Most Bible readers assume that Apollos was re-baptized as a part of being taught the way of God more adequately by Priscilla and Aquila. Let’s begin by reading the end of Acts 18 and the beginning of Acts 19.
24 Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately. 27 When Apollos wanted to go to Achaia, the brothers encouraged him and wrote to the disciples there to welcome him. On arriving, he was a great help to those who by grace had believed. 28 For he vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ. (Acts 18:24-28)
1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2 and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied. 4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 19:1-5)
In spite of the normal assumptions, much discussion has occurred about whether Apollos was in fact baptized at this point. The text does not say so, nor does it say anything more generally that would necessarily imply it. A related question is whether the apostles or even the 120 in Acts 1 and Acts 2 were re-baptized. If they had come into a saved relationship during the ministry of Christ (and they had – John 15:3), then his dying would not have made them become unsaved. John’s baptism was for the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4), called in Acts 19:4 a “baptism of repentance” which had to be followed by belief in Jesus. Since the Israelites were born into a covenant relationship with God, the forgiveness through John’s baptism was not the forgiveness of initial salvation, but rather the forgiveness of repentance for those in the covenant, much like prayers on the part of Christians accomplish today (1 John 1:9).
My opinion is that those who had experienced John’s baptism before Christ died and maintained faith in him were not re-baptized. I don’t think the 3,000 baptized on the Day of Pentecost included the apostles. If the principle is true that those receiving John’s baptism before the cross and remained faithful would not need a re-baptism, then Apollos would not have needed another baptism. However, John’s baptism would have been invalid if experienced after the cross, for it was superseded by Great Commission baptism, and that was likely the case of those described in Acts 19:1-5. The probable scenario is that Apollos was baptized with John’s baptism before the cross, but then taught and baptized the dozen men in Ephesus with John’s baptism after the cross, which was no longer valid. Hence, Paul re-baptized them with the baptism of the Great Commission. The whole issue is mostly a moot point, for it cannot be applied in any way to those living today. Even if John’s baptism remained valid for men who were baptized before the cross and who maintained faith in Jesus, no such person is alive today! Therefore, while such discussions may be interesting, they tend to produce more heat than light, and have no direct application today. However, in the interest of honest inquiry, I am glad to provide the answer that seems to me most likely correct.
Introductory Note: This article is actually an excerpt of the first few pages of my book, “The Apostle Paul: Master Imitator of Christ.” The book is one of my longest (272 pages) and also one of my most in-depth. Greater spirituality must include greater knowledge, meaning that we cannot remain satisfied with shallow reading and study. The writer of Hebrews put it this way in Hebrews 5:12-14: “In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.” In the interest of promoting deeper study, I wrote this book. In the interest of promoting deeper study through this book, I am providing this brief excerpt to whet your appetite for reading it. Enjoy!
Acts 8:1–3
And Saul approved of their killing him. On that day a great persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. 2Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. 3But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off both men and women and put them in prison.
Acts 9:1–2
Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest 2and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem.
This first mention of Paul (using his Hebrew name, Saul) is shocking, but it also raises a number of questions. Trying to figure out the context of a passage means that we not only look for the explicit information provided in it, but also the implicit information. Regarding the latter, some implicit information is absolute, while other information may or may not be implied. But the fact that it may makes raising the possibilities important and helps the Bible come alive. Using our imaginations can fill in many blanks for us, as long as we stay within the bounds of what would seem to be at least possible and reasonable. Thus, what is taught here explicitly is that Paul (I’ll just start using the Greek form of his name, since that is the one that we know him by best) was totally in favor of making Stephen the first Christian martyr. Next, we see that Paul’s hatred for the Christian cause wasn’t assuaged in the least by this one murder; he wanted to kill every Christian or at least inflict as much emotional and physical pain on them as possible. Then we see that he was verbally quite outspoken against disciples, and finally, that he was going all the way to Damascus to arrest both men and women who were dedicated to Jesus. Commenting that Paul seemed to be a bit of a madman isn’t a stretch, based only on what is said in these texts. Hence the question about whether he was driven solely by zeal for God (as he then understood God) or by some sort of intense anger is a reasonable one.
One reason for the question is based on our understanding of Jewish discipleship in this era. To follow a Jewish leader as your mentor involved much more than simply learning the Law, and the traditions based on it, from him. Discipleship meant that you were committed to becoming as much like this person whom you were learning from as possible. In fact, it involved a level of committing to imitate them to a point that even those of us in churches that employ discipling would be quite uncomfortable with their practices. Honestly, those practices wouldn’t be dissimilar to some of what we look back on in our history as being clearly wrong. So, why is that practice of discipleship within Judaism so relevant to our question about Paul’s motivation for persecuting Christians? It is relevant because we not only know who his mentor was; we also know something of how he chose to view and treat Christians. Suffice it to say that it was far different from Paul’s choices.
His name was Gamaliel, perhaps the most famous Rabbi of the day. We are introduced to him in Acts 5, when the apostles were creating havoc in Jerusalem. A special meeting of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling body, had been called, and the confrontation between the High Priest and Peter and the other apostles led to these Jewish leaders being “furious” with the apostles and quite ready to have them put to death. In the midst of this wild atmosphere, Gamaliel spoke—calmly and reasonably. Whatever else Paul may have imitated in Gamaliel, he had not imitated his demeanor and approach in emotionally charged settings. The conclusion of his speech was quite striking: “Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God” (Acts 5:38–39).
Thus, we can safely say that Paul’s intense anger was not based upon imitating the one who was training him; it came from some other source. What might that source have been? I have two ideas, both of which are possibly implied and not stated clearly, but each of which has some biblical support (with a little imagination). Before delving into these, it must be admitted that whatever may be said about Paul’s anger level and its source, he was an extremely zealous person. That was true when he was a Jew only and it was also true when he became a Christian Jew. He was a man of passions when it came to his service of God—period. But he had an anger level that begs for a deeper examination and explanation.
Explanation 1: Paul Sensed the Truth about Jesus and Hated It
It is common for us humans to sense an unwelcome truth before we are prepared to admit it. We try to block it out of our conscious minds and keep it at the subconscious level. Most of us had exactly that reaction when seriously studying what the Bible said about our salvation for the first time (and maybe the second and third time, etc.). Is that not so? Many of us thought we were saved already and didn’t want to admit the possibility that we might be wrong and therefore yet in a lost condition. Further, by admitting that we were lost, we were also tacitly admitting that many of our relatives and friends were also lost. We knew what we had been basing our supposed salvation on and what they were basing theirs on as well. This is such a common phenomenon that we hardly need further illustrations, although there are many that could be mentioned.
Paul knew the Scriptures (Old Testament) as well as almost anyone in Jerusalem, the mecca of the Jewish religion. When he heard the Christian leaders quoting Messianic passages, he didn’t hear any passages with which he was unacquainted; he just heard a different interpretation of them. Jesus tied the Jewish leaders in knots using the exact same technique. In Galatians 1:14, here is what Paul said of himself: “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.” By the time he wrote Galatians, his humility level had increased significantly, and to state that he had been the top student of Gamaliel wouldn’t be difficult to believe. As one becoming highly esteemed in Judaism at a young age, following in the steps of his teacher, admitting that the top echelon of Judaic scholars was completely wrong about Jesus being the Messiah of their Scriptures would have been unthinkable at first. Such an admission would not only call his own salvation into question; it would also call into question the salvation of all of his current heroes.
