The mistaken assumptions of Steve Amato's writings. Since Steve is going after Watchman Nee, let's begin with an appreciation of Watchman Nee's vast spiritual perception, and not be so quick to place ourselves above in understanding.
Definitions
Summary: It's really simple. You don't even need to read all this for I have provided a summary of it all for quick easy reference. Christians can see Steve is unregenerated (having a dead conscience, and that he was a prior lsm/lc cult member) having a god that tells him that he can sin, calling it sinlessness, and that this god of his (really his self) won't do anything about it. Therefore, he can sin as much as he likes, after all he believes he can't sin anymore as this other kind of Christian without accountability.
Antinomianism (definition): having love of redemption, but not to keen on co-death identification; believing the Bible is mostly to compare sinners from the saved for pride-sake, and easy-believism, instead of most passages referring to and showing Christians how to overcome in a life in Christ and warning them of backsliding as happens so much, probably the biggest concern which Amato converts into passages of the unregenerated instead of carnal Christians. Can you sense the pride in his heart when he makes this mistake?
Automaton Amato (definition): no distinction of rewards in the millennium, mindlessly repetitively misreading the Bible for this sake. All Christians, no matter how sinful, according to Steve, get a free-pass to kingdom reigning, even while still lying on a bed of fornication. Therefore, there is no motivation to stop sinning, so he can sin with no repercussion. Cute system, but deceptive, dead to the bone, and a sign of unsalvation in one who believes this as their fruit, especially in those who have knowledge to know better. Amato should know better.
A True Christian (definition): (1) believes in Christ's substitution, and (2) co-death identification, and (3) rewards of the millennial kingdom for overcomers (that is, Rev. 20.4 which include those called-out ones of Rev. 2 & 3), and (4) discipline for non-overcomers to be made ready for the new city all of which are included in the full redemptive design. The Holy Spirit leads the believer to these truths, not the other way around; that is, not the Antinomianism of the Automaton Amato.
.
Introduction
My calling is to give the truth of the mistaken assumptions of Steve Amato's thoughts here, http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html I have never attended the Local Church as Steve Amato was involved in for a year as the Word readily was already apparently discerning to do so is not of God. The problems you will confront in Steve's thoughts are that he marries Nee to Lee with no basis except the word of men, and not Nee's own thoughts in writing, and confusing the Little Flock for the Local Church. As we go through you will see these errors in Amato's heart. All this is easily apparent in Amato's comment, "I have not found a significant difference between these two men." His conscience has not been reached, and another reason he is no able to see the difference is because he does not read what Watchman Nee actually says from CFP, but relies on human beings from a cult for his source of information, thus bearing false witness. But we shall make this all too readily clear as we proceed. Even when Amato qualifies his opinion, it is still in error when he says Lee is just "more extreme" than Nee. That is not the case. Lee is rather, 180 degrees opposite. For example, Witness Lee is 100% full-blooded red hot calvinistic, while Watchman Nee is pure OSAS arminian. The former terminology simply means those who think they are saved pridefully are premade that way while others were premade for hell; and the latter means God gave each of us a free-will in His image to walk with those who choose Him that He foreknew would do so and that is why He chose them. It is no more complicated than this even though calvinists will produce 1001 articles to their prideful defense of zombiism. One thing is certain about Amato. He is antinomian. Steve admits, "haven't read Nee widely". This is another way of saying, not really at all, as previously alluded to above. People like to provide themselves a way out when doing shoddy work. He said Watchman Nee believes in purgatory also. Watchman Nee does not believe in purgatory. This is a RCC term that Watchman Nee does not believe in. If we stick to the Bible only, what Nee believes in is a place of loss of rewards called "outer darkness" which is used three times in the Bible. Loss of rewards in outer darkness has no fire about it.
