Andy Anderson on the "Overcomers"

[aron]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Aron,

I agreed with you that Witness Lee and Watchman Nee taught balanced on this topic.

That is what I liked, and still do, about both men and their teaching. The security of our eternal salvation once we believe and receive, but a loss of the kingdom reward, not the loss of eternal salvation, if we are unfaithful in our christian walk. The assurance and the warning.

I still prefer the "balanced" approach of Nee & Lee. However, I find it rather crude. The topic deserves a more thorough teaching than they provided (to me, anyway; perhaps you have gotten more than I). And it deserves a better rebuttal than Mr. Anderson gave.

The "overcomers" is a topic raised in scriptures so it ought to command our attention. If we wave "overcomers" off as being tantamount to "believers" we do it disservice, I believe. But I have in the past characterized Lee's teaching on the topic as equivalent to spreading butter with the head of an axe. It works, after a fashion, but it is neither as fine nor nuanced as the subject deserves.

Unfortunately, I can only offer my "homespun" reading as well. I am sure someone out there has addressed this more satisfactorily, but I have not yet come across them, or if I did I wasn't paying sufficient attention.

A few of my objections, in brief:

- Witness Lee taught that "raptured and martyred" folks got the thousand year "Wedding Feast" with the Lord. The rest, per John's "Revelation", were not raised until the thousand years were over. Witness taught us that "Watchman Nee was surely martyred" in China, thus was a Wedding Feast overcomer. But Lee wasn't, so I guess he's in torment for a thousand years.

Of course you'll reply, "No, not torment." But what, then? Silence. The Nee/Lee school has no idea, at least that came across my attention.

-- Jesus taught that if you do wrong, you'll get punished. If you do wrong and should know better, you'll get "many stripes", but if you do wrong ignorantly, you'll get "few stripes". Silence from Nee & Lee.

-- In the parable of the unrighteous steward, the steward and the creditors still are on the negative side of the ledger (the steward is still expelled, and th creditors still owe), but the relative positions have all improved. Silence from Nee and Lee.

I suspect, as a non-schooled laity, that these stories meant something to the hearers, as they meant to Jesus and the apostles. But what I don't know. It seems they meant nothing to Nee and Lee. They had their "Wedding Feast", and their "outer darkness", and that was sufficient for them.

[Cal]

I don't think Witness Lee was very balanced on this. For one thing, he kept tying overcoming to "growth," saying you had to be full-grown to be raptured (harvested), and equated rapture with overcoming. But this doesn't make much sense. Reward is about faithfulness, not growth. How about someone who is saved, then dies young? Or saved late in life without much time to grow? These people can't be overcomers? He never explained this kind of thing. He was just so enamored with "life" and "growth" he kept pushing it without tying the loose ends together.

Sorry, but there are a lot of problems with Lee's teaching on this subject. I would not suggest anyone just take it carte blanche.

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I don't think Witness Lee was very balanced on this. For one thing, he kept tying overcoming to "growth," saying you had to be full-grown to be raptured (harvested), and equated rapture with overcoming. But this doesn't make much sense. Reward is about faithfulness, not growth. How about someone who is saved, then dies young? Or saved late in life without much time to grow? These people can't be overcomers? He never explained this kind of thing. He was just so enamored with "life" and "growth" he kept pushing it without tying the loose ends together.

Sorry, but there are a lot of problems with Lee's teaching on this subject. I would not suggest anyone just take it carte blanche.

Igzy,

Witness Lee addressed the above scenario in blue in the teaching of the thief on the cross contrasting the thief's request (the Kingdom) with His promise (Paradise).

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy,

Witness Lee addressed the above scenario in blue in the teaching of the thief on the cross contrasting the thief's request (the Kingdom) with His promise (Paradise).

So what did the thief do to earn the kingdom reward?

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Igzy

So what did the thief do to earn the kingdom reward?

He didn't.

However, though the Lord did not grant the thief his request for the Kingdom, He did promise him the portion of every believer (Paradise)

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

He didn't.

However, though the Lord did not grant the thief his request for the Kingdom, He did promise him the portion of every believer (Paradise)

So, in other words you are saying that the way Lee addressed the issue was to say that those who die before getting a chance to grow will miss out on the kingdom reward? Is that your point?

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Igzy

So, in other words you are saying that the way Lee addressed the issue was to say that those who die before getting a chance to grow will miss out on the kingdom reward? Is that your point?

Almost. In the case of the thief on the cross, definitely.

I say almost because it depends, for instance if they died by being martyred. Many believers died after first becoming believers through martyrdom. They "loved not their soul lives even unto death". I don't see that as a matter of growth exactly, more like following the Lord to the ultimate extent.

For instance, in Foxes Book of Martyrs there is one young sister mentioned (Blandina) that may fall into the category of young in age, maybe not a lot of opportunity for spiritual growth, but "loved not her soul-life even unto death" even through excruciating torture. I weep when I think about her suffering and consecration.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I don't think Witness Lee was very balanced on this. For one thing, he kept tying overcoming to "growth," saying you had to be full-grown to be raptured (harvested), and equated rapture with overcoming. But this doesn't make much sense. Reward is about faithfulness, not growth. How about someone who is saved, then dies young? Or saved late in life without much time to grow? These people can't be overcomers? He never explained this kind of thing. He was just so enamored with "life" and "growth" he kept pushing it without tying the loose ends together.

Sorry, but there are a lot of problems with Lee's teaching on this subject. I would not suggest anyone just take it carte blanche.

The emphasis on growth over faithfulness established a hierarchy based on how many years in the LRC while deemphasizing the need to be faithful

[Cassidy]

"- Witness Lee taught that "raptured and martyred" folks got the thousand year "Wedding Feast" with the Lord. The rest, per John's "Revelation", were not raised until the thousand years were over. Witness taught us that "Watchman Nee was surely martyred" in China, thus was a Wedding Feast overcomer. But Lee wasn't, so I guess he's in torment for a thousand years."

Aron,

No. All born again christians are raptured before the 1000 year reign of Christ on the earth.

Just want to clarify that misunderstanding in your sentence above.