When Jesus finally confronted Paul personally, he made an interesting comment found only in Acts 26:14. The original account of Paul’s conversion is found in Acts 9. Paul then repeated that account in Acts 22 as he spoke to the Jews in Jerusalem who were ready to kill him. Finally, he repeated the account in Acts 26 to Roman officials, primarily King Agrippa, while imprisoned in Caesarea. In all three accounts, Jesus’ first comment to Paul is recorded: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” For whatever reason, when he addressed Agrippa, Paul added an additional sentence spoken by Jesus when he appeared to him, as recorded in Acts 26:14: “It is hard for you to kick against the goads.” Paul also adds in this verse that Jesus spoke to him in Aramaic, a fact not mentioned in the other two accounts. I will include the three accounts of Paul’s conversion in an appendix in parallel columns if you would like to observe the similarities and the differences (asking yourself the question as to why these differences exist in their broader context).
Goads were sharp sticks used to prod livestock when they were not acting as their owners wanted. Similarly, Paul was not going in the direction for which he had been created, and was thus kicking against the goads. This was a common saying of the times in application to humans and not just livestock. The question is, precisely what did Jesus mean by it? Did he simply mean that Paul wasn’t accepting the gospel and his ultimate mission? Or was he implying also that deep inside his heart, he had already heard enough to sense that he was wrong. In the latter case, it would have been a matter of his conscience hurting him, even if he was unaware of this phenomenon at the time. Both this explanation of Paul’s anger and the next one involving the latter part of Romans 7 assume that his conscience was involved.
For the scholarly world, this assumption ushers in a problem. Some years ago, a Bible scholar named Krister Stendahl wrote a lengthy article entitled “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West.” In this article, known now as a classic, he argued that Jews in Paul’s time didn’t struggle with guilty consciences. According to him, that is characteristic of a later form of Christianity in Western culture and popularized by writers like Martin Luther. Stendahl denied that Romans 7:14–25 applied to Paul before he was a Christian or after he became one. Of course, Paul did say that he had fulfilled his duty to God in all good conscience (Acts 23:1) and was faultless regarding righteousness based on the Law (Philippians 3:6). However, he also said that our consciences can be hardened (1 Timothy 4:2) and can be an unsafe guide (1 Corinthians 4:4). I think Jeremiah’s comment about the heart must be kept in mind when discussing conscience: “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). Whatever else may be said, if having a guilty conscience is a learned behavior, as Stendahl implies, then Cain was an amazingly fast learner (Genesis 4); nor can David’s condition of being “conscience-stricken” (1 Samuel 24:5) be blamed on Luther or Western culture. I believe that Paul’s conscience, whether he was in touch with it or not, may well have had something to do with his anger level and extreme reactions toward disciples of Jesus.
Explanation 2: Paul Vented His Legalistic Spiritual Frustrations on Christians
As stated, this possible rationale for Paul’s extremity is also a conscience issue. If legalism could be perfected, Paul would be the champion. No one was more devoted to works salvation or a performance merited religion than he. His own statements along these lines speak for themselves. Perhaps that is why God chose him to be the apostle to the Gentiles rather than the apostle to the Jews, just to keep him in a place of having to constantly deal with Jewish legalists in order to protect his Gentile ministry. At any rate, one who strives with all his might to be righteous by meritorious works rather than by grace through faith is destined to be filled with frustrations and hurts, which inevitably lead to anger. Anger is a secondary reaction, a response to some type of hurt, even if the anger appears almost immediately in a given situation. If the hurts are deep enough, even from the distant past, they can prompt almost a constant state of anger, generating an emotional “hair trigger.”
In Paul’s case, his words in Romans 7:14–25 show some deep frustration and hurt that could easily have been vented through anger at others. The old saying about a man coming home from a bad day at work only to yell at his wife and children and kick the dog reflects this pattern. We often take out our pain on others, sadly. Who can claim to have never done this? Therefore, if Paul is describing his emotional condition as a legalist prior to his conversion in Romans 7, it could account for his anger at those who were saying that salvation could only be had by God’s grace demonstrated through the cross of Christ. It was that message that proved to be the stumbling block for the Jews who rejected Christ’s substitutionary death and their own woeful sinfulness (Romans 9:30–33).
Of course, in order to accept this explanation as a possible reason for Paul’s anger, you would have to accept the interpretation of Romans 7 that applies it to Paul’s preconversion days, in spite of the fact that he writes here in first person. Yet this is a literary device designed to make something more impactful emotionally for the reader—to make them feel the force of the wording in a more personal way. Although this interpretation of Romans 7 is much debated, I do believe it is the correct one. Whether it accounts for a significant part of Paul’s extreme anger or not might still remain a question, but I think this interpretation of the passage is correct, for a number of reasons. Rather than attempting to reinvent the wheel (my wheel, at least!), here is what I wrote in my exposition on the book of Romans, Romans: The Heart Set Free, under the heading of seeing ourselves as being dead to the law as paradoxical:
To really understand the law and the condemnation it wrought in our lives, we must understand its paradoxical nature (vv14–25). The paradoxes are difficult to deal with on a consistent basis, especially on an emotional level. For example, we are not under law (Romans 6:14), yet we are under law (1 Corinthians 9:21). We are not saved by works (Ephesians 2:8–9), yet we are not saved without works (James 2:14–26). We must obey with all of our hearts, yet our obedience does not merit righteousness. We cannot work to earn our salvation, yet we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling! (Philippians 2:12).
Obviously, the line between correct and incorrect understanding can seem to be a fine one indeed. When we live with the correct understanding, life is fulfilling; when we live with the incorrect one, life is frustrating. Romans 7:14–25 graphically describes the latter situation. Much ink has been used discussing who Paul must have been describing in this passage. Some say it describes Paul as a Christian, while others say it describes Paul as a Jew. A variation of the second view claims that Paul used the first person in the present tense to be more graphic in showing his frustration as a Pharisee and of any person who seeks law justification. This view seems to square with the text and other texts the best.
On the surface, Paul was likely not in touch with the amount of his inner turmoil until grace found his heart. In Philippians 3:6, he wrote that he was “faultless” in legalistic righteousness. Addressing the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, he claimed to have lived before God in all good conscience (Acts 23:1). Surely Paul was one of the most exemplary Jewish leaders in all of Israel. But I have to wonder just why he was so filled with rage at Christians. A good amount of frustration and inner turmoil seems to be the most likely answer. After all, this phenomenon is not uncommon, for we all learn to stuff inner pain when we do not believe that solutions exist.
On the practical level, all of us experience the feelings expressed in this passage at various times, for all of us slip into a legalistic mindset. This is why the passage is written at this point of Paul’s argument¾he drives home the truth of how useless a performance orientation actually is! God does not want any of us to feel such frustration and failure. Being guilt ridden does not bring God glory, and it does nothing to produce in us real spirituality. In fact, living with a Romans 7 conscience is about the poorest advertisement for Christianity that we could possibly find.
Certainly this passage was not intended to be descriptive of the disciple’s normal life, although it can seem to be. Note the following biblical principles that demonstrate God’s plan for our spiritual victory over the misery depicted in Romans 7:
- We are under bondage to Christ, not to sin (Romans 6:16).
- We sin, but we do not practice sin (1 John 3:7–9).
- Christ, not sin, dwells in us (Galatians 2:20).
- We can follow through in faithful obedience with God’s power (1 Corinthians 10:13; Philippians 2:12–13, 4:13).
- Although there is a struggle between flesh and spirit (Galatians 5:17), the Spirit wins in a demonstrable way, for by his power, our lives can be worthy of imitation (1 Corinthians 4:16–17, 11:1; Philippians 3:15–17, 4:9; 1 Thessalonians 2:10–12).
- The law of the Spirit frees us from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2).
- We are filled with rejoicing (Philippians 4:4; 1 Thessalonians 5:16), not with the frustration and failure that is described in Romans 7! Too many of us do live in Romans 7 and need desperately to move on to life in Romans.
- The most important ingredient in making that transition is how we see God and how we think he sees us.
