Search
Paul writes in 1 Timothy 1:3, “I exhorted you, when I was going into Macedonia, to remain in Ephesus in order that you might charge certain ones not to teach different things.” This verse shows that Paul was inwardly clear that there were some in Ephesus who were teaching differently. For this reason he charged one of his closest co-workers, Timothy, to remain in Ephesus to help the Ephesian believers and even charge them not to teach different doctrines or teachings. This proves that the matter of different teachings is a serious matter.
In 6:3 Paul writes again, “If anyone teaches different things and does not consent to healthy words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the teaching which is according to godliness.” This is one of Paul’s final words in this book, which reminds us of his opening word. What is it to teach differently? It is to not consent to healthy words. These healthy words are the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. We need to realize that those who were teaching differently were teaching the words of the Old Testament. Although the Old Testament words are part of the Scriptures, they are not the “healthy words.” Unhealthy words are words that do not minister or supply life to others. What then are the “healthy words”? They are the words of the Lord Jesus in the New Testament age and the teaching that is according to godliness.
First Timothy 3:15-16 says, “The house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and base of the truth. And confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was manifested in the flesh...” If we put all the above verses together, we can see that the healthy teaching includes two parts. The first part is the words that the Lord Jesus Himself spoke. The other part is the words that the apostles spoke on earth after the Lord resurrected and ascended. These words are “the teaching which is according to godliness.” The teaching which is according to godliness concerns God becoming flesh, passing through human living, dying, and resurrecting to produce the church, which is God manifested in the flesh. What the church supports and upholds is the teaching according to godliness, which is God manifesting Himself in the flesh through the church. In reality, the healthy teaching covers the entire New Testament; it is constituted with the Lord Jesus’ words of life and the preaching of the apostles, which is the word of the mystery of godliness, that is, of God becoming flesh to produce the church. It extends all the way from Matthew to Revelation.
Paul’s burden in his first Epistle to Timothy was to instruct him to remain in Ephesus to charge the dissenters not to teach anything outside the New Testament teaching. If anyone teaches anything apart from the New Testament teaching, he is teaching differently, and he does not consent to healthy words. If we study this book carefully, we will see that at that time there were some Judaistic Christians who were spreading such things as Old Testament knowledge and genealogies, not only among Jewish believers in Jerusalem but among the churches in all the Gentile lands. Although their speaking was in accordance with the Old Testament, it was not the healthy words. Consider the case of circumcision. According to the record of Genesis 17, God established circumcision with Abraham as a sign of an eternally immutable covenant. The Jewish Christians argued that even in the New Testament age, God’s people, that is, His children, were not exempt from circumcision. Superficially, such a teaching sounds scriptural. Actually, it is absolutely contrary to God’s New Testament economy, which the apostles preached.
Moreover, these preachings, which were superficially scriptural, did not give life to men. They did not afford men any life supply. On the contrary, they led some to become shipwrecked regarding the faith (1 Tim. 1:19). Therefore, they were unhealthy teachings. Healthy words are those that are not only scriptural but those that consent to the revelation of the Lord Jesus. They cover the speakings concerning His birth, death, and resurrection. They also cover the words that the apostles continued to speak after His ascension concerning God becoming flesh and passing through death and resurrection to release God’s life and to produce the church to be the corporate manifestation of God in the flesh. These words according to the mystery of godliness are the consistent and overall revelation of God in the New Testament.
In order to understand 1 Timothy, we must first understand the background behind the writing of this book. In Acts 20 we find Paul sending for the elders of the church in Ephesus while he was on his way to Jerusalem. He spoke a solemn and crucial word to them. He reminded them how for three years he was in their midst, not shrinking from declaring to them all the counsel of God (vv. 20, 27, 31). This means that Paul fully and thoroughly explained to them God’s revelation in the New Testament. Then he said, “I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock” (v. 29). The wolves here refer to the Judaistic believers. They were doing an unhealthy work in the church, speaking unhealthy words. Unhealthy words are poisonous words, killing words. Those who were speaking these unhealthy words destroyed men and poisoned them rather than supplying them. In this sense they were like wolves. In John 10 the Lord said that He is the good Shepherd and that He came to lay down His life that men may receive life (vv. 10-11). He also said that the wolf comes not to give life but to snatch and scatter (v. 12). Hence, everyone who causes harm and destruction in the church is a wolf. Outwardly, those who teach differently are God’s people, but the different teaching that they are teaching is the unhealthy teaching. To be unhealthy means to not supply men with life. This is to harm and destroy. This may be compared to the food that we eat: if it is not healthy, it is harmful. If we eat unhealthy food, not only will it not benefit us, but it will actually harm our body and threaten our physical life.
The Bible is written like a jigsaw puzzle. It is not written in a systematic way. Rather, it says a little here and a little there. We must spend the time to put all the pieces together. In Acts 20 Paul knew that the church in Ephesus had a problem. He was very concerned about the situation, and he sent for the elders to come to him. He charged them repeatedly to be watchful and sober and on the alert. After this he left for Jerusalem. Once he arrived in Jerusalem, problems arose. The Christians there were deeply into the practice of keeping the law. James and the elders said to Paul, “You observe, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews who have believed; and all are zealous for the law” (21:20). Not only were they keeping the law; they were even vowing the Nazarite vow and purifying themselves (vv. 23b-24; Num. 6:2-5). This indicates that the Jewish believers in Jerusalem were still keeping the law of Moses and remaining in the Old Testament age. Under the strong influence of Judaism, they mixed God’s New Testament economy with the out-of-date Old Testament economy.
However, James thought that this mixture was good. He even told Paul, “They have been informed concerning you that you are teaching all the Jews throughout the nations apostasy from Moses...What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come” (Acts 21:21-22). James was saying that there were tens of thousands of believers in Jerusalem who could not accept what Paul had done. As a result, Paul had an evil name. What should he do? James advised him, saying, “Therefore do this that we tell you: We have four men who have a vow on themselves; take these and be purified with them, and pay their expenses that they may shave their heads. And all will know that there is nothing to the things that they have been informed of concerning you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the law” (vv. 23-24). The four had vowed a Nazarite vow. In order for a Nazarite to complete his vow, he had to pay a sum for the sacrifice (Num. 6:13-17). It was a substantial sum of money; therefore, according to the Jewish tradition, those who paid on behalf of a poor Nazarite were not only considered pious but actually became partakers of the Nazarite vow.
