three men. And this was not Hellenistic enfluence on the Old Testament Scriptures.Genesis 18:22 Only TWO men were seen entering into Sodom so the third who remained with Abraham was God.Then we have Jacob wrestling with a man who must be God. The mysterious visitor changes Jacob's name to Israel as a blessing. (The changing of the name signifies God's ability and promise to change the character - transformation ). The mysterious man asks Jacob why Jacob would inquire what His name is.Jacob also saw a vision of God in Genesis 28:19 - "And there was Jehovah, standing above it; and He said, I am Jehovah, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac." He was able to see God standing. He probably had legs to stand on.Latter Jacob says that God the All -sufficient appeared to him. The God of glory who appeared to Abraham and the God who appeared to Jacob at Luz visited both patriarchs in the form of a man. This is before the incarnation of Christ in New Testament times. And neither appearance, either to Abraham or Jacob had anythiing to do with Hellenistic culture.Then we have God appearing to walk before Moses. As He walked before Moses He would not allow Moses to see His face but His back only. This certainly was an "anthropomorphic" appearance of God in the Old Testament as well. Here God appears and mentions His face, His hand, and His back. He appeared to Moses in an anthropomorphic sense again.The prophet Ezekiel discribes the glory of God as someone like the appearance of a man seated on the throne above the angelic cherubic creatures. God promises in the Old Testament that He will draw Israel with the cords of a man. But the reference I do not have time to look up right now. The cords of a man I take to mean the emotions, beauty, and human attributes which draw, attract, and bind one human soul to another. God will come and draw His people as an incarnated man.This is all the Old Testament speaking. So AM's idea of the anthropomorphic appearance of God as purely Hellenistic is false.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

AM may assert that as forcifully s/he wishes. However, it indicates to me that AM simply doesn't receive what the Scripture said. In these instances God appeared in the form of a man for it names YHWH as the One appearing."And Jehovah appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre as he was sitting at the entrance of his tent in the heat of the day" (Gen. 18:1)The burden is on AM to explain exactly where in that chapter are the details of the appearance of YHWH to Abraham. It is most logical to understand that the following discussions relates the details of how God appeared to Abraham. And it does. We'll look at AM's objections shortly.God cannot be anthropomorphic, AM asserts. Well to be fair there are places where God says He is not like a man. But we learn not just what the Bible says. We have to learn what else the Bible says.In Genesis for God to create man in His own image and in His likeness (Genesis 1:26,27) has to prove that there is at least some fundamental correspondence between the created human being and the eternal uncreated God.Now it may be a discussion as to what exactly image and likeness mean. But whatever they mean the fact that man shares that image and likeness with God necessitates that we are like Him and He is like us.Remember, here I have not defined exactly what God's image and Gods likeness are. I am, however, stating that God and man SHARE those attributes whatever they mean. So AM's attempts to make God totally not like people would be unbiblical. And we will see AM's contradictions in this below. This is simply straight out denial of what the Bible said in a number of places. Then AM blames "Fundamentalist Christians" for reading and comprehending what the Scripture is trying to tell the reader in a few places."Fundamentalist Christians" did not write that God would not allow Moses to see His "face", and that God would shield Moses with His "hand" and allow Moses only to see His "back". These words were written in the Hebrew Bible before "Christians" came into existence Fundamentalist or otherwise. I agree. All three men turned their faces. Two who turned thier faces left the scene and went down to Sodom. The third who also turned His face remained there to speak further with Abraham. And the Scripture says:"And the men turned from there and went toward Sodom, while Abraham remained standing before Jehovah." (Gen. 18:22)There seems no way out for AM. Afterall, a central point of the chapter is that this Jehovah God appeared to Abraham that day. Two is a plural. Three is also a plural.The fact that all three turned their faces toward Sodom does not prove that God was not one of the three men. I quite agree. It does present a problem. It does present a paradox.The appearance of God manifest as a man to Abraham is in contrast with a number of other biblical passages. But my reaction is to embrace the paradox and read on until the end of the entire Bible.But I sympathize with AM that it does present a mysterious contrast to what God told Moses in Exodus. We have to seek to understand why there is this paradox. Denying that it is there is not honest IMO. No it doesn't. It does however present this paradox - in one instance God did NOT allow a prophet to see His face and in another instance God DID allow a prophet to see His face.I think the place to look is in the manner in which God manifested Himself. I do get the feeling that God's appearance to Moses in Exodus 33 was with supernatural splendour and gloriously radiant. It probably was rather fearful.But in Genesis 18 there is an emphasis on the humaness with which God fellowshipped with Abraham. They had a nice tasty lunch together. The Bible takes time to discribe the heat of the day and the preparation of a delicious meal. Is speaks of the three men eating and Abraham standing dutifully nearby to fetch them whatever they might need.I think that the appearance of God in Genesis 18 is a foreshadow