Although there are other possible explanations for his intense degree of anger toward Christians, I think these two are the most likely, perhaps in combination. In describing Paul as a person, he was without doubt amazingly devoted to God as he saw him through the eyes of a Jewish legalist. Further, in my opinion, he was also the very epitome of the “angry young man.” He was full of zeal for God, a quality that remained for the rest of his life, but there seems to be more to it than that. In his non-Christian days, his personality went beyond zealous to the point of anger and hatred. We can debate the reason(s) behind that fact, but the fact itself would be difficult to debate successfully.
Like many readers of Facebook, I have tired of reading about politics long after the last election was held. Each of us has a right to our political views and preferences, and each of has the choice to vote or not vote as American citizens. We are never going to agree on politics, and the history of politics in this country is ample proof of that. I have lived in or through 16 different presidents in office. As a country, we tend to vote one party in for two terms and then the other party for two terms. That says that as a nation we are not convinced that either of the main parties has the solutions to our problems.
As disciples of Christ, our focus must be on his kingdom over all other kingdoms. But since I live in the kingdom of America, I have a type of dual citizenship and some responsibilities and opportunities within each. In the United States, I have the responsibility to pay taxes, but no opportunity to avoid them legally. I have the opportunity to vote, but not the responsibility before God. It is a choice. If I choose to vote, I have to make a choice which party to vote for.
For starters, let me shock some of you by saying that I didn’t vote in the last election. Some are disturbed by that, but disturbed for different reasons. Some are disturbed because they assume that I would have voted for their candidate of choice. But what if I had voted for the other party? Then you would now be less disturbed that I didn’t vote! Others are Americanized to the point that they feel like I’m just not a good citizen of the US or I would have voted. Although I obviously disagree, at least I see your disturbance as being based on principle alone.
I’m not disturbed by those who voted for either party nor by those who did not vote. You have the right to do either, and I respect your rights. Please respect mine in this instance. My main concern is always going to be a matter of my primary focus as a disciple. I simply cannot become overly focused on the things of this world and please God. Stated more bluntly, I cannot become overly focused on the things of this world and be saved. This is a serious matter. We could make quite a long list of things in this life that can become too much of a focus, and it would include far more than politics. But it would include politics. Read the following passages and contemplate what they are saying to us:
1 John 2:15-17
15 Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. 16 For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. 17 The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.
2 Timothy 2:3-4
3 Join with me in suffering, like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No one serving as a soldier gets entangled in civilian affairs, but rather tries to please his commanding officer.
Colossians 3:1-3
1 Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. 3 For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God.
Philippians 3:20
20 But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ,
Hebrews 11:13-16
13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance, admitting that they were foreigners and strangers on earth. 14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
If our main focus is on the kingdom of heaven, and not on human kingdoms, how do we react to man’s kingdoms as citizens of them? The Bible makes that point quite clear as well.
1 Timothy 2:1-4
1 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.
Titus 3:1-2
1 Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2 to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone.
1 Peter 2:13-17:
13 Submit to every human authority because of the Lord, whether to the Emperor as the supreme authority 14 or to governors as those sent out by him to punish those who do what is evil and to praise those who do what is good. 15 For it is God’s will that you silence the ignorance of foolish people by doing good. 16 As God’s slaves, ⌊live⌋ as free people, but don’t use your freedom as a way to conceal evil. 17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the Emperor.
In spite of all of these passages, Facebook is replete with those who claim to be Christians continuing to register their strong support or strong dislike of the party now in office, and especially the president of that party (and thus of our nation). I have, as many others have, selected the option to no longer follow those on my friends list who are consumed by politics. I still consider them friends and I love them, but I am concerned for them and will no longer subject myself to reading material that I don’t believe to be appropriate for disciples.
Sooner or later, we all have to decide whether we are going to allow our thinking and feelings to be governed by our emotions and human logic or by the Bible. Regarding the latter, even among those who claim to believe it and accept it as authority, the lack of really knowing its contents shows up all too often, especially when mixed with strong emotionally based opinions. Like it or not, everything that goes on in your life and mine, and in our world, falls into one of two categories. Either God allows something to take place or he directly causes it. We humans cannot know for sure if God’s active agency is involved or his inactive (yet allowed) agency in any given situation. But whatever the case, he is still in control. Many passages can be used to show this principle. Here are but a few among multitudes:
Lamentations 3:37-38: Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it? 38 Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come?
Daniel 2:21: He changes times and seasons; he sets up kings and deposes them. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning.
Daniel 4:17: The decision is announced by messengers, the holy ones declare the verdict, so that the living may know that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men.
When Nero was the Emperor of Rome, and both Paul and Peter were destined to be executed by his government, they still wrote that he should be obeyed. You may choose to reject what the Bible says and accept your human wisdom, but I am not about to do that. I may not like a lot of things that God allows, but since he is God, that is his business and not mine. Either God works all things together for spiritual good in the lives of those who love him or he doesn’t (Romans 8:28). Either he can or he cannot – and if the latter, the Lord of lords and King of kings is in that case subject to the power of human beings. That latter thought is perfectly ludicrous, but we each must decide if God is God and ultimately in control or not. I’m fully decided.
A couple of additional biblical thoughts may prove helpful. When Jesus started his ministry, his ability to do miracles astounded the Jews. They hated the Roman government and believed it to be totally godless and should be taken out of power at all costs. Their early reaction to Jesus wasn’t surprising. John 6:14-15: “When the people saw the sign He had done, they said, “This really is the Prophet who was to come into the world!” 15 Therefore, when Jesus knew that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, He withdrew again to the mountain by Himself.” Jesus had a different agenda than trying to straighten out the kingdoms of the world, as he made clear. John 18:36: “My kingdom is not of this world,” said Jesus. “If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I wouldn’t be handed over to the Jews. As it is, My kingdom does not have its origin here.”
Jesus spent his life, death, and all time since trying to get people to focus on the kingdom that lasts forever, his spiritual kingdom where our real citizenship must be as disciples. We can feel as the Jews did, that the prevailing government should be put out to pasture. The term “impeach” is being bandied about repeatedly. If God decides that our current president should come out, do we believe that He is capable of getting that done? If God has allowed him to be in there for a reason, do we really think we can do what we think should happen no matter what God is doing in the whole situation?
As a young preacher, I heard a popular older preacher say that if God didn’t punish America for her sins, he was going to owe an apology to Sodom and Gomorrah! I picked up on that and have repeated it through several decades, and during the whole time, our nation has been in increasingly moral decay. What if God has decided that enough is enough with the downward spiral of our nation’s sins and is going to use the current setting to deal with it? (A scary thought for us all!)
We have nearly lost all touch with the morality of the Bible in this country. The Nazis destroyed six million Jews over a half century ago and we are still talking about it. In the US, about one million babies are being killed in their mother’s wombs every year, and it is so accepted that few even discuss it anymore. Or do we no longer believe what Psalm 139:13-16 clearly says: “For it was You who created my inward parts; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I will praise You because I have been remarkably and wonderfully made. Your works are wonderful, and I know ⌊this⌋ very well. 15 My bones were not hidden from You when I was made in secret, when I was formed in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw me when I was formless; all ⌊my⌋ days were written in Your book and planned before a single one of them began.”
We could add many statistics to this one regarding the true state of sinful America, but the point is that we do not know what God is doing right not and we won’t know until it’s done. In the meantime, I suggest that we focus on the kingdom in which our true citizenship lies (Philippians 3:21), and let God run the world, our part of the world included. For those of us in the ICOC, we have prided ourselves in following the Bible as a whole and not picking and choosing what parts we would accept while rejecting the rest. But when it comes to the subject of politics, is this not exactly what we are doing? Honestly, I wish it was the only area in which we were doing this, but that’s another sermon for another day. Please, please, please deal honestly with the passages in this one article for now!