Paul writes strongly in the books of Romans and Galatians that the law is over. Since that is the case, why would Paul concede to James’s proposal when he was in Jerusalem and go back to the law? Perhaps Paul was thinking, “Although I have written the books of Romans and Galatians, I have also written the book of 1 Corinthians. There I said that to the Jews I became as a Jew in order that I might gain the Jews (9:20). Since all the people here in Jerusalem are Jews, I can only be a Jew.” To put it in a nice way, Paul did this in order to not be different from others. To put it in a not-so-nice way, Paul was compromising.
Although Paul tried to become as a Jew to the Jews and as a Gentile to the Gentiles, the Lord did not allow him to compromise. It was a serious thing for him to participate in that vow. It jeopardized God’s New Testament economy to the uttermost. This is the reason that after Paul stayed with the four men in the temple for six days, while waiting for the priests to come on the seventh day as the Nazarite vow was concluding, a riot suddenly broke out. Some Jews from Asia saw Paul in the temple, and they stirred up the crowd to seize him (Acts 21:27-30). Outwardly, it was the rioters who seized Paul. Actually, in God’s eyes, it was a rescue to Paul.
I believe that while Paul was staying in the temple for nearly seven consecutive days, he was both ashamed and disgusted with the whole affair, yet he dared not express himself. He did not know what to do. It is very possible that he prayed desperately: “Lord, save me from this troubling situation. I have told others in the books of Romans and Galatians that Christ is the end of the law and that I have died to the law and have nothing to do with it anymore. I have said this so clearly. Even the ink of my writing may still be wet. How can I now go back to offer a sacrifice and keep the law? It is true that I have determined to become as a Jew among the Jews, but I will not remain in the Jewish land for long. I have to go to the Gentile lands to work. By then the news will have spread to these Gentile lands. The Gentile believers will ask me, ‘Paul, what have you done? What happened to you? Your action did not match your word! We have been reading your Epistles. How are you going to explain to us what you have done? Why did you go back to Jerusalem to keep the ordinances of the law? How are you going to justify yourself?’” It is very possible that Paul prayed, “Lord, rescue me out of this troubling situation!” The Lord used the riot and rescued him in this way.
To the Jews, the reason for the riot was to kill Paul, but God in His sovereignty protected him. The news of the riot reached the commander of the cohort (v. 31). Immediately he brought soldiers to rescue Paul out of the hand of the Jews and keep him in custody. This was a big protection to Paul. It not only saved his life from the persecuting hands of the Jews, but it saved him from the peril of tearing down God’s New Testament economy. In the end Paul did not complete the Nazarite vow. This spared the church completely from the havoc of Judaism, but at the same time it also terminated the first part of Paul’s ministry.
We have already covered this matter in detail in the Life-study of Acts (see Messages 56 to 59). The events in Jerusalem eventually brought Paul to Caesarea. There he was kept for about two years. No doubt those two years were a very profitable and excellent time for Paul. They afforded him the peace to reconsider everything. In his prison he was separated from all the hindrances, distractions, frustrations, and influences. He surely would have realized that his going up to Jerusalem was a big mistake. Such pondering must have brought him under an open sky.
Actually, after the conference in Jerusalem in Acts 15, Paul’s spirit was already quite troubled. He was not at peace concerning the situation in the church in Jerusalem. He must have been clear that the church in Jerusalem was in an ambiguous situation. It was not absolute for God’s New Testament economy, and it contained a strong mixture of Old Testament elements. Jewish and Christian influences were all mixed up together. He could not have been at peace regarding it. Because his burden was so heavy, he was not able to forget about Jerusalem even during the third journey of his ministry. This must be the reason that in 19:21 Paul purposed in his spirit to go to Jerusalem. I believe he had a strong desire to go to fellowship with James and to deal with the matter of the mixture. Little did he realize that not only would he not be able to fellowship much with James, but he would be forced into an embarrassing situation by James and the elders in Jerusalem. In the end he was subdued by James and fell into his trap.
However, God did not allow the situation to continue this way. His hand came in to intervene. First, He rescued Paul out of the mixture of the church in Jerusalem. At the same time He rescued him out of the hands of the Jews who sought to kill him. In the end Paul was kept in custody under the hands of the Romans and was isolated from the disturbance and riot. He remained in prison in Caesarea for two years. This afforded him a period of quiet reflection. It prepared him to write the last few Epistles, especially the Epistle to the Ephesians. Two years later, he appealed to Caesar. This brought him to Rome, where he remained in prison for another two years. During that period he wrote the Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians. The thought in these three books is very deep. Such a thought had not been in him before he was put into prison. Neither had he ever written anything concerning it before this time. In these three books he unveiled God’s economy, which concerns God’s dispensing of Himself in His Divine Trinity into His chosen people in order that they may gain Christ, who is the Triune God Himself, for the producing of the members of Christ, to be constituted as the organic Body of Christ to be the church of the living God to manifest Him.
From the time of Acts 20 Paul was very concerned regarding the condition of the church in Ephesus. This is the reason that he wrote to the church in Ephesus even while he was in prison, revealing to them God’s economy, which is God’s working Himself through His Divine Trinity into man, in order that man would enjoy the riches of Christ to become His members and be constituted into the Body of Christ for the manifestation of the Triune God. This is the central vision of God in the entire Bible. It is the consummating vision in both the Old and New Testaments. Later Paul was released from the Roman prison. He passed through Macedonia and wrote the first Epistle to Timothy, telling Timothy that some in Ephesus had a problem. He told Timothy to remain in Ephesus to charge them not to teach anything different from God’s economy. This is the entire background of the writing of the first Epistle to Timothy.
A little more than a year after Paul was released from prison, Nero, the Roman Caesar, began to persecute the Christians. He put leaders such as Peter and Paul into prison. After Paul went into prison again, he wrote the second Epistle to Timothy. Before his second imprisonment there were many Jews among the churches in the Gentile lands who were beginning to teach Old Testament things different from the New Testament teaching. By the time Paul went into prison, the Judaizing Christians had become even more aggressive. Perhaps they told others, “See? Paul is in prison. If his teachings were right, why would God have allowed him to end up in prison?” Paul’s imprisonment gave the Judaizing Christians and those who taught differently a strong ground to speak. This is the reason Paul wrote the second Epistle to Timothy.