Amato is correct when he says that the LSM system criticize others while not look at themselves, and thinking they are some subjective recovery, even though they have their errors as noted here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/15_sins.htm Yet Steve makes the same mistake, unable to see his own errors in bearing false witness of Watchman Nee, and even some mistakes of the LSM cult. I am not defending the LSM cult since they are a cult, but I am just going after the truth here, and if I have made a mistake in anything I do wish to be corrected, though I am fairly confident I have not erred. The LSM cult is not recovering anything, but they are more like Sardis, false revivals adding more untruth than truth by emptying the cup and refilling it up, but now with even less water and lots of murky soiling of the water with these various false teachings they have, gone over and over enough times here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Misreading.htm
I have noticed this observation that Steve makes, "they also presume that just about anyone with any trivial faith in Christ is saved and a brother in Christ". I believe I know the reason why the LSM-LC cult does this. It is because it is a filthy lucre organization of dead conscience. If I am a profit center, it would be reasonable to want to get in as many as possible, not for spiritual life but to get clients. But of course God does not operate that way. God's way is the narrow path through the narrow gate. In all fairness though the Leeist do not believe in purgatory and never use that term. They actually have a correct understanding of "outer darkness"; the only problem is like Steve said, they are saving too many people, which is pure fantasy for profit, not representing God's reality. Steve makes an error in his view of outer darkness when he says "elitist division among" Christians where some will receive reward and some will not. In itself, God needing to deal with this matter of rewards, there is no elitism, but elitism does creep in if you are under false locality making this same statement about overcomers in Christ. The root error is false locality. If you believe in true biblical locality then the denominational organization passes away, and you can not be accused of such elitism since you are not part of any organizational system, assuming you stay within God's promise to deal with those who sinful Christians and trusting in God's promise to receive you to the throne if you are ready at first rapture. Since modern-day cities are not true biblical locality, what is true biblical locality? Watchman Nee, differing from Witness Lee, explained very accurately in the Word of God what true biblical locality is, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/whichchurch.htm
Amato in marrying Nee to Lee says he is teaching "doctrinal deviations". May I say Watchman Nee is not teaching doctrinal deviations, but simply what the Word of God has always said and many men through each century have said the same thing, though usually more spiritual brethren who discern such matters like Nee. Though Joey Faust teaches the lake of fire like the Local Church does as part of the millennium concurrently for believers erroneously like the Leeists, I want to instead, point you to his book, The Rod, because he provides lots of quotes of many writers in various centuries who believed on the matter of outer darkness that it is a place of loss of rewards, just as chiliasm was the understood belief in the first couple centuries of the church, which simply means premillennialism. Obviously Amato holds a position that is itself a doctrinal deviation contrary to the Word of God having no explanation of how to deal with Christians who still lie on a bed of fornication. Yet these believers mentioned in Faust's book have an answer as did Nee by the Holy Spirit, and even the Leeists understand this relatively simple matter. It is ironic what Amato accuses with is the very thing he suffers: his own lazy believism, his own feel-good popularity teaching, and really division, since he himself is including more in the body of Christ than God says, thus causing division since these competing groups can never all come together, that is, all these groups who hold his wide path view of no consequence and no accountability. Though the Leeists save many for profit overassuming who God says is saved, Steve Amato saves too many also since apparently all those he says are Christians there is no consequence to their sinning, and as an antinomianist, focusing on redemption with no concern and consideration for co-death. May I say that this type of thinking is more like easy believism AND unsalvation, for even a babe in Christ knows he must overcome in the Lord and it is not just about initial salvation for there is a life of overcoming for all Christians. God deals in His Word with how Christians who leave the body retaining much flesh in their lives will be handled.
Steve Amato understands unsaved nominal Christians and true Christians (but below you will see his misuse of its application below), and he also understands immature and mature Christians as he agrees with the parable of the sower, yet this does not translate, by Amato's teaching, into how God deals with this problem in Christians that remain fleshly as you will see throughout this article. This is why we can identify Amato as an antinomianist for he stops short of God, not accepting what God says about outer darkness. If you don't understand what antinomianism is, just see it simply as accepting redemption, but not co-death unto rewards; and the flip side of that is remaining in the flesh and thus loss of rewards. It should also be noted that Watchman Nee also believed that nominal Christians are unregenerated. In The Spiritual Man, CFP white covers only, doing a search for the word, nominal, you will find various comments there, and if you have Watchman Nee's complete works on CD from CFP you can simply search the term, "nominal" to see his uses of such reference elsewhere to be unregenerated Christians. Obviously this is an oxymoron since a Christian is regenerated, so that it means those who say they are Christians but they are not. At this point you may be coming to the picture to see that Watchman Nee was of a higher standard in truth in the Word which will thus be expounded on, much different than Witness Lee. We isolate yet another aspect in which Nee and Lee differ as the term, nominalism is applied, that is if Amato is correct in assessing the Leeists on nominalism. This is not merely an extension of extremism, but a wholly different thought, quite opposite of Watchman Nee. Steve Amato used 1 John 3.9,10 and 1 John 5.3,4 correctly in regards to nominalism, but that is about all he does right.