The Indwelling Spirit of Promise
Ezekiel 36:26-27, in an apparent Messianic prophecy, gives a wonderful promise of the Spirit’s presence in our hearts and lives as Christians. “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.” (Ezekiel 11:19 uses the term “undivided” heart instead of “new” heart.) In the Old Testament, people did not have the indwelling Spirit, and as a result, did not consistently follow God’s decrees and laws. Now, however, we have the Spirit to move us in the right direction.
Paul describes this impetus of the Spirit in Romans 8:1-4 in powerful ways. Through Christ, the law of the Spirit sets us free from the law of sin and death. Jesus was our perfect sin offering to take away both the guilt and power of sin in our lives. The righteous requirements of the law can be fully met in us, who live according to the Spirit, which is not sinlessness on our part, but absolute faithfulness and consistency plus God’s continual forgiveness as we walk in the light (1 John 1:7) with the aid of the Spirit.
The Spirit and the Message of Salvation
The Holy Spirit and the Word of God are closely associated in the salvation of mankind. First, the message was inspired by the Spirit in the OT prophets, as they foretold the message of salvation by the Spirit (1 Peter 1:10-12), and in the NT apostles and prophets who had their message revealed to them by the Spirit (Ephesians 3:2-5; 2 Peter 1:20-21). Since the Spirit expresses spiritual truths in spiritual words (1Corinthians 2:13-14), they can only be understood by spiritually-minded people (See also Ephesians 5.17-18). Such a person readily accepts what is written, rather than looking for and praying for an “understanding” which fits his preconceived ideas and desires (2 Timothy 3:2-4). Refusal to accept the Spirit’s inspired message leads to God sending those who refuse a powerful delusion which leads to their condemnation (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12)!
Second, the message also was sent by the Spirit. Once the Spirit came to usher in the Kingdom of God on earth, the apostles had the task of being witnesses to all nations – Acts 1:1-8. The Spirit was to testify about Jesus (John 15:26); the apostles were to testify about Jesus (John 15:27); and, all other disciples were to do the same (Matthew 28:19-20). Through this preached message, the Spirit offers the invitation to salvation; the church does the same, and every individual who accepts the invitation must pass it on (Revelation 22:17). Obviously, the Holy Spirit loves to preach! But He can only preach through those whom he indwells. How fired up is he about dwelling in you? Does He find you exciting or boring?
Third, the message was directed by the Spirit, as he opened doors of opportunity for evangelism. These doors were to individuals (Acts 8:26-40, especially verse 29) and to entire areas (2 Corinthians 2:12). This being true, Paul admonished us to pray for such open doors (Colossians 4:3). Sometimes, the Spirit directed some doors closed in order to lead to more open doors (Acts 16:6-10). Therefore, we must take advantage of every opportunity (Colossians 4:5-6) as we trust the Spirit to direct our paths to fruitful service! When your evangelism does not seem successful, do not get frustrated nor discouraged. Keep on sowing the seed, and trusting the Spirit’s direction. You will bear fruit!
The Spirit and Initial Salvation
When we find God, it is because he has first found us, seeking us through the Holy Spirit. In Acts 8:29, the Spirit sent Philip to meet a non-Christian (who had an openness to God). The Spirit is definitely involved in divine providence, both before and after we become Christians. Our being met and taught is never an accident – it is the plan of God brought about by the Holy Spirit.
The Spirit draws us to God initially by convicting us of sin, righteousness and judgment (John 16:7-8). Because we are blinded by sin, we must first deal with this malady if we are to appreciate and accept the abundant grace of God. But how does He bring about this conviction? First, he inspired the Word of God (1 Peter 1:20-21; Ephesians 3:3-5). This explains why the Word of God is called the “sword of the Spirit” (Ephesians 6:17), for through it he brings people to conviction.
Look at this convicting process in Acts 2:36-41, as the people were convicted of the sin of crucifying Christ (verses 36-37), convicted of the way to righteousness with God (verse 38) and then convicted of judgment (verse 40). In Acts 24:25, Paul reasoned with Felix about righteousness, self-control (sin), and the judgment to come, which left this hardened ruler convicted (afraid) but not obedient. Thus, the Spirit convicts the world through his Word, whether shared individually, preached publicly, or read privately.
The Spirit and Continual Salvation
When we are baptized into a saved relationship with Christ, the Spirit comes to indwell us (Acts 2:38; 5:32). According to Galatians 4:6, he is sent into our hearts by God because we became children of God, thus signifying this new relationship (tie this in with Galatians 3:26-27). Back in John 7:37-39, Jesus had promised this indwelling. Several truths are connected with this indwelling. One, the Spirit is our seal (2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Ephesians 1:13). A seal was an official sign of ownership. When we become Christians, God stamps us as his property! The world may not be able to tell who is a child of God simply by looking, but the spirit world now can.
Two, the Spirit is the deposit of our inheritance (2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:14). The deposit here carries the idea of earnest money put down for a purchase as a pledge that the full amount will be paid at the proper time. Therefore, the Spirit is God’s deposit in us, guaranteeing our future blessings with him (Philippians 3:20-21).
Three, he strengthens us (Ephesians 3:14-21), which is more than being strengthened by the Word (which definitely strengthens us). He also helps us to follow through with our convictions. Of course, he will not force us to do right against our will to do otherwise, but he will strengthen us to do what we really want to do for God. Once I was jogging a much longer distance than I ever had before, and near the end of the run, I came to a formidable hill. When I was tempted to give up, a friend ran behind me with his hand in the middle of my back pushing me. Had I quit running, he could not have helped me, but because I was trying, he could assist me in completing the run. Similarly, the Spirit assists us to complete what we could not complete without his helpful and vital “push.”
Four, he aids us in godly living. Just knowing that he dwells in me keeps me from wanting to sin (1 Corinthians 6:19-20), for where I go, he goes! Galatians tells us that we “live” by the Spirit in a number of ways: by refusing to gratify the desires of the sinful nature (verses 16-17); by being freed from a legalistic works orientation (verse 18); by avoiding a life directed by the sinful nature (verses 19-21), by developing the fruit of the Spirit (verses 22-23); by crucifying the sinful nature (verse 24); by keeping step with the Spirit (verse 25); and by maintaining loving relationships with our brothers (verse 26).
Romans 8 also promises that as we set our minds on spiritual living, the Spirit helps us control our minds and lives for God. We have life and peace (verse 6); our spirit is alive (verse 10); life is given to our mortal bodies (verse 11); we put to death the misdeeds of the body (verse 13); we are led by the Spirit (verse 14); we have a Spirit of sonship, not fear (verse 15); we have the assurance of salvation (verse 16-17); and he intercedes for us (verses 26-27). The Holy Spirit is vitally concerned about every aspect of our lives and needs. He loves us. He cares how we feel. He intercedes because he is an Encourager (Acts 9:31) and a Counselor to us (John 14:16-18). In that latter role, he joins Jesus in speaking in our behalf (1 John 2:1).
Five, the Spirit acts providentially for us, often leading in ways that are very delightful to us as we are led directly into the blessings of God. However, he also leads us into the desert of trials (Matthew 4:1)! In this gospel context, Jesus was thus led right after a time of great commitment to God’s will. Don’t be surprised when spiritual mountaintops seem to be followed by some rather intense valleys. Passages like Lamentations 3:38 inform us that everything which happens to us is either directly caused by God, or at the least allowed by him.
But why does a loving God allowing such painful testing in our lives? The Bible supplies abundant answers to that question. It develops character (Romans 5:1-5; James 1:2-4); it breaks us of self-sufficiency (2 Corinthians 1:8-9; 12:7-10); it makes us into Christ’s image (Romans 8:28-29; Galatians 4:19; Hebrews 5:7-9; 12:4-13). However, knowing why we suffering doesn’t remove the pain! Suffering is tough, producing what men call stress (the difference between our agenda for our lives and God’s agenda for them!). It may lead to our questioning God, as did the Psalmist on many occasions (Psalm 13:1-6). Such struggling with God is natural at first, but if we don’t work it through, we can end up like Job, who found himself facing a God who had worn thin on patience!