The two Epistles to Timothy were written approximately two years apart. Therefore, Timothy did not remain in Ephesus for a long time. In 2 Timothy 1:13 Paul says, “Hold a pattern of the healthy words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.” Paul reminded Timothy to hold “the healthy words.” He had already spoken concerning this in 1 Timothy 6. As we have already seen, these healthy words are the words of the Lord Jesus in the New Testament and the preaching of the Lord’s apostles concerning such things as God becoming flesh and the mystery of godliness. Paul charged Timothy to hold these words. This proves that at that time some believers were already not holding these words. This is a very serious matter.
Second Timothy 1:14 says, “Guard the good deposit through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us.” This is the Lord’s commission to the apostles. It is also the apostles’ charge to the believers. We need to deposit the Lord’s healthy words, including the riches of life in the Lord’s words, into our being, like we deposit money in the bank. Verse 15 says, “This you know, that all who are in Asia turned away from me.” Paul was sitting in his prison in Rome. How could believers far away in the province of Asia have turned away from him? This proves that what the Asian believers were turning away from was not Paul’s person but his ministry. The “me” here does not refer to Paul’s person. It refers to his teaching. When we come to Revelation 2 and 3, we find the Lord writing to the seven churches in Asia, and the first letter was to the church in Ephesus. This proves that it was the church in Ephesus that took the lead to forsake Paul’s ministry and teaching. This is the background of the writing of the second Epistle to Timothy.
The burden in this chapter is not to expound the Epistles to Timothy but to continue from the previous chapter to speak on our present vision and practice.
First, let us fellowship a little concerning our history. In 1955 Brother T. Austin-Sparks was invited for the first time to come to Taiwan. In 1957 he came for the second time. During the second time he raised a crucial issue. He thought that the way we were taking was good in every matter except one. The one thing he considered to be seriously wrong and absolutely intolerable was the ground of the church. In other words, it was the practice of the church. While he was alive, he was the only one on the whole earth who could echo what we saw concerning spiritual life principles. He echoed what we saw, and we responded to what he saw. At that time the rejection he faced in the West was more severe than the rejection we faced in the East. In the entire Western world he was the only one who saw the principles of life, and he was the only one who spoke on the deeper truths of life. Almost no one accepted his teaching. In the East we also spoke on these deep matters. Hence, on the side of life principles, we held the same view, but on the side of church practice and church ground, we could not fellowship with each other. At that time we saw that the church ground cannot be separated from church practice. Without the ground there can be no practice. In order to have the practice, there must be the ground. However, he did not agree with the matter of the church ground, and he did not agree with that kind of church practice.
From 1937 to 1938 Brother Watchman Nee visited a number of countries in Europe and stayed there for more than a year and a half. Most of the time he stayed in London with Brother T. Austin-Sparks. After he returned to China, he cabled me immediately to join him in Shanghai. At that time he called together a special fellowship meeting and reported to us in detail his fellowship with Brother Austin-Sparks in London. At the end he said that in almost every aspect they were in harmony with each other and echoed each other. The only exception was the practice of the church, which they could not get through in their fellowship. Brother Nee was somewhat sympathetic regarding the matter. He felt that in England the Brethren had spoiled the matter of church practice for more than a hundred years. Because of this, most seekers of the Lord were unwilling to speak concerning the subject. Brother Nee sympathized with their frustrations and spoke to us in this way, but he also pointed out that this was exactly where the problem between Brother T. Austin-Sparks and us lay.
After we heard Brother Nee’s fellowship, we asked why we should not invite Brother Austin-Sparks to come and visit us, since Brother Nee spoke so highly of him. Brother Nee answered in a wise way: “The time has not come.” At that time we did not quite understand what he meant. About fifteen years later, in 1954, our work in Taiwan was very much blessed by the Lord. At that time a brother visited England and America and met with Brother Austin-Sparks. After his visit he wrote three letters—one to Manila, one to Hong Kong, and one to Taipei—highly promoting him. He said that Brother Austin-Sparks was a spiritual giant and that he had a strong burden to come to the Far East to witness for the Lord.
In the first part of 1955 I was conducting the life-study training in Taipei. Brothers Chang Yu-lan and Chang Wu-cheng took the letter and showed it to me. After I read the letter, I considered a little. Then I told them that for many years we had learned a certain thing before the Lord: In knowing a person we should not look at the big matters but at the small matters. It is not very easy for a person to expose his flaws in the big things; the problems are always with the small things. Brother Austin-Sparks published a bimonthly magazine called A Witness and a Testimony. In the January 1955 issue there was a column acknowledging the Christmas cards that he had received from readers. His magazine was altogether on spiritual subjects, yet there was such an acknowledgment. This was a small point. By the Lord’s leading, we had completely dropped the celebration of Christmas, but Brother Austin-Sparks, whom we had always respected so much, published an acknowledgment thanking his readers for Christmas cards. From this small matter I could tell that there must still be some distance between him and us. If we were to invite him to come, it would be hard to guarantee that there would be no friction between us; perhaps the better thing to do would be to keep our distance and remain cordial to each other.
At that time the two elders agreed with what I said, but two weeks later, they said, “Brother Lee, we feel that on the spiritual side, we still need the spiritual help from Brother Austin-Sparks.” The phrase spiritual help made it difficult for me to say no to them. Since the brothers had felt that the small differences did not matter and that they needed spiritual help, how could I insist on not inviting him? I then suggested that if we were to invite him, it would be better not to bring up the subject of church practice, because Brother Nee had discussed this matter in detail with him already and had not been able to get through. The two Brothers Chang agreed and said, “We will only receive the spiritual help from him.” I then drafted the letter in English myself. The Taipei brothers signed it and sent it to Hong Kong and Manila for their signatures. In this way Brother Austin-Sparks came.
