| Poster | Thread | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | I am sorry, but I don't follow the logic, the sense or the purpose of this response. It does not seem to address anything said in a comprehensible way.
If you can testify that you never experince the 'loss of patiance" in traffic then well, Amen to you. but I do. and all saints do and all saints can testify that calling on the Lord in such a circomstance brings in the Life, the riches, the abundant supply of Christ
Graftedbranch |
|  2005/11/16 0:38 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | Quote:
That is a straw man argument is it not? It is to say if one was to disagree then they have no experiential knowlege of "Christ in you, the hope of Glory and that is absurd.
It is not a matter of disagreement. the statement is that those who refuse to acknowlege the sufficiency of Christ and the available experience of Christ in such circomstances deny the reality of Christ in us. That is His availability to us as the indwelling Life giving Spirit to supply us with Himself as our all sufficiency.
I find it hard to concieve that those who appreciate the ministry of Lenard Ravenhill who is the King of 'quips and one liners" would take offense in a concise statement such as this.
Graftedbranch |
| | 2005/11/16 0:53 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | Quote:
The emphasis on one teacher and one teaching itself ought to be enough to raise all kinds of questioning, that which from what has been seen here in the past with this ministry has the same setups and rebuttals. We have been down this road before.
I don't believe in my post I quoted one teacher. I quoted H. C. G. Moule and Joseph Carroll. I also quoted Witness Lee and used the others to support what he said. I also gave genuine testimony to the realty of the teaching and practice. I don't think this is in any way deciptful or contrary to good practice.
What is it? Do you just have an inherent dislike for the "recovery"? do you without consideration just consider it bad or unscritpural? What is the nature of your offense?
Graftedbranch |
| | 2005/11/16 1:20 | Profile | Beaz
Member
Joined: 2005/11/16
Posts: 2
| | Re: | | my grandfather (manley beasley sr.) knew Rev. Ravenhill personally and preached with him for years at the Milldale conference. Mr. Ravenhill did not beleive in works salvation, or righteousness achieved by the Law. Obedience to the moral Law does not mean that a person's standing before God is affected by it. it only means that a person who is saved by grace will bear fruit. the moral law is a reflection of God's own nature. if God lives in a person the result is God's nature is revealed through him or her. they will desire to not sin. lying, stealing, murder, adultury is now something the person hates. this is the point that rev. ravenhill was making; God effects His holy life (reflected in the moral law) within' those born again. The moral law is still important it just can't save you. It can certainly show the beleiver the way they should live and behave. rev. ravenhill never taught that it could save. when we obey God's word and tell the truth or refuse to steal it is honoring to Him when done in faith (relying on Him for the power to do it) while also recognizing the inability to please God with our own effort. when we rely on Him we have all that we need to obey. when we rely on our own effort it will become obvious because we will fail miserably. this is what John 5:3 means when it says,
"For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and his commandments are not burdensom."
obeying His commands are not burdensom when done in faith, they bring God glory. |
| | 2005/11/16 2:14 | Profile | Beaz
Member
Joined: 2005/11/16
Posts: 2
| | Re: | | also, approach the local church with some caution. I have known a person involved with them and I have to say they are very exclusive in their dealings with other Christians. In reading Lee's Bible comentery it became very clear that he commits the same error that many hyper-dispensationalists commit. He interprets his doctrinal books by his eschatology instead of vice versa.
According to the book "Jesus in Bejing" the main group of Chinese evangelicals have now excluded Lee's group (Little Flock as its called in China) from fellowship because of some of its teaching.
they do like watchman nee though (as do I). |
| | 2005/11/16 2:43 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | Quote:
if God lives in a person the result is God's nature is revealed through him or her. they will desire to not sin. lying, stealing, murder, adultury is now something the person hates.
Amen. if this is what Ravenhill Means, then "Amen" |
| | 2005/11/16 10:15 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: The Lord Jesus our pattern | | Quote:
According to the book "Jesus in Bejing" the main group of Chinese evangelicals have now excluded Lee's group (Little Flock as its called in China) from fellowship because of some of its teaching.
The Lord Jesus who is our Pattern, at one time had many followers. But at the peak of His popularity, He turned to them and said, "Unless you eat My flesh and drink My Blood, you have no life in yourself". As a result, many turned away and walked with him no longer. He turned to His diciples and said, 'will you not go away also?" They responded, 'to whom else shall we go for you have the words of Eternal Life".