Rest assured that God is not sentimental. He gives us what we need rather than what we think we need. We especially struggle with accepting testing through people (who make mistakes), but following Jesus in the way of the cross is still the only answer (1 Peter 2:18-25). The key is to trust God no matter what occurs (Romans 8:31-39) and to decide to be thankful in (not necessarily for) all circumstances (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18). Note that nine of the ten lepers cleansed by Christ were not even thankful for the good things in their lives. We seem to expect the good, thus taking it for granted, while being shocked and dismayed at the not-so-good. Shedding the idea that we are somehow God’s gift to creation would help us be more thankful and more accepting of the challenges of life! Only Spirit-filled disciples can be thankful for the hard times in their lives. Bottom line, God is allowing you to be tested in order to become more spiritual and more prepared for deeper spiritual service in the future. Trust him and trust the Spirit who leads you through both the storms and through the sunshine (and each has its own inherent danger!).
The Holy Spirit and Conscience
We often speak of conscience, but what is that? Biblically, it is an inner voice which sits in judgment over our attitudes and actions (Romans 2:15). It is not infallible, for it is only as good as it is trained. Since we all receive worldly training as non-Christians, the conscience must be retrained, by the Scriptures. Two vital lessons regarding the conscience must be kept in mind.
One, we must always strive to keep our consciences clear before God and men (Acts 24:16; 1 Timothy 1:15,19). However, a clear conscience does not guarantee our innocence (Acts 26:9; 1 Corinthians 4:4). It can be weak (accusing us inaccurately – 1 Corinthians 8:7, 10); seared over (1 Timothy 4:2); corrupted (Titus 1:15); and guilty (Hebrews 10:22). Two, in the situation where conscience is not trained properly, it nonetheless must not be violated in the process of retraining it (Romans 14:22-23). Although religion per se cannot clear the conscience (Hebrews 9:9), the blood of Christ, properly applied, can (Hebrews 9:14).
But having said that, how do our consciences and the Spirit work together? Paul said that his truthfulness was confirmed in his conscience by the Holy Spirit (Romans 9:1). Since a clear conscience does not guarantee innocence (it is the Lord who judges – 1 Corinthians 4:4), to be approved by the Spirit has to mean that our actions or thoughts are based on God’s Word (which the Spirit inspired). The real danger comes when trusting our emotions and attributing them to an inner prompting of the Holy Spirit. Emotions and conscience are not the same thing. Emotions can be very selfishly directed, leading us to violate our own consciences (with the help of our rationalization process).
In making decisions, conscience should move us to stay surrendered and open-minded, and to get plenty of advice. Emotionalism moves us to be very independent and untrusting of others. Bottom line, if you feel like making a decision without wanting advice, Satan is using your emotions. If you want advice to insure a godly decision, God is using your conscience. This line of reasoning does not rule out prompting by the Spirit, but it does raise a proper caution. The Spirit will never prompt us in a direction which violates biblical principles, and such prompting must then be confirmed by advice from mature spiritual people (Proverbs 12:15;13:10;14:12; 19:20; 20:18; Romans 15:14).
The Holy Spirit, the Word, and Spirituality
The Holy Spirit works very closely in conjunction with the Word he inspired. Note the following parallels:
- We are born again by the Spirit (John 3:8) and by the Word (1 Peter 1:23).
- We are sanctified (set apart) by the Spirit (2 Thessalonians 2:13) and by the Word (John 17:17).
- We live by the Spirit (Galatians 5:25) and by the Word (Matthew 4:4).
- We are strengthened by the Spirit (Ephesians 3:16) and by the Word (Acts 20:32).
- We are filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18-19) and in a parallel passage, indwelt by the Word (Colossians 3:16).
Being full of the Spirit (Acts 6:3, 5; 11:24) is to be full of desire to love and serve God, and to be directing that desire in accordance with the Word of God. One can be knowledgeable without being spiritual. One can be pious in heart, yet deficient in knowledge, and still not be spiritual. The need is always spirit and truth – to possess both zeal and knowledge. When we are truly Spirit-filled, Spirit-led disciples, we live in the very atmosphere of the Holy Spirit! As Paul put it in Romans 14:17, the kingdom of God is a matter of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. We are to pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers (Ephesians 6:18). We love one another in the Spirit (Colossians 1:7). In spite of severe suffering, we have joy given by the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 1:6).
In conclusion, with Paul let us say: “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit by with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14).
—Gordon Ferguson (May 1998)
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:26-28).
Spiritual thinking means that we are colorblind in one sense, but it means more than that. It also means that we are both color-aware and color-appreciative. The Galatians passage above affirms that in some sense, physical distinctions are ended in Christ. Regardless of race, social status or gender, we are all equally valuable to our Creator. None is superior and none is inferior, for we are all made in the image of God and saved by the blood of Jesus. But we do not cease to be who we are racially, socially and sexually. Men are still men and women are still women. We must remain aware of those differences if we are to be effective evangelistically. Read Paul’s comments in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 on the principle of becoming all things to all men to reach as many as possible.
We must also be appreciative of the differences that remain. America is a blending of cultures like few other countries. Of course, in our cosmopolitan world, the cultural and racial composition of most nations is far more varied than in the past. However, Americans generally relish the variations more than the norm, since we were built with this diversity from the beginning. We are the big melting pot, and the acceptance of this diversity is at least a part of the reason many from other countries would like to migrate here. The attraction of financial opportunities is the biggest draw, but even more because these opportunities are found in a setting where backgrounds don’t mean too much.
However, in spite of this relatively accepting atmosphere, prejudices abound. I was raised in a part of America at a time when blacks and whites were quite segregated. I did not attend school with blacks until post-graduate studies when I trained as a minister. (Thankfully, that all seems so strange now.) When I was a teen, I did construction work in the summers as what was called a common laborer, and most in that category were black workers. Being around black men on the job was the first time I was able to closely associate with them on a peer basis, and frankly, both they and I loved it. We had a blast acting more than a little crazy together. I enjoyed their fun-loving ways no end, and my life was enriched by close association with those who were different from me racially and culturally. Since I was a young adult, some of my closest friends have been from different minorities. As I learned from their cultures and backgrounds, I grew to delight in our differences.
The church in the Bible was made up of equals, but equals with some pretty significant differences. Learning to love each other and live together in one Body was not always easy, but it will always be God’s way. All white churches or all black churches or all Asian churches or all Hispanic churches stand in stark contrast to the early church that Jesus built. Variety is the spice of life. We need each other, and we need to be enriched by the differences in each other. I rejoice in the true kingdom of God, because it is such a conglomeration of different types of people. We have the rich and the poor; the educated and the uneducated; the young and the old; the social adept and what the world might call the social misfits; the blacks, the whites, the Asians and the Hispanics, and then mixtures of all of these. We are the same in heart and purpose, but not the same in so many other ways, and these differences are cause to rejoice. Only God could bring such a group together in love and harmony. Our unity is the demonstration to the world that we are true disciples of Jesus (John 13:34-35; 17:20-23).
On my desk is a very unusual picture of seven men, affectionately called the BBB Club ─ the Big Black Brother’s Club. A number of years ago, several brothers in the church started coming over to our house on select Monday nights during the fall to watch Monday Night Football on TV. Most of these brothers were black, and gradually, the moniker of “the BBB’s” started being used. So, by mutual agreement, I was also black on Monday nights. (Actually, I always thought that I had too much soul to be a white man anyway!) On the nights when we are going to meet, we would discuss whether to invite a “token white” for the evening (remember, I’m black on Mondays). It was quite a group. Although a number of different “brother-brothers” (black disciples) have attended at different times, our club ended up with seven members: Bob Peterson, Walter Parrish, Curt Garner, Keith Avery, Jon Williams, Arthur Conard and me. My wife said that she could hear us out in the street, even though we met in the basement. Gin Rummy or Spades card games often competed with the football game, and to say that it was a lively meeting would downplay the true nature of the atmosphere considerably.