At the end of 1955 Brother Austin-Sparks came for the first time. He restricted his speakings to spiritual subjects. The messages helped many people. Everyone was happy and decided to invite him to come again. In the spring of 1957 he came again at our invitation, but this time it was different. He told us clearly regarding his feelings. After visiting for about a month, one morning we asked him to have a time of fellowship with the hundred or more co-workers that we had. One brother among us took the lead to ask, “Brother, you have been staying with us for some time, and you have observed our situation. What is your feeling concerning us?” As soon as I heard this, I knew at once that this brother had dissenting thoughts within him. It turned out that my feeling was correct. Right after this brother asked the question, Brother Austin-Sparks replied, “The last time I came, I did have some feelings, but I was determined not to say anything. I was waiting for another opportunity to come again to speak regarding them.” Later, I found out that this dissenting one was echoing Brother Austin-Sparks. He took the initiative to ask that question in order to provide Brother Austin-Sparks the opportunity to speak what he had prepared.
The first thing that he disagreed with was the way we conducted the bread-breaking meeting. He thought that our bread-breaking meeting was too disorderly. There was no proper order. One person could call a hymn, and another could pray. I did not say much regarding this because I was the translator. However, I will speak in detail regarding the second matter with which he did not agree. We need to realize that if one’s vision is not clear, he can be very spiritual, but he can become quite confused in certain matters. The second thing that Brother Austin-Sparks mentioned shows that he was somewhat confused. He said, “Please tell me why the brothers among you who are in the military service put on their uniform cap even before they leave the meeting hall?” At that time we had many brothers among us who were in the military. They all came to the meetings dressed in military uniforms. After the meetings they would put on their caps and fellowship with the brothers and sisters in the meeting hall. When he saw this, he began to criticize.
At the time this happened, one brother answered him, saying, “According to the Chinese tradition, a soldier does not take off his cap when he is standing up, whether or not he is inside a building. These brothers remove their caps when they sit down for the meetings in accordance with the biblical teaching concerning not covering their head, but when an announcement is made that the meeting is dismissed, they put their caps back on.” When Brother Austin-Sparks heard this, immediately his countenance changed. He asked, “Are you here to keep the tradition, or are you here to keep the Bible?” When I heard this, I was not too happy inside. I realized that he was wrong. It was he who was following the Western tradition and not we who were disobeying the Bible. The Bible says that when a man prays or teaches, he should not cover his head (1 Cor. 11:4, 7), but it does not say that a man cannot put on his cap inside a building. To take off the cap inside a building is a Western tradition. Brother Austin-Sparks was imposing on us a tradition that Western unbelievers keep.
I did not have any prejudice against him. Before that day I supported that elderly brother almost completely. He did render us quite an amount of help, and he also received some help from us. For a long time we communicated with one another and fellowshipped with one another, but from that day onward, I became alarmed. First of all, for him to say such a word lowered his spiritual ministry. Why did he need to touch such outward matters? At his invitation I went to London in 1958 and met with his group for four weeks. Their bread-breaking meeting lasted for an hour. During that whole time he took the lead. At the beginning he took the lead to pray, to call a hymn, and to speak. Afterward everyone prayed for about ten minutes. At a certain point he would break the bread and give it to the congregation. He would first give it to the seven deacons; then the seven deacons would distribute it to the others. After everyone had the bread in his hand, he would say, “Now we can eat.” Only after he had announced this, was anyone allowed to eat. After the eating, they did the same with the distribution and drinking of the cup. At the end he stepped in and monopolized the meeting again by announcing, “Now the time for public worship is over,” which meant that no one could do anything anymore. This was his way. It is no wonder that he considered our bread-breaking meeting to be somewhat disorganized.
Brother Austin-Sparks came to our meetings and started questioning such practices among us as the breaking of bread. He even touched on such insignificant matters as the donning of military caps. Was it not too much for him to touch such matters? These were traces that gave us a hint that his way and our way could not be reconciled, because what we saw was different.
Recently, I have felt the importance of the one accord. As long as we have different views on a minor point, we cannot have the one accord. This is the reason that in this training, right from the beginning, I spoke concerning the vision in the Lord’s recovery. I believe all the brothers and sisters love the Lord, and all of us want to be in one accord, but if our vision is not up to date, it is impossible for us to be one. Concerning Brother Austin-Sparks, I could never have dreamed that a spiritual ministry as high as his would touch upon and even seriously meddle with minor things. It was actually not worth it. I kept all these things in my heart and did not tell anyone, because I did not want to ruin the atmosphere there. At that time more than five hundred co-workers from all over the island were together. Every morning we were under the training and his ministry. I needed to maintain a good situation.
One evening we had another fellowship with him. The atmosphere was a little tense, and no one knew what to say. We thought perhaps we would fellowship a little concerning something related to spiritual principles. Suddenly a brother asked, “Suppose here in Taipei there are five assemblies that meet in the Lord’s name. Please tell us which one is right and which one is wrong, or are they all wrong?” As soon as I heard this, something jumped up in alarm within me. I knew that this would lead to trouble. Yet I had to translate what he said. Brother Austin-Sparks was well prepared for such a question. He said, “None is right and none is wrong; everything is relative.” Another brother was quite stirred up, and he and the first brother together asked, “Relative to what?” Brother Austin-Sparks immediately answered, “Relative to the measure of Christ. Those who have a greater measure of Christ are more right, those who have a lesser measure of Christ are less right, and those who do not have any measure of Christ are not right.” All the brothers became very agitated. I was the translator, but I had to somewhat calm them down.
