<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Reformed in the Calvinistic sense of the term. I have read the 3 volume set called The Spiritual Man many years ago. Do you think The Spiritual Man is an inspired work of the Holy Spirit without error, as the Holy Scripture is? Do you agree with Nee’s own assessment of his own work?</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Reformed Calvanistic sense? What does that mean? The Spiritual Man is a top notch work by the Holy Spirit in the man of Watchman Nee. Only the Bible is the Bible. I agree with Nee's own assessment of his work, yes. What's wrong?<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]1. This is a form of baptismal regeneration.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>I am not convinced that armenian baptism is legastically baptismal regeneration, after all read what Watchman Neew writes here: "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (John 3.5). This is the word of our Lord to Nicodemus. <br><br>When Paul wrote to the saints in Rome he inquired, "Are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?" Paul then continues with these words: "We were buried therefore with him through baptism itno death: that like as Christ was raised from teh dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For if we have b ecome united with him likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection" (Rom. 6.3-5). Both the Lord Jesus and Paul speak of the reality of baptism.<br><br>But some people look at this matter of baptism from the physical point of view. Their eyes see only the water. Hence they insist on baptismal regeneration. They have not touched spiritual reality. Other people try to approach this question mentally. They maintain that water cannot regenerate people. Accordingly, they explain that with some people baptism is real and inward while with others it is false and outward. The first group can enter into the kingdom of God but those in the second category are excluded. They too have not touched spiritual reality in this matter.<br><br>The baptism of which the Lord told Nicodemus is a reality. Paul also sees reality in baptism: burial with the Lord for newness of life. He told the saints in Colossae, “Having been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him” (Col. 2.12). To him baptism and burial are one and the same thing; so too are baptism and resurrection. He knows what it meant to be buried with the Lord and also what is meant by being raised with the Lord. He does not see the water of baptism only, nor does he view some as being truly baptized while some others are not. He communicates to others the reality of that baptism which he has touched.<br><br>Brothers and sisters, if you have seen baptism as a reality you naturally know what it is. The question of its being true or false, inward or outward, simply does not exist, because you see that to be baptized is to be buried and raised up together with Christ. Having seen this reality, can you refrain from proclaiming that baptism is indeed so big, so real, and so inclusive? As soon as a person is shown the reality, then that which is false can no longer exist. Suppose someone should say: “Now that I have been baptized, I hope I may be buried and then raised together with Jesus.” The one who could utter such a statement has not touched reality, since to him baptism is one thing and burial and resurrection are quite another. But that person who perceives spiritual reality knows what burial and resurrection. Baptism is burial, baptism is also resurrection are. They are one and the same thing.<br><br>Do you realize, brothers and sisters, that no one can ever perceive spiritual things with his eyes fixed on the material, that no one can ever think through to the spiritual with his brain? All spiritual matters have their realities. He who has touched reality questions no more.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]He believes in a separate filling of God after salvation, that being the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. He did not push the tongues issue as much as many today, but he did push the second blessing issue of this separate baptism against Scripture,(Rom 8:16).</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Not that I am aware of in his writings. He treats Baptism as burial and resurrection. Perhaps you should find a quote. Nee talked about the buildup of the inner life and considered a church that built up based on the gifts as kindergarden church. Watchman Nee also did not believe in gibberish, but he did believe in tongues as languages. He treated baptism of the Holy Spirit much differently than you describe, perhaps you are reading into him? (see above writing of Baptism by Nee). Nee never spoke gibberish but he spoke tongues of chinese and its derivatives and english.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]I like to talk to God and not to demons. Eve tried that and it did not work out to well for any of us. But, yes, I believe in Spiritual Warfare. It is a great battle that is fought 24/7 by prayer, proper study, proper discipline... But, as far as seeing a demon around every corner and casting them out in today’s day and time, no that is not spiritual warfare.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Spiritual warfare is not talking to demons. It is casting out, rebuking and refusing ground. sounds like you agree with Watchman Nee and Jessie-Penn Lewis then on the matter of spiritual warfare after all.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Nee believed that ALL the gifts were still available today when Scripture is clear that many have ceased.