These brothers seemed to understand that I needed some setting where I don’t have to be a church leader of any type, but only one of the brothers, able to let my hair (what I have left) down completely. I needed these men and I cherished our times together. Now that others have heard about us, they are clamoring to get into the fray. With good-natured but raucous humor, we give them a hard time and let them know, that according to our by-laws, visitors have to be approved by a majority of the club members. None of those little white skinny guys have much of a chance of approval! Actually, those who do come have a great chance of losing their skinniness, since the food items are not exactly of the low-fat variety!
The picture to which I referred earlier is very unusual because it was taken after Arthur died suddenly of heart arrest last fall at age 38. (With the help of a friend, Arthur’s picture was scanned into a computer along with our picture taken later, and now we have the seven originals in a BBB Club picture.) He had a heart condition and realized that he would not live a normal life span. Yet he was as full of zest for life as anyone I have ever known. Deeply in love with God and people, he spent his last hours out sharing his faith. Returning home on the bus, he simply went to sleep and woke up with God. About 700 people attended his memorial service from all walks of life. The BBB’s, along with several of Arthur’s closest brothers wept together at his casket, but during the day, laughed about as often as we cried. Our tears were not for him but for ourselves. He will be missed greatly by his faithful wife, Joyce, and by a vast throng of friends and family who loved him deeply. Life for us will not be the same, both because he leaves a void and because he changed us by his copious love and laughter. My background was about as different from Arthur’s as one could imagine, but we were (are) brothers, and on Monday night, brother-brothers.
In our racially tense society, people are more than impressed at our camaraderie and deeply appreciated love for one another. Where else can you find such outside the family of God? We are in no way up-tight about our differences; we glory in them. God made us as we are and he expects us to enjoy each other to the full. Any family in which all the children were exactly alike would be boring at best. The diversity of nature demonstrates God’s belief in the special place of variety in his plans. When visiting our son and his family in Hawaii, I usually go snorkeling at least once. The numbers of fish species I see is astounding. It is often claimed that no two snowflakes are alike. (Of course, those making the claim must have done a rather enormous amount of research, and they will have to be satisfied with tentative conclusions at most.) God obviously is trying to tell us something important, even by the design of nature.
Spiritual thinking is colorblind in its absence of prejudice, but color-aware and color-appreciative in making us a family. I have often said that the ultimate effectiveness of spiritual leaders is found in their ability to lead different types of people. If we can only relate well or become emotionally close to people like us, we are missing out on one of the greatest possible blessings of life. May God grant you the perspective of family that he has taught the BBB’s, for then your life will be enriched more than you can imagine! And thank you, my unique brothers of the club, for allowing me to be one of you in far more ways than simply being members of the same church. Praise God for his plan for his kingdom!
My Introduction To Watchman Nee and Witness Lee
In my first ministry job, I was one of several ministers on the staff of a local church. The main pulpit preacher was using terminology and concepts that were strange to my ears, which was significant, since I had just graduated from a very intense two year ministry training school in which we went through the whole Bible verse-by-verse and memorized hundreds and hundreds of Bible verses. What I was hearing sounded definitely different from biblical concepts and wording. Further inquiry led to discovering that the minister was reading books by Nee and Lee, and appeared to be rather drawn to what amounted to a “new teaching” in the churches of which I was a part.
I then purchased some of these books and read them, being struck quickly with the obviously allegorical approach to interpreting Scriptures. The allegorical approach to studying written documents certainly predated the Christian era, but it found its way into the Christian church fairly early. Philo, an Alexandrian Jew (20 B.C. to 42 A.D.). is credited with introducing this method of biblical interpretation to the Old Testament Scriptures. Origen (182-251 A.D.) was quite influential in spreading this method of interpreting the New Testament, as one of the early “Church Fathers.” Augustine adopted a modified form of the system, and Jerome is said to be the main figure responsible for introducing it into the Roman church. But my most recent study, described in the following material, convinces me that Nee’s system is also a form of neo-Gnosticism. Actually, the allegorical system of interpretation is quite closely related in a specific way to the Gnostic approach of interpreting the Scriptures, as we shall see.
Introductory Thoughts About Interpreting Nee
In Watchman Nee’s classic book, The Spiritual Man, he combines three volumes into one comprehensive work, which well represents the school of theology that he has developed. The total number of pages in this compendium of his work is 694 − hence a substantial work. The first chapter, Spirit, Soul and Body, forms much of the basis of what he writes later, and gives the reader the keys to interpreting and understanding the terminology used and the concepts they represent. It should be said that the terminology and concepts are unfamiliar to the average Bible reader, which suggests from the outset that we are being introduced to a system of interpretation developed by a man, rather than to the Bible itself. Instead of being taught biblical things in biblical terms, we are forced to learn a system before we can understand what is being taught about the Bible, and thus, this teaching must be run through the filter of the system of interpretation being employed.
A failure to learn the system makes reading Nee’s work confusing and not really understandable to the uninitiated. For example, terms like “soulish” and “soulical” (neither of which are in the Bible or the English Dictionary) are used repeatedly. Soulish essentially represents worldly or non-spiritual attitudes and behavior, while soulical represents spiritual attitudes and behavior. Had Nee simply used the biblical terms themselves rather than inventing other terms, the book would be far more helpful to the average reader, and its errors more obvious. The insistence of using non-biblical terminology to represent fundamental teachings in Nee’s system of theology is not only confusing and demands that the reader develop a familiarity with the system, it also introduces elements of Gnosticism − which will be explained later.
Spirit, Soul and Body − the Biblical Passages
This first chapter of the book lays the foundation for the rest of the book, and thus all quotes used from Nee come from Volume One, mostly Chapter One. A failure to understand the terminology and basic assumptions upon which it is based insures the reader’s failure to grasp the rest of the book. With that in mind, I want to give a basic introduction to the theological system used by Nee. The main two passages which form the basis of the theology are the following:
1 Thessalonians 5:23: “May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Hebrews 4:12: “For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.”
A few observations about these passages are in order: One, the mention of “soul” and “spirit” contained within one verse is only found in these two passages, and neither of them defines what is meant by the distinction. Hence, basing an entire system on one’s interpretation of only two passages which are left divinely unexplained should raise eyebrows at the outset. Most biblical scholars do not elaborate upon this distinction, since it doesn’t seem to be the focus of the passage, but they rather state what the overall emphasis of the passage appears to be (i.e., God saving us completely in 1 Thessalonians 5:23). The following comment by the College Press Commentary is typical of the type explanations given:
That idea is further underlined with the combination “spirit, soul and body.” Much discussion of this phrase has concerned whether it indicates that human beings are trichotomous, consisting of three distinct aspects described by these terms, or dichotomous, really consisting of two aspects, body and spirit. In favor of the former interpretation is the fact that all three terms are used here; in favor of the latter is the difficulty in distinguishing clearly between the meaning of “spirit” (pneuma) and “soul” (psychē). However, it must be conceded that Paul is not discussing the precise nature of humanity but is offering assurance of God’s protection. The combination of three terms here is probably only intended as a means of underlining the comprehensive nature of that protection; it is no more a systematic presentation of human nature than is the combination “heart, soul, mind and strength” in Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27. Paul, like the other New Testament writers, repeatedly indicates that God’s purpose is to save the whole person, not just some part.