The third time we gathered together with him, we were still on this subject. In the previous two meetings, I remained quite neutral and served only as the translator. This time I felt that I could not be neutral anymore. No one was speaking then, and I opened my mouth. I said, “For the last few times we were together, we have been speaking of the matter of the church and the church ground. Brother Austin-Sparks has told us that none is absolutely right, and none is absolutely wrong; how much one is right depends on the measure of Christ he has.” I did not appear to be stirred up, but I turned to a brother from Denmark and said to him in a calm voice, “Brother, let me ask you a question. God ordained that the children of Israel would be taken captive in Babylon for seventy years, after which they would return to their homeland and would rebuild the temple upon its original foundation. Suppose a very influential prophet would rise up at that time and tell the people that it did not matter whether or not one returned to Jerusalem. Suppose he would say, ‘See? Daniel is such a spiritual person, but he did not return to Jerusalem. Therefore, it does not matter whether or not one returns, as long as he is spiritual.’ I would ask all of you here if this is right or wrong.” Brother Austin-Sparks was an intelligent man. He knew that I was reacting to his word concerning the spiritual measure. I explained further: “Daniel had the greatest spiritual measure of his time; in today’s terms we would say that his measure of Christ was the highest. The reason that he did not return was that the time had not come for him to go. Around the time the Israelites were returning, he died. He could not go while he was living, yet his heart was toward Jerusalem. He knelt down three times a day and prayed with an open window toward Jerusalem. During his time with us here, at least a few times our Brother Austin-Sparks has highly recommended Dr. F. B. Meyer. I have read Dr. Meyer’s books and have received some help from him. But all of us know that Brother Meyer is still in the denominations, that is, in the so-called ‘organized Christianity’ that our Brother Austin-Sparks condemns in his messages. Since Dr. Meyer still remains in organized Christianity, the very organization which Brother Austin-Sparks condemns, can we say that he is right in the matter of the church merely because his spiritual stature is high?”
I continued, “For more than three hundred years, all those who have sought after the inner life have received help from Madame Guyon. She should be regarded as a person with a great measure of Christ. As far as the spiritual stature of Christ is concerned, probably none among us can match hers. But Madame Guyon, a person with such a spiritual stature of Christ, still remained in Catholicism. Today any Christian who is enlightened at all would condemn Catholicism, yet Madame Guyon, whom we respect so much, never left the Catholic Church. We cannot say that simply because her spiritual stature was high, she was right in the matter of the church.”
Finally, I said, “These examples prove to us that it is one thing to be spiritual, and it is another thing to have the proper ground of the church. Spirituality has to do with our personal condition. The ground of the church, on the other hand, is a corporate ground; it is the corporate standing that we take. Not everyone who left Babylon to return to Jerusalem was a spiritual person. Neither was everyone who remained in Babylon necessarily unspiritual. In fact, among those who returned, we find many who were not that spiritual, because some had married Gentile wives. However, as far as their ground was concerned, they were approved by God. With such a ground they could build the temple. No matter how poor their situation was, their ground was still the right ground. When the temple was built, God’s glory filled the house.”
I then made the following conclusion: “Today in pursuing the Lord, we must take care of both aspects. Spirituality has to do with our condition, and the ground has to do with our stand. A man cannot be right only in his condition; he must also be right in his stand and position. Whether or not a person has a justifiable position is based not so much on his condition as on the ground he takes. On one hand, no matter how spiritual a person was, if he remained in Babylon and stood on the ground of captivity, he was wrong. On the other hand, no matter how poor and confused the returned captives were, they stood on the proper ground that God had ordained for them and that their forefathers had left to them. Their approval was based on their ground and not on their personal condition. Of course, their confused situation did not please the Lord. It is for this reason that God raised up Ezra to teach them the law to enlighten and rebuke them; as a result, they wept, repented, and confessed their sins. At any rate we cannot despise the returned captives’ ground simply because their spiritual condition was poor. Nor can we justify the ground of those remaining in Babylon simply because they were spiritual.”
In the previous chapter we said that God gave men a vision even in the Old Testament age. We cannot say that those who remain in the Old Testament visions do not have any vision at all. Yet their visions are not up to date; they do not match the age. In the New Testament, after the four Gospels we have the book of Acts. After Acts we have the early letters of Paul. Paul went into prison, was released, was imprisoned again, and then was martyred. By that time he had written his Epistles. All of them concerned God’s visions. About thirty years after his martyrdom, around A.D. 90, the aged John wrote the book of Revelation. It is also a book of visions. We can say that the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation is a record of visions. Throughout the ages there were many saints who loved the Lord and who feared the Lord, but we cannot say that they all had the vision that matched their age. Some, like Gamaliel, were still stuck in the Old Testament age. I believe Apollos somewhat belongs to this category of people, because Acts 18 says that he was powerful in expounding the Scriptures (v. 24). He knew the Old Testament well, but he did not know the four Gospels; he only knew the baptism of John (v. 25b). His vision only went that far. He did not see any further vision after John the Baptist.
In Acts 15 we find James becoming the leading brother among those in the church in Jerusalem. Although he was a man in the New Testament, he had one foot in the New Testament and the other foot in the Old Testament. His two feet were standing on two “boats,” and his two hands were holding on to two “oars.” He was very pious, and he feared God very much. History tells us that he was so pious that the skin of his knees grew coarser than an elephant’s skin from kneeling. It was his piety that attracted many to the Lord. It was also his piety that made him the chief apostle among those in the church in Jerusalem. However, although he was spiritual, he did not have an adequate vision. History tells us that the Pharisees and priests thought that James was for Judaism. They even gathered together the Jews and the Christians around Jerusalem and asked James to speak to them. However, James feared the Lord very much, and he spoke concerning the New Testament on that occasion. This upset the Jews, and they killed him on the spot. This is how James was martyred. It is difficult to say whether James’s martyrdom was something pleasing to the Lord. How could God reward him for his ambiguous condition? All we can say is, “Only the Lord knows.” Although James was much more advanced than Gamaliel, he also did not have the vision that matched the age.
Then there was Barnabas. He was the one who ushered Paul into his apostolic ministry (Acts 11:25-26). In Acts 13, when the Holy Spirit commissioned him and Paul to the ministry, he was the leader between the two. Halfway through their journey, however, there was a turn in the ministry. When the crucial time came for someone to speak for God, Barnabas had nothing to say, and Paul took his place. From that day onward, Paul became the leader. In other words, the vision and the revelation shifted to Paul; they were no longer with Barnabas. At the end of chapter 15, the two of them contended, and they parted from each other. From that time onward the Bible does not mention anything further concerning Barnabas’s fellowship and work. This means that Barnabas disappeared from the stage of God’s move at that time. He no longer played a role on that stage. Although he was still in the New Testament, the vision he saw was not adequate.
In Acts 18 Apollos appeared on the scene. He was a person partly in the Old Testament and partly in the New Testament. As we have seen, he went to Ephesus, and the church in Ephesus first received help from him. In the end Apollos’s work dominated Ephesus by virtue of its early arrival. Once Apollos’s seed took root in the church in Ephesus, it was difficult to eradicate it. We can detect through various hints that the cause of Ephesus’s decline was its failure to rid itself of Apollos’s seed. From the standpoint of the New Testament, that teaching was a different teaching; it was a different doctrine. The work of Apollos left a lasting mark of different teachings on the church in Ephesus. For this reason Paul was always concerned about the church in Ephesus, as evidenced by Acts 20.