There is No Such Thing As Purgatory
I find Steve Amato purposefully unethical in his terminology when having been in the LSM-LC system for a year he said when he knows full well that the LSMers do not believe in purgatory. Purgatory is a very negative term associated to roman catholicism with several negative implications totally contrary to what "outer darkness" IS. Amato says "their doctrine of eternal security does not include salvation from purgatory during the 1000 year Millennial reign". This is not a right statement. "Outer darkness" is the correct term, AND DOES deal with salvation for God's salvation includes disciplining non-overcomers outside the light of the reward of reigning in the millennium for having loss of rewards. Furthermore, Amato asks, "But I asked the leaders [of LSM] also the obvious question as to how it is that the overcoming Christians who are not sinlessly perfect in this life achieve sinless perfection automatically without having to go through a purgatorial suffering. But they had no answer." The answer to this question is obvious. The answer is, THEY DO NOT. They do go through outer darkness in loss of rewards. Think of outer darkness as simply out of the light of reward of reigning. It is a very simple to perceive once you let go of your antinomianism and don't speak of sanctification IN NAME ONLY as Steve does. This is how we judge people by their fruit. They may speak of something like justification or identification, but when they then believe something else that is in disagreement and contrary to their previous statements about true statements of God, we know something is wrong as in Steve's case, for we know his god rejects God's dealing of rewards and reigning.
Steve Amato insists "both Witness Lee and Watchman Nee advocate a purgatory idea". The truth of his mistaken assumption is simple. Neither Witness Lee nor Watchman Nee believe in purgatory. I don't want to repeat myself, but if you search this page, you will see some quotes of how Watchman Nee used the term, "purgatory" in not the same way as Steve Amato uses it. http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/myabsurd.htm This is our proof that Steve Amato is bearing false witness. Nee despises purgatory. And as also mentioned, Amato uses falsified Watchman Nee writings at the LSM cult, but these writings are nowhere to be found at CFP, the authoritative source of Watchman Nee. Those who try to critique Nee never seem to quote from CFP and only quote from LSM, as the tritheistic calvinist bereans cult have done for their gain, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/bereans.htm having done the same thing, quoting from a source SOLD by LSM, but nowhere can the same thought be found at CFP by Watchman Nee. We may disregard such things, therefore, yet we have to work around them to deal with Steve's false premises. We can't control how the cult leader Witness Lee of LSM is falsifying Watchman Nee's writings. Is it contrary to Biblical Christianity to bear false witness of someone? Incidentally, I have written to CFP, and they say to me they have the same problem of not being able to locate these same writings said to be of Nee at LSM that Steve Amato is collecting quotes of saying that Nee believes that the believer will suffer the lake of fire during the millennium. Though a Joey Faust or an LSM cult member may believe this, it is wonderful to see a believer like Watchman Nee not believe such a thing, and only sees such burning off of the dross at judgment seat of Christ's parousia, not extended throughout the millennium. Such a thing would hardly be reasonable at all, and overbearing to say the least. Rather, discipline in outer darkness in the Bible is that place of loss of rewards after judgment seat. What Steve Amato believes is that there is no matter of rewards or accountability in his antinomianism which of course is non-Biblical Christianity so that Steve can engage his sin and not feel convicted. O the vanity. He must let this teaching of his die on the cross, but first he has to come to the cross, and to Christ.