and hint of the incarnation of God in Jesus in the future.So the nature of the two appearances are not exactly the same. God was much more approachable in Genesis 18 than He was in Exodus 33. Yes, it is mysterious and a paradox. My answer to the theological difficulties the passages present is NOT to deny anthorpomorphic manifestations of God in the Old Testament.Furthermore, AM's argument seems self defeating because God speaks to Moses in Exodus 33 as well as in Genesis 18. So already you have God anthropmorphic enough to communicate with human beings in language of human beings obviously. That may be true. It does not follow that God did not appear to the prophets Abraham and Moses in Genesis and in Exodus. It is only doubtful if you doubt what is written before your eyes as you read it. I think that Genesis 18 presents a paradox to the ten commandments. However, Abraham did not MAKE anything. Sarah made a lunch. That is all.God appeared and had lunch with the prophet. It is not as if the prophet made idols.I have to discontinue at this moment.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't see why that wouldn't be the case regardless.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Yea, I guess under atheistic regimes like that of Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin we did see some tendencies like that.You wouldn't find me voting for a government mandated national religion. Do you mean the Fundamentalist Evolutionists? My goodness we would have to have an amendment declaring the separation of Ape and State.

You have body count on how many people died because of the fanaticism not taught by Jesus, but was exploited by a sinner.Do you have any stats or body count on how many people down through the centries were healed, had cloths put on their naked backs, had food placed on their tables, were sheltered, were assisted, were provided homes, were fed, were bandaged, were guided,were kept from going astray into crime,were educated, were supplied with necessities in the name of Jesus Christ?Do you have body count on those matters also? I mean we should be historically objective about the matter of things done under the banner of Christ.You could also include wars not fought or prevented because of prayers to God or because of someone being enfluenced by a conscience under Christ's teachings.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I agree that we should read Matthew again. Here are some points to ponder on the Sermon on the Mount."Blessed are you when they reproach and persecute you, and while speaking lies, say every evil thing against you because of Me. Rejoice and exult, for your reward is great in the heavens; for so they persecuted the prophetss who were before you. " (Matt. 5:11,12)We have to remember that for the sake of Jesus Christ all manner of lies and evil speakings will have to be endured. Some apparently with some plausible basis and some with none.Case in point, implying that who Jesus is and what He taught is responsible for many deaths. The Christian will have to endure much "guilt by association" with those who utlized the name of Christ for selfish purposes."You are the salt of the earth ..." (Matt. 5:13)The salt of the earth is meant to preserve the earth from being totally rotten and corrupted. Salt is a preservative, a stop measure to halt the decline of rotteness.The Christian church is not on the earth to renovate the world totally. It is only there to be a testimony and preserve the earth from being totally corrupted until Christ returns to establish a kingdom.Salt is only a preservative. The salt of the earth does not heal all the problems of the world. It only prevents total decay of human society."Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth" (MAtt. 5:5)The planet will not ultimately be ruled by the armies of the world. World rulers will not finally possess the earth through their weopons and power. The meek who believe in Christ and trust their vindication to Him will inherit the earth."Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God" (Matt. 5:8)To be pure in heart is to be single eyed and focused on one thing - God Himself. In the midst of so many pressing responsibilities and duties the pure in heart keep a simple single eye of hope on Jesus Christ and His kingdom. A single and simple fixed vision of the divine will cause them to see God. We desperately need to see God in the midst of such tumultuous times."Enter in through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction and many are those who enter through it. Because narrow is the gate and constricted is the way that leads to life, and few are those who find it." (Matt. 7:13,14)The way of the kingdom of Christ will not be popular. It is like swimming upstream like a Salmon. It is much easier to be carried along downward by the current of the age.Lastly these two points show that we cannot make it to be kingdom people without having the divine life of God implanted into our being. We need the living Person of Christ grafted into our being. He has to indwell us."A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, neither can a corrupt tree produce good fruit." (7:18)The only good tree in the universe is the man Jesus. He has the life that can produce for the will of God and the kingdom of God. He must impart Himself into us as the good tree that we can bear fruit to God. Otherwise we cannot - "You must be born again" (John 3:7)( This is the Bible Study Room. )Human perfection must be derived from being born of the diivne Father. His life must enter into us and saturate us. "You shall be perfect even as your heavenly Father is perfect."Our only hope is to have God beget us to be His sons and daughters with His Spirit and divine nature. Then His perfection will grow and spread within us and ultimately swallow us up into His expression as Jesus expressed the divine Father.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Are you saying that you have the statistics all done for us?