From the time of Paul’s first imprisonment to the time he was imprisoned again was a period of about three years. During that period he charged Timothy to remain in Ephesus to take care of the church because there was a problem there. Some were teaching differently. During Paul’s second imprisonment he wrote the second Epistle to Timothy to tell him that all the churches in Asia had forsaken his ministry. Here we can trace the source of the churches’ decline. The cause for the churches’ decline was the forsaking of the apostles’ teaching; they forsook the apostles’ ministry. Because of this forsaking, the teaching of Balaam, the teaching of the Nicolaitans, and the teaching of Jezebel (Rev. 2—3) crept into the church one by one. These three kinds of teachings represent heresies. When the church departs from the apostles’ teaching, all kinds of doctrines invade the church. This is very clear.
About thirty years later, the aged John wrote the book of Revelation. After he finished writing concerning the New Jerusalem in the new heaven and new earth, God’s visions were complete. At the end of Revelation, which is the end of the entire Bible, there is the warning against any further addition or deletion. All the visions of God have been completed. After the book of Revelation was completed, three hundred years went by until in A.D. 397, at the Council of Carthage, the authority of the entire canon of the holy writings, including the books of Revelation and Hebrews, was recognized. In A.D. 325 when Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea, the books of Revelation and Hebrews still had not been recognized as part of the canon. These two books occupy a pivotal position in the vision concerning God’s New Testament economy. Hence, the creed produced at the Council of Nicaea did not include the revelation revealed in these two books. Today many Protestant and Catholic groups recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday in their services. While I was in the West fighting for the truth concerning the Triune God, I told people, “The creed that you hold is defective, for it does not say anything regarding the seven Spirits.” They had nothing to say in response.
By A.D. 397 the entire Bible was recognized. Today this holy Word before us is full of visions. Whether or not we can come up to the standard of these visions depends entirely on our understanding of the visions contained in these sixty-six books. During the first sixteen hundred years of church history, countless numbers of lovers of the Lord were raised up. Regrettably, all these lovers of the Lord, all these servants of God, were not able to be in one accord. The reason for this is that the visions they saw were all different. Some saw only the vision of the four Gospels. They liked it, and they faithfully adhered to that vision, but they did not advance any further. Some advanced a little and saw the vision of Acts. Spontaneously, they became different from the first group, and they discovered that they could not fellowship with the first group. Other people advanced to the different visions recorded in the different Epistles, and similarly they held different views from the previous groups. Throughout the last sixteen centuries many lovers of the Lord were raised up, yet they were not able to be in one accord. The reason is not that there was sin or evil among them but that the vision each held was different in degree. Each remained in the degree to which they saw the various visions. Because the degree of the visions they saw was different, spontaneously there was no one accord.
In the nineteenth century Hudson Taylor saw a vision. He felt that he should go to China to preach the gospel. We cannot say that his vision was wrong. We can only say that his vision was not up to the standard of the age. During the past three decades we lost the one accord a number of times in Taiwan. The case with Brother Austin-Sparks was one example of such a time. Can we say that he did not love the Lord or that he was not spiritual? Even today I still recommend his books. Some of them are certainly worthwhile reading. However, he did not see what Brother Nee led us to see in the Lord’s recovery. Needless to say, all our differences were not caused by the flesh but by the difference in our visions. In 1958 there were some aspiring and promising young people who were saved and perfected through my ministry. I entrusted to them the crucial works on the island of Taiwan, including hall three of the church in Taipei and the churches in Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan, and Kaoshiung. They became proud, and through Brother Austin-Sparks’s influence they decided to no longer speak concerning the ground of the church but to speak regarding only the fullness of Christ, the full Christ. They boldly proclaimed that they had seen a vision. At that time the one accord was truly lost.
Although Brother Austin-Sparks was spiritual, he limited himself to the scope of his vision. His problem was that he was unwilling to see more. Moreover, he considered all those who saw something different to be wrong. He tried all he could to annul the “ground,” which was recovered among us. He told me personally in a meeting that he had been speaking for decades, but in his whole life he had not found one place with such a good audience. He also discussed with me the possibility of moving to Taiwan to set up a ministry station. In the end, however, he and we were still not the same. The reason for this is that our visions were different.
What then is our vision? A young brother once said, “Brother Nee used to speak of the cross, but we do not speak concerning it anymore.” This is a shortsighted remark. Who says that we no longer speak concerning the dealing of the cross? By reading the messages on the New Jerusalem, we can see that in order to become the gates of pearl we must pass through the Lord’s death. We need to enjoy the secretion of the Lord’s resurrection life through His death. Only then can we become the pearls. Furthermore, every one of the nineteen items in the book The Experience of Life involves dealings that are related to the cross. We need to speak regarding the dealing of the cross, but we should not make this truth our limitation or our issue. In the West some people emphasize tongue-speaking. We do not oppose tongue-speaking, but if someone emphasizes tongue-speaking to the point of strongly promoting it, it becomes a great damage. One may do this out of harmless zeal, but if his listeners receive his speaking and enlarge upon it, it will bring a problem into the church. We must remember that the vision we have received does not concern itself with such small matters. This is not the focus of our vision.
What is our vision? Our vision is that God so loved the world that He gave His Son to die for us to redeem us, the sinners, in order that we can have the life of Christ and be regenerated by Him to be God’s children, enjoying the riches of the Triune God to become the Body of Christ. In practice, the Body is expressed as the local churches in various localities, practicing the Body life in a practical and proper way. This Body, the church of God, is the focus of God’s economy.
In the theology of the early church fathers there was such a term as economy, but in the Lord’s recovery, during the period when we were in mainland China, we did not use this term. It was twenty years ago that I first picked up this term in Taiwan, but it was only two years ago that we saw the entire New Testament economy of God. At the same time we saw the mingling of God and man and the divine dispensing, which is the Triune God dispensing all His riches in Christ as the Spirit into us to constitute us the Body of Christ. This is God’s economy.