A representative example of what biblical scholars say about Hebrews 4:12 is as follows (from Expositor’s Bible Commentary):
The Word of God is unique. No sword can penetrate as it can. We should not take the reference to “soul” and “spirit” as indicating a “dichotomist” over against a “trichotomist” view of man, nor the reference to “dividing” to indicate that the writer envisaged a sword as slipping between them. Nor should we think of the sword as splitting off “joints” and “marrow.” What the author is saying is that God’s Word can reach to the innermost recesses of our being. We must not think that we can bluff our way out of anything, for there are no secrets hidden from God. We cannot keep our thoughts to ourselves. There may also be the thought that the whole of man’s nature, however we divide it, physical as well as nonmaterial, is open to God. With “judges” we move to legal terminology. The Word of God passes judgment on men’s feelings (enthymeseon) and on their thoughts (ennoion). Nothing evades the scope of this Word. What man holds as most secret he finds subject to its scrutiny and judgment.
In other words, the main focus of these two passages is not to emphasize a distinction of soul and spirit, but to make a main point of practical application − namely that God can save us entirely and that the Word of God exposes our inmost thoughts and motivations. Building a theological system on passages intended to provide practical motivations is highly suspect, to say the least. However, Nee has not only chosen a suspect approach, he has deemed it absolutely essential to our understanding of the Bible. A couple of quotes will illustrate that point:
“It is an issue of supreme importance for it affects tremendously the spiritual life of a believer.” (page 22)
“To fail to distinguish between spirit and soul is fatal to spiritual maturity.” (page 22)
It is obvious that Nee has not only developed a system of theology and interpretation, but it is equally obvious that he believes we cannot be spiritually healthy (or maybe spiritually saved) without seeing the Bible through the filter of his system. One brother, who came out of this background himself, said that it is not uncommon to hear the adherents to Nee’s doctrine say that this issue is a salvation issue. Certainly such strong assertions by Nee are both assumptive and arrogant, and insulting to the large body of believers who are either unaware of Nee’s system or who have studied and rejected it upon biblical grounds. And as stated before, one of these grounds is the inclusion of certain Gnostic elements.
Spirit, Soul and Body − the System Introduced and Defined
It is important that we introduce the basics of Nee’s theological approach and explanation of his terminology. Nee begins his explanation with the creation of man in Genesis 2:7, quoting from the American Standard Version: “And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” The term soul is from the Hebrew nephesh, which will prove to be very important in this study. Nee says that God breathing into Adam the breath of life meant that the breath of life became man’s spirit, and when it came into contact with man’s body, the soul was produced. Hence, the soul is the combination of man’s body and spirit (and assumedly would not have been formed without the spirit).
He states: “In other words, soul and body were combined with the spirit, and spirit and body were merged in the soul” (page 24). Another quote: “Soul is the organ of man’s free will, the organ in which spirit and body are completely merged” (page 25). Thus, according to Nee, the soul chooses whether to go toward the flesh or the Spirit. We are told that the body gives us “world consciousness;” the soul gives us “self consciousness;” and the spirit gives us “God-consciousness.” This interesting observation was made on page 27: “Before man committed sin the power of the soul was completely under the dominion of the spirit…The spirit cannot itself act upon the body; it can only do so through the medium of the soul.”
However, this observation was followed up by quoting Luke 1:46-47, which reads: “And Mary said: ‘My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.’” This passage is typical of scores of passages which use soul and spirit interchangeably (which Nee denies strongly). In this case, we have a simple case of Hebrew parallelism, as any commentator will note. Hence, Nee uses a passage that makes a different case than the one he is trying to make. Nee’s threefold delineation of the supposed nature of both soul and spirit: Soul − the site of personality, consisting of will, intellect and emotions; Spirit − the site of conscience, intuition and communion (worship).
Biblical and Practical Inconsistencies
The word “soul” is used in a variety of ways biblically. Prior to Genesis 2:7, where man is said to be a “soul,” animals, fish, birds and creeping things were all said to be “souls” (from nephesh). (Yet, they had no spirits to unite with their bodies to form their souls!) See Genesis 1:20-26 on the point of other animate life besides humans being souls. The word “creature” is most often the term used to translate nephesh. Thus, living “being” is a good translation for all of created animate life, including man.
Further, God himself is a soul (and has a soul):
Leviticus 26:11: “Moreover, I will make My dwelling among you, and My soul will not reject you.”
Leviticus 26:30: “I then will destroy your high places, and cut down your incense altars, and heap your remains on the remains of your idols; for My soul shall abhor you.”
Leviticus 26:43: “For the land shall be abandoned by them, and shall make up for its sabbaths while it is made desolate without them. They, meanwhile, shall be making amends for their iniquity, because they rejected My ordinances and their soul abhorred My statutes.”
Psalm 11:5: “The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, And the one who loves violence His soul hates.”
Isaiah 42:1: “Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights.”
Isaiah 53:11: “As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities.”
Zechariah 11:8: “Then I annihilated the three shepherds in one month, for my soul was impatient with them, and their soul also was weary of me.”
In the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, soul is often used to describe the inner part, or the spirit of man. Nephesh can describe only the man as a created being (like the animal, bird and fish world), or it can describe the part that is unique to man − the spirit.
Psalm 19:7: “The law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.”
Psalm 23:3: “He restores my soul; He guides me in the paths of righteousness For His name\’s sake.”
Psalm 25:1: “To Thee, O Lord, I lift up my soul.”
Psalm 30:12: “That my soul may sing praise to Thee, and not be silent.”
Psalm 33:20: “Our soul waits for the Lord; He is our help and our shield.”
Psalm 34:2: “My soul shall make its boast in the Lord; The humble shall hear it and rejoice.”
Psalm 35:9: “And my soul shall rejoice in the Lord; It shall exult in His salvation.”
Psalm 42:1-2: As the deer pants for the water brooks, So my soul pants for Thee, O God. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God; When shall I come and appear before God?”
Psalm 71:23: “My lips will shout for joy when I sing praises to Thee; And my soul, which Thou hast redeemed.”
Psalm 94:19: “When my anxious thoughts multiply within me, Thy consolations delight my soul.”
Psalm 103:2: “Bless the Lord, O my soul, And forget none of His benefits.”
Psalm 108:1: “My heart is steadfast, O God; I will sing, I will sing praises, even with my soul.”
Psalm 119:81: “My soul languishes for Thy salvation; I wait for Thy word.”
Many other similar verses could be quoted, but why is this point important? The following quotes from Nee answer that question.
“The spirit lies beyond man’s self-consciousness and above his sensibility. Here man communicates with God.” (page 29)
“The revelations of God and all the movements of the Holy Spirit are known to the believer through his intuition.” (page 32)
“God is not apprehended by our thoughts, feelings or intentions, for He can only be known directly in our spirits.” (page 32)
Implications from the above quotes:
-
-
If the spirit lies beyond man’s self-consciousness” (his soul), and is the only place where man can communicate with God, the Psalmist was poorly informed of such.
-
If the revelations of God and all the movements of the Holy Spirit are only known through the intuition (which is a part of the spirit, not the soul − by Nee’s definition), then the Psalms are mistaken.
-
If God cannot be known directly through our souls, the Psalmist is again mistaken.
These kinds of contradictions will always occur when the Bible is forced into an artificial system of interpretation. Other contradictions:
-
-
Before conversion, one cannot distinguish between soul and spirit. (page 34)
-
Yet, on the same page we are told: “The New Testament does not consider those with a sensitive conscience, keen intellect or a spiritual tendency to be saved individuals.” (If conscience is a function of the spirit and is based on the intuition, which cannot be distinguished prior to conversion, how can the conscience become “sensitive?”)
-
If the revelations of God and the work of the Holy Spirit can only be known through his intuition, one’s personal insight is exalted above the statements of Scripture. (Dictionary definition of intuition: “knowledge or conviction gained by intuition. The power or faculty of attaining to direct knowledge or cognition without evident rational thought and inference.”) Such a conclusion is both unbiblical and dangerous.
