Kingdom Exclusion

[tinytim]

IT DOESN"T MATTER?????? Winning a debate at all costs, even if it means bearing false witness against a brother who gave everything he had to Jesus so he could win the prize doesn't matter?

That makes me want to vomit!


Lacy

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?

 

[Diggin in da Word]

Are you kidding me. Seriously?

If I provide you some clothes and you don't put them on then did I still clothe you? Of course not I just gave you some clothes, but you decided to not wear them. The veil was provided, but Rebecca has to put it own. She clothed herself.

Again Revelation 19:8 tells us that we are to array ourselves. We are to clothe ourselves. And we do this by dying to ourselves and allowing the Spirit to work through us. If we don't do this then we are not clothing ourselves and will not have a wedding garment when the time comes just like the guest who was taken to the outer darkness.

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.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

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?

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

 

[Lacy Evans]

Then why did he teach that Baptism was necessary to be in union with God?

I just read one of his books to you. What is your problem? I have a whole shelf of them, yet I fear more direct quotes would not convince you.

I give up. Just be careful.

lacy

 

[Lacy Evans]

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

Many might but Nee didn't!

Lacy

 

[J. Jump]

The wedding garment in Revelation is Christ's Righteousness.

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.

 

[Lacy Evans]

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!

NEE! NEE! NEE! Can you not read? I don't own a single book by Lee and I already said he turned out to be a crackpot. But you keep saying "THEY" insinuating thae NEE taught baptismal regeneration, which is false!

Lacy

PS. sorry i guess I don't give up yet.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

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

[/FONT]

The primary focus of a Christian and Godly life is TOTAL OBEDIENCE to your pastor. He even goes as far as to say that a Christian must obey his or her pastor, even if the pastor is wrong, since God will not judge the follower for doing wrong, only for not obeying the pastor.

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]

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

 

[tinytim]

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.

 

[J. Jump]

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

[/FONT]Quote:
The primary focus of a Christian and Godly life is TOTAL OBEDIENCE to your pastor. He even goes as far as to say that a Christian must obey his or her pastor, even if the pastor is wrong, since God will not judge the follower for doing wrong, only for not obeying the pastor.
[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]

God will not judge the follower for doing wrong?

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]

 

[Lacy Evans]

Maybe God allowed you to make the typo to show us the connection between kingdom exclusion and the false doctrine of salvation by baptism.

I'm sure that's it brother:sleep:

Even though the proponents of Millennial Exclusion are some of the staunchest champions of "Justification by faith alone" of all time. Have you read SS Craig? or Robert Govett? Have you studied the Theocratic Kingdom by Gh Peters or the Apocolypse by JA Seiss?

Yeah there's a fine list of Church of Christ canidates if I ever saw one. Boy am I glad I hit a typo so I could ignore everything they ever wrote and know the "real truth" about them!!

The Lord works in mysterious ways, I'll tell you wut dere buddy!

lacy

 

[J. Jump]

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.

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.

 

[Lacy Evans]

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

First of all "Delegated Authority" is a chapter in a book (Spiritual Authority -again right here in my hand) not a book.

Second You did not quote the book. You paraphrased it and took several small statements out of their greater context. The obedience "even if they were wrong" was when neither the person under the authority of the elders (Plural Elders-Nee was brethren) nor the person under authority knew if the elder was wrong. It is a common excuse of the disobedient. "What if he turns out to be wrong?"

It is the same as telling a wife to obey her husband and if he happens to be wrong, she is covered. Nowhere in the book's 185 pages does it ever insinuate that Nee advocates blind obedience to any authority. It is a book on the Scriptural response to spiritual authority.

Did you call Joey Faust a liar? hmmmmm? Something Mama said about pots and kettles.

 

[Lacy Evans]

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

I would agree except to show the extent one will go to oppose genuine scriptural accountability.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Sorry everybody. (esp you Bro. Tim) I apologize. I got a little worked up. I'm OK now.

Lacy

 

[Hope of Glory]

Page 21 already?! Wow! Debate! Debate!

Linda, DHK, Tinytim, standingfirminchrist, diggin, and many others are right, they do not agree with your belief of millennial exclusion. Because it is man-making doctrine, and it is unbiblical. Nowhere in Bible teaching that a saved person shall be suffer in hell during 1000 years so called 'millennial kingdom'. There is not a single verse in Bible supports Kingdom Exclusion doctrine.

BUT, I agree with James, Lacy, Faust and others, that a lazy servant shall be cast away into hell, because there are so much overhwlemed proofs in Bible with warnings and conditonals, we cannot afford to neglect them.

Also, you should be aware that Bible shows us lot of conditional warnings, therefore, these cannot be unconditonal security salvation as what most baptists believe.

Matt. 25:30 doesn't promise us that a lazy servant shall be finally being released out of the outer darkness beyond the judgement day. Outer darkeness is very clearly speak of eternality punishment same with hell & lake of fire, all of these are go include with final eternality destiny, where lazy servants and unbeliefs shall be spend.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

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?

 

[Hope of Glory]

We have a heavenly calling to a heavenly land just as the nation of Israel had a calling to a physical land. There were some that didn't qualify to enter this new land, falling short of their calling, but on the right side of the blood.

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).

 

[tinytim]

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.

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]

 

[tinytim]

Sorry everybody. (esp you Bro. Tim) I apologize. I got a little worked up. I'm OK now.

Lacy

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

 

[Hope of Glory]

That is the issue faithfulness and unfaithfulness. There is nowhere in Scripture that says all believers will be faithful and obedient. If we were then the warning to be faithful and obedient are pointless.

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.