During the past few centuries no one saw God’s economy. Even if some did see it, no one spoke concerning it. No one spoke of the mingling of God and man, and no one spoke of the divine dispensing. Some spoke regarding sanctification, but that speaking was somewhat ambiguous. From the Bible we see that sanctification is of three stages. There is separating sanctification, positional sanctification, and dispositional sanctification. Dispositional sanctification is transformation, and transformation includes the dealing and breaking of the cross. But even the inner-life Christians, including those attending the Keswick conferences and the many spiritual giants who have written on the subject of the spiritual life, did not clearly explain what transformation is. The teaching of transformation is an item that is characteristic to the Lord’s recovery.
The vision that the Lord has given to His recovery is an all-inclusive one. It includes the economy of God, the mingling of God and man, the dispensing of the Divine Trinity, and the believers’ salvation in Christ, including God’s selection, calling, regeneration, sanctification, renewing, transformation, conformation, and glorification. In the history of the development of Christian doctrine, this entire set of truths finds its full recovery only among us. Such truths as selection, calling, regeneration, sanctification, renewing, transformation, conformation, and glorification were not recovered much before us, and the recovery of these truths will not increase much after us. This set of truths has found its full recovery among us.
The problem among us is that some are bound by the little experience and vision that they have. Some have said that Brother Lee is now different from Brother Nee. This is a remark made not only by those outside the Lord’s recovery or by some who have left us but by some who are still among us. Actually, if there is anyone on this earth who knows Brother Nee, I must be that one. He fellowshipped with me all that he had seen, and I received tremendous help from him. If anyone says that my work is different from Brother Nee’s, he is an outsider with regard to the vision. Of course, because of the lack of opportunity on his part, Brother Nee did not develop the vision as far as I have. We may use the Recovery Version of the New Testament as an example. I spent twelve years day after day writing the footnotes, yet what I wrote was nothing more than what Brother Nee had sown earlier. I can only say that the seed has sprouted and grown, although, of course, it has not grown to the fullest. I ask the Lord to give me more years so that I can develop this seed within me. If the Lord would give me another twelve years to rewrite the Life-study messages, I will have another set of Life-studies. It will not be different, but it will be new. If anyone thinks that I am different from Brother Nee, it is because such a person has not come up to the standard of the vision of the age.
I would like the co-workers, the elders, and all the churches in the Lord’s recovery to realize that today we have not changed. If we are different in any way from others, it is because we hold to all the visions of the Bible, from the first vision of Adam in Genesis to the ultimate, consummate one in Revelation. If anyone sees only a part of this entire vision and condemns us for being different, it is not merely because we are different from them; it is because they do not have the vision that matches the age.
We cannot blame those whose vision does not match the age for doing what they are doing. James was very pious. We cannot criticize him for his piety, yet he did not have the vision that matched the age. In the end he not only destroyed himself, but he destroyed the work of God and brought trouble to all the saints in the land of Judea. Because of his inertia and reluctance, the Roman prince Titus marched with his army in A.D. 70 and ransacked Jerusalem. The temple was destroyed, and not one stone was left on top of another. Josephus the historian told us the tragedy of the whole story. Many Christians were killed. Even children were murdered. Who would have wished that the whole matter end this way? However, God was forced to do this. If God had not done this, the result would have been even more unmanageable. Christianity would have become entirely mixed with Judaism. Faced with such a murky situation, God had to step in to clear the atmosphere. The fact that Jerusalem was burned to the ground and that thousands of people were killed was altogether James’s fault. This is not a small thing. This is what the Chinese mean by “off by a fraction of an inch, missed by a thousand miles.” One faulty step resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of lives. History bears a tragic testimony to this.
Today the Lord has been merciful to His recovery. Within a short period of sixty years, He has brought us to the ultimate consummation of all the visions. I hope that all of us will seriously study the messages that we have published, especially those in the Elders’ Training and Truth Lessons series. If we study them thoroughly, we will have the full view; we will see the vision that the Lord has given us in His recovery, and we will realize what is the ultimate consummation of all the visions—the New Jerusalem. Within this ultimate consummation everything is included, such as gospel preaching, loving the Lord, the dealing and breaking of the cross, the resurrection life, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Regrettably, today on the earth, when believers see a little revelation in the New Testament, they begin to think quite highly of themselves. They become very zealous concerning that one point that they see. So naturally they think that our actions and words are too extreme. There is no doubt that many Christian groups are very busy on the earth today, but not only are they not able to be one with us; they are not able to be one with each other. They cannot be one mainly because they have different visions; they see different things. This difference is a difference in degree, although the basis is still the same. We have the same Bible, the same God, and the same Savior, and we have received the same Spirit and the same salvation. We all believe in the blood of the Lord, and we all share the same faith, but any further advance beyond this basis ends in differences. Some advance only a few steps and then stop; others advance a few steps more; and some advance even further. We thank the Lord for giving us the same basis. We are all saved, and we all have God’s life and nature. We all have the same standing. However, while the Holy Spirit is moving on, we may remain where we are. The minute the Holy Spirit moves on, some decide to follow, but others decide to stay. The more the Holy Spirit moves on, the fewer there are who follow Him. In the end we are the only ones left who have followed Him all the way.
Faced with such a situation, what should we do? Thank the Lord that at the end of the Bible there is the call to the overcomers. Although the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3 had degraded and their condition was poor, the Lord still recognized them as churches. The Lord did not call the overcomers to leave the seven churches. Why? Because their ground was still the right ground. They were not meeting as many churches in one locality but as one church in each locality. Although the condition of Thyatira was poor, it was still one church in one locality. Its ground was still the right ground. It was corrupt, and its condition was poor, but its ground was still the right ground. This can be compared to a member of a family. Whether the family is a good one or a poor one, that person still belongs to the family. If he separates himself to begin another family and changes his name, he is splitting up the family. According to his condition, he may be very good, moral, and educated. However, as for his standing, his ground, he has caused a division. In the same way we can say that Thyatira was poor beyond measure, yet the Lord did not ask anyone to leave the church in Thyatira, because it was still standing on the proper ground. The Lord instead called some to be overcomers in the midst of that situation.