Steve Amato believes rewards are "contrary to the forgiveness of sins which Jesus provided by his atoning sacrifice". No. It is because of Christ's atoning sacrifice that we have that ability to overcome in Him, and for those who do not reach the necessary attainment in so overcoming while still in the body, by the cross, that very reward will be lossed through the millennium in order for God to prepare them and make them ready for the new city, since to occupy the new city in eternity future requires sinlessness. You will find it very dissatisfying to true believers when this gap is undealt with. A further legalization is seen when Amato says "there is no such thing as one who has been born of God, but lives a lifestyle of sin" in order to not deal with the fact that indeed Christians do sin, and not accept that there must be some way to handle the matter which God does through outer darkness, loss of rewards. Are you sensing already Steve's soporific and dull teaching? Are you getting uninterested of hearing about Steve Amato's continual antinomianism? I know I am. The dangers of Steve's thoughts mount when he says Nee agrees with 1 John 3.6,9-10 but then Amato contradicts himself immediately by saying "But Nee doesn't accept this concept". How can you accept these verses and then not accept them? This is a careless mistake on Steve's thought. Since Steve is quoting from the cult source said to be Nee's writings and not from CFP, I can hardly address the matter for the only reasonable way to defend the truth is identify the error at its source in Steve's heart that he was operating from a false premise to begin with. Even so, what must be judged, must be judged by God, all sins still held onto in the flesh, for that is why there is a judgment seat of Christ for all believers, of just believers. You don't have a judgment then no result, consequence, repercussion, nor dealing. That is nonsensical. Judgment is the cause, outer darkness is the effect. All believers that need dross to be burned off so they can enter loss of rewards as non-overcomers is accomplished by the lake of fire for fire stands for judgment as well as illumination when it is related to Christ. The lake of fire is applied only at the judgment seat, not for the whole period of the outer darkness that runs concurrently with the millennial kingdom. You could say that is OVERKILL. Leeists suffer this false teaching, but Watchman Nee does not. And Amato doesn't get it at all. He is totally out to lunch.
It is too bad Steve Amato did not study the true Watchman Nee and only chose willingly to study the falsified Watchman Nee. Common sense even says that he should have considered this possibility that Witness Lee would have altered Watchman Nee's writings underhandedly. Why did Steve Amato not look to Stephen Kaung's translations, a close worker of Watchman Nee, after all Kaung is so humble. Lack of knowing I suppose so engrossed in a cult for a year is probably why Amato had his blinders on. Witness Lee was not close to Watchman Nee at all, in the true sense of the meaning. This is also a misconception if you read history carefully. If you read the history, you see Witness Lee was very shy and had some emotional problems, which created some so-called awakening in him and his organization skills brought forth his cult with tones of writings expressing himself, albeit not keeping to the Word. Perhaps he had the appearance of being on the right track before Nee was imprisoned, but then something happened to him along the way where he lost of the faith as if to say he never had it to begin with. Watchman Nee, jailed by that time, where Lee manifested his shy life into a monster, had no opportunity to denounce Witness Lee's new teachings. Watchman Nee did not get involved in organizing for He so loved the Word to stay in it rather than pursue worldly endeavors. Let us have a spirit of wisdom and revelation in such matters with a renewed mind and clear thinking; not be so close minded and narrow minded to see what is really going on now and what happened then. A common problem is too many people rewrite history in their hearts.
It is no doubt difficult to defend from false quotes of Nee, but we have to do our best with Steve Amato, the bearer of false witness. Watchman Nee disagrees with the RCC with penance for those in outer darkness, disagrees that there is some purgatory going on today, and Amato is wrong in saying that Nee believes the millennial discipline for non-overcomers in Christ are not a matter of salvation, for it is salvation and part of the completion of all resurrected-saved of what is necessary for the fullness of the new city to be reached to be inhabited. Again Amato will have to find a quote to justify himself to prove himself from CFP. Sanctification is part of salvation. Full salvation is complete sanctification. Let us not confuse usage and application by saying as Steve does thinking Nee believes outer darkness is "not for salvation". So much bearing false witness here. That is why I coined my conversations on Steve Amato, "My Absurd Conversations with Steve Amato" for he operates from too many false premises and that is something antinomianism does to a person. http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/myabsurd.htm
The source of Steve's problems and personal confusion is his not seeing the clarity of Watchman Nee's writings at CFP in totality and specifically. Steve said "ambiguous terminology...in Nee's own writings". However, this is not true. Nor is it shown. Why do I understand everything Nee says, and can testify that it is most wonderful. The clarity in Nee's writings is nothing short of awesome at CFP. Steve reads from a cult source instead. Steve is bearing false witness. What I am interested in is what is Steve hiding for is it only his antinomianism? Is he against separate rapture? Obviously. What other problems does he have in his heart? Who can say unless Steve gives us a clue. Maybe he is fallen bipartite in his view, and not believing in tripartite man. That is a common one, where the bipartite man believes his soul is his spirit with no distinction. http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Christianity.htm
Amato is so convinced in himself that Nee believes what an LSM speaker believes, that "he acknowledged that their concept of suffering in the eternal fire during the Millennial reign is a judicial matter." Though LSM believes this perhaps, Watchman Nee does not believe this for as we have previously acknowledged Watchman Nee never said any such thing in his complete writings at CFP by Stephen Kaung. Let us not thinking this very bad sin of Steve Amato's who takes the comment by an elder of the deceased Witness Lee as his own bearing false witness of Watchman Nee. Marrying Nee to Lee is all you hear from shallow people. Oh what tangled webs they weave. To repeat, Watchman Nee does not believe the lake of fire is applied to believers in the millennial kingdom and though one may find such claims by Witness Lee who altered Watchman Nee's writings, such is not true of the true Watchman Nee. Sneaky world we live in huh?
