Kingdom Exclusion

You know that I meant the typo you made doesn't matter.

and I am not bearing false witness Lee wrote what he wrote... it is in black and white in the RV!

Lee and Nee were in ministry together... Now tell me, if someone taught that you needed to be baptized in order to be in union with God, wouldn't you seperate from him if you disagreed?

 

The wedding garment in Revelation is Christ's Righteousness. If we are not clothed in His Righteousness, we will not be in the Marriage feast, we will not even be part of His kingdom, we will not even be saved. Our righteousness is filth.

 

I remember reading this back in the 80's tim. Sadly, many think one is not saved if one does not get baptized.

 

Well let's see what the text tells us and see if you are right.

It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.

Sounds to me like the garment is the righteous acts of the saints. Nothing in there about Christ's righteousness.

So again we can either believe Scripture for what it says, and it says the garment is the righteous acts of the saints or we can believe something else. I will stick with Scripture.

 

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]In his book [/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]"Delegated Authority"[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica], Watchman Nee states:

[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]

God will not judge the follower for doing wrong?
[/FONT]

 

I guess I do need to chill out...

I'll admit that I don't know much about Nee or Lee.
I just know that they were sidekicks, and that Lee's Recovery Version is not an upstanding version. And that according to his notes, he teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation.

(I'll study more about them, and if I am missing something, and have misrepresented either one, I will post an apology. but as for now, all I have is what I have found about the 2 guys)

I just hate to see the doctrine of works portrayed as the way to the Kingdom.
Christ died, He shed his blood, was tortured, all for my sins.
So that I could be eternally with Him.

If we have any part of salvation, then Christ died in vain... And that teaching does make me angry.

It is through Christ alone that we are saved and kept.
And Christ said he is able to keep us.
I trust what he says more than I trust myself.
He has always been faithful... I haven't.
My future is secure in the promises of Christ.
And I guess instead of getting angry, I should feel sorry for those that are trying to redeem themselves in order to get into His kingdom.


Sooo... until tomorrow I will try to avoid this thread.

 

I don't ever remember anyone saying the man was perfect. So let me ask the question to you...is every commentator that you read absolutely 100% accurate in their teachings and writings? I'm guessing you will not answer that in the positive, so why would you all harp on some of the negatives of a person.

You chew the meat and spit out the bone. That's the way it is with everyone, but some folks think they need to win a debate by discrediting people, when that can be done with every single Bible commentator that has lived.

Why don't we just stick to dealing with what Scripture says instead of what man says.[/FONT]

 

Tim you are combining two totally different messages. The gospel of the kingdom is not the same thing as the gospel of the grace of God. Salvation for the kingdom is not the same as salvation for eternity. They are different subjects, different contexts. If you try to combine the two messages (as most of Christendom does) then you are going to have some serious problems.

Keep the messages separate as they were intended and everything falls into place just as it was intended to do.

 

This is one thing that I find almost amusing. DPT, who I think is very wrong about the salvational security of the believer, at least sees the warnings that are given to saved people.

Yet, others, who do see the security of a believer, close their eyes to the warnings that are given, and simply conclude that in order to fit their theology, that those warnings just can't be to saved people.

Yet, I have yet to see anyone lie about what DPT says, and I have not seen DPT lie about them (and I don't think he's lied about me for that matter), but others seem to find it necessary to lie about what I, J. Jump, and Lacy have said in order to "defend" their beliefs.

Why does someone who believes the opposite of you see the warnings, yet you see no warnings to a saved person and think we'll all be treated just the same, no matter how we act, or use doublespeak to say that our salvation is based on works, but it's not based on works?

 

In this same vein, most people forget that the children of Israel were in the Promised Land the moment they set out on their journey (a picture of saved people). Genesis 15:18 tells us that their land is from the Nile to the Euphrates. They were saved, then they were baptized in the Red Sea. Yet, almost all of them failed to enter the Land Flowing With Milk and Honey (a picture of the Kingdom; the better part of the inheritance). Even Moses came up short on that one. The type of the Kingdom was given way back then. Many are called (saved), but few are called out or elect (Kingdom rule).

 

I know I said I would not post until tomorrow, but it is after midnight here!:laugh:

I went online and found some statements that NEE made about Baptism.
If I am following you, you are teaching that there are two types of salvation... one eternal, and one kingdom? Is that right?

Is that why NEE says in A Living Sacrifice, Basic Lesson Series 1, CFP, W. Nee

"[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]There is not the slightest doubt that whosoever believes in the Lord Jesus has eternal life. We have preached this glad news for many years. As soon as one believes in the Lord Jesus, whoever he may be, he receives eternal life and is thereby forever favored by God. But let us remember: believing without being baptized is not yet salvation."[/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]or, "[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]Baptism is immersion on the one side and emergence on the other side. It speaks of passing through the water and of coming out of it. Let us emphasize the side of emergence. All went into the water, but only eight persons came out. Today we too are saved by baptism. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]or,
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]“And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins” (Acts 2:38). Does the word of the apostle sound strange in our ears? Again, many Protestants seem to have difficulty with this verse so plainly spoken by the apostle. In what way can baptism lead to the forgiveness of sins? Is it not strange that the apostle does not lay stress on “believing” in his message? [/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]We may ask ourselves whether Peter in this message recorded in Acts 2 is seeking to persuade people to believe. Not at all. Is this a reflection upon Peter’s ability to preach the gospel? Is his preaching inferior to ours? Is his presentation inadequate? We know that, according to the whole Bible, the most important point touching the gospel is belief. How then is it that Peter overlooks such a cardinal feature? He can omit other less important aspects but surely not this one. Yet strangely enough, he speaks on baptism instead of on faith, and the Holy Spirit causes a pricking of the hearts of those who listen to him. In accordance with orthodoxy, we would claim that faith alone is necessary; but Peter declares that his hearers must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. [/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]Why is it that Peter speaks only of baptism? It is because all of his hearers were participants in the killing of the Lord Jesus. Fifty days ago they had cried out: “Away with this man!” (Luke 23:18) They had been in the crowd shouting their rejection. Now, though, some of them desired to be separated from the crowd. How? By being baptized. Through baptism they would come out of the world and sever their relationship with that brotherhood. As soon as I step into the water to be baptized, my sins are remitted, that is, I come out of the brotherhood to which I once belonged. This is why Peter on Pentecost tells them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus that their sins may be remitted. This single act of baptism causes them to come out of the world. [/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]I am confused now... I may just be sleepy, but out of one side of his mouth he says believing is all that is needed, and then states that it is not enough for salvation...[/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]From what I found so far NEE teaches Baptism is needed for salvation. Of course if he believed there are 2 types of salvation, then it would make sense.[/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman][/FONT]
[FONT=JGAFHA+TimesNewRoman]And what is this belief that I found that NEE received special revelations from God... is Kingdom Exclusion one of them?[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT]

 

All is forgiven... we can agree to disagree.
I apologize too, if I offended you.

 

Unless, as DPT believes, you can lose your salvation. I think he's wrong, but at least he sees that the warnings are for saved people.