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Why would you think the gift of wisdom has ceased? Then where would be God's wisdom? Or the gift of knowledge? Who then who had have God's knowledge? Or the gift of languages, then how could we spread the Word to other nations? Why would you think God is giftless? If yhou fulfill His conditions sureless he will bestow gifts here or there, non-legalistically<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Now, I ask you, are we to search the Scriptures with our intuition or a renewed mind (Rom 12:2)? God does not embrace mindless Christianity and mysticism.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Of course are you trying to imply Nee is saying otherwise. I see page 149 is describing the difference between the spirit life and the soul life, that which of the spirit, and that which is of the soul. Do you see how you may have taken this out of context. You said intuition or mind. I say both, pray with the spirit and the mind, but kinow that God's Holy Spirit always works from within intuitively first. Not from the outer man's soul or body. For God is Spirit where he testifies to our spirit and ours to His. Are you able to see how you misread this or should I say Miles, and you are just following the guy. It is interesting to see how people read into to stuff out of context. <br><br>More: paragraph of page 31 is talking about a man who lives soulically without the spirit and it is much better to live by the spirit "walk not according to the flesh" so we can "walk according to the spirit". "spirit wars against the flesh and the flesh wars against the spirit". All that is of the soul if not led by the spirit is soulish. page 74 paragraph talks about the agitated soul's searching but the spirit runs much deeper and can know God's thoughts need not reason them out for their is a deep inner knowing.<br><br>Sounds like Miles and perhaps yourself are reading into things?<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]But, Nee by spiritual intuition, against the Scripture, said we could arrive at a state of perfectionism saying, Whoever genuinely desires to be perfect must let the Cross cut deep into his emotion, (vol 2, p 195), and again, on page 256, when a believer has experienced the practical treatment of the Cross he finally arrives at a pure life. He sums up this false theology by saying, they forget that unless all nerve responses, sensations, actions, conduct, words, food and speech which belong to the body are utterly for the Lord, they can never arrive at perfection (vol 3, p 149).</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Nee is not saying to be perfect for elsewhere he says we can never be perfect for it is a life long process of growth. You should take this as being pefected. Miles misunderstood Nee. I know that when I read that part I did not read it as Miles read it or yourself. Perhaps be careful into reading into things. page 256 is referring to a pure life. He is not saying perfect where there is no more. I know i did read it that when when I first read it nor the 5th time I read it. The question then why would Miles, and perhaps yourself, read into it other than the way it was intended. A pure life is a life as oppossed to an impure life. A pure life is one where greater spiritual stride is being achieved. Do you see? Knowing Nee's vast spirit and intelligence I am sure you recognize Nee is not a man of legalisms as Miles alludes. Same again on page 149. Just know that I never read it the way you read it, so why did you read it incorrectly? Is it because Miles took it wrongly. When we say The Spiritual Man is a perfectionist work, it means as I take it, that it is a highly quality work that is a leading writing today on its subject matter..we should strive for perfection and achieve a perfection..think of perfection as the highest level reached by the most spirtual Christians that ever lived and yet they could have even gone higher..moving right along to the next point..................<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Show me one Scripture where a Christian was possessed by a demon? </font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Possession is defined as by Jessie Penn Lewis as any hold which the evil spirits have in or upon a person in ANY DEGREE. They possess that which holds them. I see lots of my Christian friends under this state, and there are many examples in the Bible. Many examples of men sinning held by such bondage. Do you disagree? Otherwise they would not have sinned so repeatedly especially. <br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Thus, am I the one that married them together?</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Yes. You should not blame Watchman Nee for Witness Lee's mistakes, especially if Watchman Nee adamantly would disagree with Witness Lee's approach as the years wore on while Nee was in jail. A man should not be blamed for another man's mistakes.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Again, this is not what I stated. I stated, He stressed that Christian "victory" is not gained by teaching, doctrine, or prayer, but by just four words of praise. Do you assert with Nee that you can have victory in the Christian life without teaching, doctrine, or prayer?</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>I thought Witness Lee said this, not Watchman Nee. That is why I say, why do you marry Witness Lee to Watchman Nee.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Very little if any. They both embraced error! </font><hr></blockquote><p><br>While I agree that Lee embraced error, and given my responses above I don't see having erred, so I am not sure how you can either given my responses to deal with your claims. Do you have anything else to offer besides this?<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