Brother Lee also had many who followed his ministry. But when he began to release "the High Peak of the Divine Revelaiton", many simply could not take this word. They left.
Watchman Nee also was very popular in the United States in the 70s. That is his books were very popular and embraced by many in Evangelical Christianity. However when the books were released which showed his view and burden for the church and the ground of the church and his teaching that the Clergy/Laity system was unbiblical, Evangelical Christianity in the US turned away from him and he lost favor and many began to critisize him.
This just shows that human nature does not change, and religion does not change. When something touches it, it turns on it and condemns it. It was religion that crucified the Lord Jesus. Why should we believe that religion is any different today?
Graftedbranch
|
| | 2005/11/16 10:39 | Profile | crsschk
Member
Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA
| | Re: | | Quote:
What is it? Do you just have an inherent dislike for the "recovery"? do you without consideration just consider it bad or unscritpural? What is the nature of your offense?
It is manifold. And yes, I do find that this is greviously sad, being that the truth becomes muddy and difficult to sort through, but there is something back of it that is telling enough...
Will back up here a little bit;
Quote:
On the other hand, I find it sometimes helpful to toss out a few hand granades just to see what happens and in this way I get a feel for the realtiy of things and where others are comming from.. It is effective. And in fact it brings about dialoge which is profitable such as I believe this is.
Was of a mind to let this go and have changed my mind. This mindset, this audacity. Do you make this sort of welcome in peoples homes? Other places where you are a guest? What manner of spirit is this of? Pragmatism is effective as well, that doesn't make it right. Here is what is very surprising to me. That someone who has such a long tenure of walking with the Lord can miss just such elementary spiritual as well as practical things such as "manners".
Quote:
Finally I came to the Lord and realized that the Lord Himself is the only final source of Truth and the Scritpures the only authority. When I came to the Lord in this way, the scritpures came alive and I began to live unto Him and not unto any man or his teaching.
Quote:
So when I say we can idolize a person, I speak from experience. We can elevate someone above the Lord Himself and their teaching or preaching above the scritpures. But they are men as we are and earthen vessels. And we follow the Living Christ who is within us, not any man.
Contrasted with;
Quote:
The points I put forward reflect something of the "High peak of the Divine Revelation" which is just the consumate essense of the New Testament. I believe these things are lacking in most of Christianity today especially in the west. But they are the heart of the Lord's ministry in the East through both Nee and Lee and those who are the co-workers today.
Quote:
And I have come to believe that the recovery today is in the same stream and operating out of the same mine shaft. The level of life and light in the Lord's recovery today is in my experience, observation, and according to much prayer, study, and seeking the Lord, the highest I have seen anywere else in this age. And I have been privelaged to sit under the teaching of some of the greats.
No contradaction here? Let's cut to the chase. It is obvious that you are much taken with this whole teaching and there is enough red flags in Witness Lees Ministry to cause great concern and as it was stated this has been addressed here in times past, another area that can often be overlooked in the haste to push forward one's known or unknown agenda; That is to actually search through the previous discussions here.
What is extremely difficult and deeply grevious is that there is much truth I am sure within these things that are a part of his ministry. Reading through many of the previous discussions it is a great effort to attempt to dialouge with these advocates as it presuposses much and is usually on the defensive. If what they believe is true, why the defending all the time? Why the lawsuits? Why the cult like seperating and elevated thought as even you expressed in these quotes? I am no where near adept enough to go through all that it might take to attempt to unravel the distictions between Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.
I will honestly admit that this really is spirtualy depleting and likely have gone out of the way to address this here not so much as an attack but as to ask the question, why? Why is it that the basic spiritual understandings can be thrown to the side, humilty, self exalting, pride, haughtiness, 'exclusiveness', being offended... Not all these are in evidence here but often come about from followers of this man. I am just as sure the same charges could be leveled against what I am now saying or have said, the appearance of being offended. I really could not care less about that, no one has been more due the 'right' to be offended than our Lord and He was not. How could I dare to? No, it is just very sad and very grevious to see some caught up in all this and to sit by and say nothing to it's effects would be worse.