Today’s situation is the same. Many have seen the initial vision, and they are satisfied with what they have seen, but they should not stop there. We must follow the Holy Spirit, and we must go on, but the more we go on, the fewer there will be who follow. Hence, it is not true that we refuse to be one with others. The truth of the matter is that they will not follow. We are not only following, but we are practicing what we have seen and what we follow, which is the dispensing of the Triune God, the mingling of God and man, to become the Body of Christ to be the manifestation of the Triune God. In the process of becoming this, we experience regeneration, sanctification, renewing, transformation, conformation, and glorification.
In our practice we must take care of the increase. First we need to spread the high gospel and bring people to salvation. Next we need to build up the home meetings and nourish the new ones. Then we need to build up the small groups and teach the truth. Finally, we must edify and perfect the new ones to be the same as we are, practicing the Body life in all the local churches for the Lord to gain a full-grown, mature Body. These are the four things that we need to attain in our practice. If we all see this clearly, we will be in one accord. We cannot stay in the past; there is no future in that kind of standing. That vision and that practice are short. With only that vision there is no preaching of the gospel and no teaching of the truth; there is only the bearing of the cross, the dealing and breaking of the cross. What kind of future will this narrow view afford us? I am very clear concerning the responsibility that the Lord has given me. More or less I am a leading one, and I must bear great responsibility for the things I say and do, because they affect hundreds, even tens of thousands, of people. In the future I must give an account to the Lord. For this very reason I have observed the situation very much. Some emphasize the preaching of the cross, but there is not much practice with them. When they want to lose their temper, they still lose their temper. They do not preach the gospel, they do not nourish and perfect others, and they do not pursue after the truth. The cross is merely a doctrine to them. We do not care for mere doctrines. We need to see the vision. As we have seen, the vision that matches the age is the vision that extends all the way from Genesis to Revelation.
Now we need to consider the proper practice. Matthew 24:14 says, “This gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole inhabited earth for a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.” This means that we must do everything we can today to spread the gospel. We should spend every cent and every drop of our sweat, tears, and blood on the gospel. Only this will satisfy the Lord and take care of His gospel. The little island of Taiwan has twenty million people, but there are only five hundred thousand Christians. Are we sitting still, not willing to be on fire for the gospel? If we are, how can we give an account to the Lord? I believe that one day, when we stand before the judgment seat of the Lord, He will ask us, “You were in Taiwan for so long. What was your attitude toward My gospel?” He will tell us that He was not a hard Master, that He had given us a talent. But how did we use it, and how much did we use it? How many people did we bring to the Lord? How many people did we nourish and care for? How many people did we teach? In the future we will need to answer these questions one by one.
Matthew 24 and 25 show that one day we will have to stand before the Lord and give an account item by item. I admit that my responsibility is greater than yours. I also will have to stand before Him to give an account of myself, but I cannot give an account on your behalf. Today you have risen up and have responded to my leading, and I thank and praise the Lord for this. I worship the Lord for you, but you need to be clear that you are not following me. You are following this ultimate and completed vision, and you are spreading the gospel according to the Lord’s commandment. No one can say that he does not know how to preach the gospel. Matthew 28:19 says, “Go therefore and disciple all the nations.” This commandment is to all the believers. The Bible has never said that some are exempt from preaching the gospel. If we are faithful to the Lord in the matter of the gospel and if we are diligent, the number of believers in the churches will greatly increase in a country as densely populated as Taiwan, but if we do not do anything, we will have nothing to say when we face the Lord.
Those who are sitting here today are either co-workers, elders, or full-timers who are learning to serve the Lord. Please consider calmly: If we cannot save one or two people within a year in an island as populous as Taiwan, how are we going to give an account to the Lord when we see Him? If each of us brings one to the Lord in a year, in a short time we will reach the goal of gospelizing Taiwan, but if we all hold back our energy, how can we gospelize this country? In the parable of Matthew 20, the householder went out and said to the idle workmen, “Why have you been standing here all the day idle?” (v. 6). All those who do not participate in the gospel move, even if they are pursuing “spirituality” and are knowledgeable in the truth, are idle in the eyes of the Lord. Today when we speak concerning the one accord, we are not speaking concerning a certain method that we must practice. We are saying that we should be attuned to the Lord’s heart. The Lord’s heart is that we enter the vineyard and labor for His gospel. If we are attuned to the Lord’s heart and if we dispense the Triune God to others, imparting to them the Lord’s life so that they become His members and are constituted to be His Body as His full expression, then spontaneously we will be in one accord.
The preaching of the gospel is the first step in the spreading. Following this we need to have home meetings and the nourishing of the new believers. We also need to build up the small groups and teach the truth. Finally, we need to have the practical manifestation of the Body life. These four things must become the “family tradition” among the churches in the Lord’s recovery. In order to develop this “tradition,” we must have the same view and the one accord. This is the reason that I have presented to you the matter of the ultimate and completed vision. Today we should no longer emphasize different ways. We should not have any different leadings. We are all in the Lord’s recovery, and we have all seen today’s concluded vision. Even if some cannot follow and do not see clearly, they should not say anything. As long as they follow, they will obtain the blessing. The sons of Noah did not see the vision that he saw, yet they were in one accord with their father. They closely followed him, and they were saved in the same way that their father was saved. Peter was also one who blindly followed the Lord. He did not know anything. He only knew that the vision was with the Lord, and he followed. In the end he received the blessing.
If we have different emphases and different ways of doing things, our energy will be dissipated, and our faith will be weakened. We will lose the one accord, and our morale will be gone. However, if we are in one accord and we preach the gospel desperately, we will become hotter and hotter; our mutual burning will heighten our determination. Even the new ones will be brought into the proper function. We will have an invincible morale, and we will march over all obstacles. Wherever we go, we will more than conquer. This is what we must have today.
Do not ask why we did not do this ten years ago. Ten years ago we were not as clear as we are today regarding the way of the work. Thank the Lord that His leading is always progressive. If a child does not grow in ten years, he must be sick with some terrible illness. If I am still teaching the same thing as I did ten years ago, you may think that I have not grown. We are not changing our way. During the past twenty-three years that I was in America, I did not change my tone. Faced with all the opposition and attacks, I stood firm on the truth. However, we are advancing and spreading. Today our work has to advance because the vision that the Lord has given us has advanced.