The Soul and Spirit of Man in Normal Biblical Usage
Spirit refers to man’s inner being, made in the image of God. Soul may refer to the animate life itself, or to man’s inner being − depending on the context. Some OT verses use Hebrew parallelism to show the interchangeable nature of soul and spirit, when soul is used to refer to man’s inner being.
1 Samuel 1:15: But Hannah answered and said, \”No, my lord, I am a woman oppressed in spirit; I have drunk neither wine nor strong drink, but I have poured out my soul before the Lord.
Job 7:11: “Therefore, I will not restrain my mouth; I will speak in the anguish of my spirit, I will complain in the bitterness of my soul.”
Isaiah 26:9: At night my soul longs for Thee, Indeed, my spirit within me seeks Thee diligently; For when the earth experiences Thy judgments The inhabitants of the world learn righteousness.
The NT is even clearer in its interchangeable usage of the terms soul and spirit:
Matthew 10:28: “And do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (According to this passage, man cannot kill the soul.)
Matthew 22:37: “And He said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’”
Matthew 26:38: “Then He said to them, ‘My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me.’”
Luke 1:46: “And Mary said: ‘My soul exalts the Lord.’”
Acts 2:27: “Because Thou wilt not abandon my soul to Hades, nor allow Thy Holy One to undergo decay.”
2 Corinthians 1:23: “But I call God as witness to my soul, that to spare you I came no more to Corinth.”
Hebrews 6:19: “This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil.”
Hebrews 10:39: “But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.”
James 5:20: “let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins.”
1 Peter 2:11: “Beloved, I urge you as aliens and strangers to abstain from fleshly lusts, which wage war against the soul.”
2 Peter 2:8: “for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day with their lawless deeds.”
3 John 1:2: “Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers.”
Many observations could be made on the above passages, but a mere reading of them pretty much makes the point. Trying to force biblical terminology to fit a system imposed upon it always leads to confusion and false teaching.
Dangers of Watchman Nee’s Teaching (and Those Patterned After Him)
His teaching is a system which is based on his theology and terminology, and cannot be understood without first being trained in that terminology. Thus, instead of just studying the Scriptures, time must be taken to study the philosophy of a man. Many of his teachings are merely assumptions and opinions, and yet are emphatically declared by him to be Scriptural. The essential ingredients of Gnosticism are present in both subtle and blatant forms.
Gnosticism (which was present in incipient forms in many places in the New Testament) has the following characteristics: The name comes from the Greek word, gnosis, for knowledge. It is built upon the premise that anything material was bad. In the realm of personal practices, the NT contains two manifestations of it: asceticism (see 1 Timothy 4:1-3 and Colossians 2:20-23) and libertinism (see 2 Peter 2:13-22 and Jude). The reasoning was that since the flesh was inherently bad, either deny it or indulge it. In the latter viewpoint, as long as you had the right knowledge (gnosis), what you did with the body didn’t matter. In defining the nature of Christ, those with Gnostic tendencies denied that he could have come in the flesh. He just “seemed” to be in the flesh. We call this the Docetic doctrine. The Apostle John attacks this heresy in no uncertain terms in 2 John 1:7: “Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.”
Further, and this is where Nee’s and Lee’s teachings especially converge with Gnosticism, those who succumbed to Gnosticism believed that they had a special insight to spiritual knowledge, and saw their insight (intuition) as more important that the Bible’s specific teaching. They were very prideful and looked down on those who just simply clung to the specifics of the Bible. They had the idea that in spite of what the Bible seemed to say on certain points, they had been given the illumination of the true will of God. (They could read between the lines to get the real meaning God intended.) This tendency is seen in some of the Christians in Thyatira, according to Revelation 2:24: “Now I say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan’s so-called deep secrets (I will not impose any other burden on you).” In other words, these people claimed to have the “deep teachings of God,” but God said that they actually were holding to the “deep teachings of Satan!”
Nee’s form of Gnosticism comes through the development of a rather complicated system, with its own specific terminology, which means that the uninitiated cannot really grasp the “deep teachings” of God. The focus on the intuition as the real means of grasping truth, rather than through the specifics (including the wording) of Scripture is a definite type of Gnosticism, complete with its arrogance and exclusivity (regardless of intentions to the contrary). His claims that the conscience is based on one’s intuition opens wide the door for being directed by a supposed inner voice from God rather than taking God’s written Word as the true basis of conscience training. The conscience is only as accurate as the training upon which it is based. (See my recent article on this subject, entitled: “Matters of Conscience: a Deeper Look.”)
The allegorical approach to interpretation is a part of the discovery of so-called “deeper truths.” For one example, Nee on page 29 compares the three-fold nature of man to the three parts of the temple (outer court, Holy Place, Most Holy Place) − as if God had made the comparison. Such allegorization is common to Nee and Witness Lee. Mentioning Witness Lee, who picked up the torch of Nee’s theology, Lee is even more blatant in his Gnostic statements. Consider the following quotes from The All-Inclusive Christ:
“First of all, I would ask you to realize that according to the Scriptures all physical things, all the material things that we see, touch, and enjoy, are not the real things.” (Chapter 1, page 7)
“…material objects: we are eating food, drinking water, putting on clothes; we are living in our houses and driving in our cars. I would ask you to realize and remember well that all these things are not real.” (Chapter 1, page 7)
“What about the earth? There was chaos upon the earth. Waste and void and deep waters were upon it. It was buried under the deep. So God came in to work; God began to recover the earth…Then He divided the water from the earth, and the earth came out from the waters on the third day. It was the third day when the Lord Jesus Christ came out of the depths of death. So, you see, this is a type. On the third day God brought the earth out of the waters of death. From this type you can realize what the earth is. The earth, or the land, is a type of Christ.” (Chapter 1, page 10)
“Whenever you want to do something, whenever you enjoy something, whenever you use something, you must immediately apply Christ. For instance, you are sitting on a seat. Do you realize that this is not the real seat? This is but a shadow, a figure point to Christ. Christ is the real seat. If you do not have Christ, it means that in your entire life you have never had a seat. There is no rest for you. You have nothing to rely upon. You have something false, for Christ is the real thing.” (Chapter 2, page 19)
These quotes from Witness Lee show us two important pieces of this dangerous Gnostic-type teaching. One, the alleged lack of realness of material things is very Gnostic in nature. Two, the typology (allegorization, in this case) is merely speculative, but a part of so-called deeper truths. The only way we can be sure that an allegory is intended in Scripture is when the writer makes an allegorical application. For example, in Galatians 4:24-26, God inspires Paul to use the following allegory:
These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. [25] Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. [26] But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
When God inspires a biblical writer to use an allegory and make an application that we might not have otherwise thought of, that is his prerogative. When non-inspired men do the same thing, they are assuming what God has not said and are in danger of adding to the Scripture and of being false prophets. Additionally, and this is not necessary Gnostic-related, Lee is clearly Premillennial in his interpretation of prophecy (which I believe to be false, in spite of its popularity in the Evangelical world).
Concluding Observations
Upon a close examination of the theology of Watchman Nee and those who ascribe to his theology, I believe it to be biblically erroneous in many ways and thus clearly dangerous. This is not to say that the faulty exegesis and danger was in any way intentional by him, nor is it to say that his followers are intentionally deceived and deceptive, or unspiritual in their overall desires or actions. However, regardless of intention, false doctrine is false doctrine and therefore dangerous.
Recently, I heard a disciple commenting on Nee’s books, saying that they were “deep” and contained things that he never would have thought of. I told him that there was a good reason for that − the Holy Spirit never thought of them either! But this brother provides a good example of how reading subtle but erroneous teachings can influence those without a real foundation of biblical knowledge. My hope and prayer is that this study can be profitable to those who have unknowingly ascribed to a false system of theology, and will help them to decide to adopt a much simpler and more accurate approach to Bible study by being willing to call Bible things by Bible names and accept the simple teachings of God’s plan of salvation.