Well, I will tell you, Jesus said that the way to life is narrow and strait but the way to destruction is broad. So first of all I would expect fewer people on the straight and narrow and more people on the broad and easy.This would be according to what Christ taught. "Destruction" there does not necessarily mean damnation. The soul can be destroyed by the sin nature. So I expect that the way to divine life would be narrow and few would be on it but the way to the soul damage of sin would be broad and many people would be on it.Now, most of the Christians that I regularly meet with from different cities, and from different countries seek to live the highest standard of morality of any people on earth.We are seeking that through Christ. And there are different levels of maturrity. But we are growing and feel one day we will cause the Lord to come back to claim a Bride and wrap up this age. Tell me where you live and I'll recommend some congregation for you to meet some serious Christians. That is if I know some in your area.Go meet them, mingle with them a bit. Then come back and give me your impressions. The brothers and sisters I meet with for the most part are very serious about living unto Jesus. Well, I'll tell you. Some of us love Jesus and want to follow Him even if EVERYBODY else wants to live on as a typical unbeliever.He said "Follow Me."
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I know some of the believers who meet here:Welcome to the Church in Denver — Our Savior God desires all men to be saved and to come to the full knowledge of the truthAnd I would recommend that some Sunday you break bread with them and talk to a few of the older ones.

Index of Theological Responses to criticisms of Witness Lee and the local churches:http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/index.html Could you please point out where I proclaimed my "superiority" over others? Where did I do that in this discussion?Quotation please? Well as you know, the fabulous Internet is a nifty place to find information. And as you might expect websites cut both ways:Contending for the Faith – Beloved, while using all diligence to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you and exhort you to earnestly contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints. -Philippians 1:7has some good responses, expert court testimony, rebuttals, testimonies, and articles in response to your references.Spend some time to look around there too. This is interesting indeed.I am a registered Democrat in my state, if you must know about my politics. Is that Okay with you or does your paranoia insist that I must be a registered Republican so I can subscribe to "Right Wing Authorianism?"Seems for some people if the only tool they have is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail.Thanks for the free advertizement of LSM. This usually causes seekers for rich ministry to find great ministry. Funny how slander can backfire. Keep it up.Oh, by the way, Living Stream Ministry is a Publishing House of books by Watchman Nee and Witness Lee. It is not a group I am a member of. I am not an employee. I do buy a lot of the books. That's all.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Quite the contrary. I hope anglegard continues to provide such excellent free advertizement to attract many seekers of the truth.Usually out of this kind of debate people come to appreciate more the ministry in the Lord's recovery. This is how I myself decided that "I have to find out for myself!" , an act which lead to the last 30 years of the most joyous fellowship and building up among fellow Christians.Could you please provide me the location of the quotation you referenced so that I may view it in its entire context?And here is an index of Theological Responses to criticisms of the local churches that have received Lee's and Nee's ministry.Page not found – Contending for the Faith Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.