This is just as likely a poor job of explaning what it is specifically that is troubling. In regards to the matter of patience in the example given, what I was attempting to state was that the order seems backward. Do [b]all[/b] have this problem as you stated? I don't believe so, in former days would be amongst the worst of the worst, classic road rage almost... The thought here was only in if we are rightly related and these things have died along with the others like hatred and bitterness and jealousy we would not even have the need of asking for help in this 'temptation' and no, I am not advocating some unrealistic perfection nor have I 'attained' to such. But the difference now in patience in so many matters is even surprising to myself, a life long 'worry-wart' and child of litttle patience. Can be sure it is not of my own self will that brought this forth.
_________________
Mike Balog
|
| | 2005/11/16 10:55 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | Well brother,
This conversation came about because I stated some reasons why I felt Ravenhill was lacking and a concern I had about his position on the Law and the Chrisitian. I was chastised for "impuning this man's ministry' by a few off the cuff remarks (in essense).
And yet it seems to be of no concern at all to take a few circulated accusations and impune another's ministry with no first hand knowlege or any exposure to the man's ministry. Just hearsay.
You suggest that we are always defensive. Well, when one attacks ones position or someones ministry which is appreciated, expecially when the charges are based on mininformation, the only position to take is defensive. Just as many did here when I made some comments about ravenhill.
Quote:
No contradaction here? Let's cut to the chase.
Brother, I do not deny I appreciate the ministry of Nee, Lee and the recovery today. But I do so not blindly. I see in the scritpures the views of the recovery and that is why I am in the recovery. When I began to meet with the Saints I did not know Lee and accepted nothing on anyones word, expecially just because brother Lee said it.
Rather I sought the Lord and researched and studied the materials, compared what is taught with both Nee's works, with all the Christian resources at my disposal, and especially the scriptures. What I found in the meetings of the church was a level of Life and Light and a depth of reality I had never seen or experienced in any Christian group. And I had the sense in my spirit that this was the real thing. And my study and my research confirmed it objectively. Like the Bareans, I searched the scritpures to see if these things were so.
In the end it is the Spirit alone who is our teacher. The Apostle John told us this however we appreciate His epistles and the teaching it contains.
The botton line is you or any may attack or criticise the Ministry of Witness Lee and I do not take it personally and am not personally offended by it. However I will seek to demonstrate that the charges are baseless. I don't say, "how dare you say such a thing about one whom I hold so dear?" That is to be attached to a man and not the Christ of the man. Brother Lee is with the Lord and he does not meed me to "defend him", but for the sake of those who might be swayed by false accusations, it is necessary to offer a defense at times.
What is a shame is that instead of being in a profitable dialoge concerning the truths and their scripturalness, we have to go off on this or that view of this or that man or a "movement".
The issue in the end is what the New Testament teaches and the Christ it reveals, not this or that man.
I was told I should "introduce myself" and so I did so and presented who I am and where I am comming from and what I held so there would be no questian.
I just suggest that instead of condemning a man or a work or a group based on heresay, If you don't care to take the time to do the research. At least keep things wihtin the framwork of discussing things from the perspective of scritpure.
Graftedbranch |
| | 2005/11/16 11:57 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | I will also add that the reason I attended the first meeting of the local church was because I was seeking the Lord and doing research and came upon the web site of Jim Moran, the leading opposer of the recovery on the web. As I read his remarks, I said, 'this man doesn't know the Lord, or at least he dosent have a grasp of the abc s of the Christian Life. I sensed no life in him. He was opposed to any and all forms of experimental Christianity.
Yet as I read the posts of those in the churches who were responding to his accusations, I sensed Christ. It was this that led me to say to my wife, We will go to a meeting on the Lord's day.
Subsquent to that, for the next 9 months I became the leading contributer to Moran's web site and he and I even exchanged many personal emails and He did develop a respect for what I had to say.
But in the end he was just an opposer. And he even had no testimoy of his regeneration or the New Birth. Finally the Lord took him. I corosponded with him to the end and he died of a massive heart attack at age 45.
But it was our dialoge which forced me to call on the Lord, to read, to study, to get out my church history and theology books, to inquire, to varify, and to find the truth by the resources I had. And the Lord was very faithful to me to lead me to the proper resources. I can say that I have given more time to objective consideration than most anyone I have met.
And I would also ask you this. If someone published a book titled, "cult leaders and false teachers" and included in that book was a chapter on Leonard Ravenhill, Would there be no effort on the part of those who appreciate his ministry and Know differently to take steps to have such a thing taken out of circulation?
Graftedbranch
|
| | 2005/11/16 12:14 | Profile |
|