Amato asks further questions from false premises, "Secondly, how does a person get saved from Watchman Nee's purgatory? Can a person honestly say that he is saved, if he still faces hell fire for a period of time?" First off, the person is already saved eternally at initial salvation when the person made a choice for God. Secondly, since Watchman Nee does not believe in RCC purgatory the point is mute and the question is dead works. Thirdly, there is no such thing as a Watchman Nee purgatory. Fourthly, since Watchman Nee does not believe a person spends any significant length of time in hell fire these questions are equally of no account.
Watchman Nee never said believers are assigned a place in hell fire with non-believers as Amato tries to say from some LSM falsified said-to-be Nee writings, and then asking various other questions on this premise which really we don't even need to touch on and waste our time with, since it is all founded on the error that Nee believes as Lee does on this matter or as Joey Faust believes. Really, Watchman Nee stands apart and agrees with me and another person I talked to, Robert Wilkin, in which the lake of fire is applied at judgment to burn off dross to bring the person into the outer darkness as a loss of rewards for that person is not ready. This is necessary. When the lake of fire is applied at judgment seat it is more like a dipping in rather than a full putting in as would be the case for unbelievers at GWT after the millennium. Since such applying of the lake of fire to burn off dross at judgment seat occurs at the end of this age of mystery of the church, and unbelievers have not been cast into the lake of fire of hell yet, such sharing of hell does not even exist or could not even be possible at this stage, since the non-believers are still waiting for resurrection at GWT while all believers are already raptured in parousia of Christ. The whole conversation is totally ludicrous since Nee doesn't even believe what he is be accused of.
Other false accusations of Watchman Nee are these thinking Nee believes "outer darkness" is "torment", "salvation from eternal hell" in hell, and the list goes on and the reasonable response is that Nee does not even believe these things. Does Satan accuse day and night? Amato says "And what if after the 1000 years of purgatorial suffering, the saints still aren't sinlessly perfect? Where do they go then? And if they become sinlessly perfect through suffering, then, having removed the suffering, what is to prevent to them from becoming sinful again?" God says that after the 1000 years all those resurrected-saved for the new city are fully sinless, fully ready. Speculation by Amato is not realistic. Hypotheticals show his lack of understanding of the Word of God. They are like fantasy questions. To be completely overcoming in Christ is to sin no more forever. Such a state will be attained for all who occupy the new earth and the new city. O ye of so little faith Steve Antinomian. Can you see the spiritually motivating application of rewards and loss of rewards for believers? Loss of rewards is not a place of suffering as it is a place of "loss of rewards". It is no doubt a place of regret of "gnashing of teeth".
More dumb questions are asked, "And what about the unbelievers in hell? If suffering in hell fire brings perfect sinlessness, then will the unbelievers also become perfectly sinless people eventually?" Suffering in hell fire does not bring perfect sinlessness and Nee does not believe hell is the place of outer darkness. And he continues "Contrary to Nee's teachings, a person cannot achieve sinlessness through torment", but Watchman nee does not believe torment is used in outer darkness, nor is torment being used with the lake of fire to burn of dross of Christians at judgment seat. But look what Steve says next, for here is where his antinomianism screams like a siren "But rather sinlessness is given as a free gift". Sinlessness is not given as a free gift. Forgiveness eternally is given as a free gift, and God's life is a free gift, and through God's foreknowledge of those saved eternally, God provides a salvation to them while in the body and through outer darkness which requires a completion concurrent with the millennial kingdom for all who will occupy the new earth. This salvation occurs to eradicate sin forever. It is because of sin, such salvation comes in. Sinlessness is not to be already presumed, and not needing any dealing when a believer leaves his body to go down to the good side of Hades. Perhaps this is another issue Amato is struggling with maybe thinking that Christians go to heaven as soon as they die.
And the dementia continues by Amato, "perfect sinlessness is not achieve until one's death and resurrection, and not through hell-fire. Nee's concept of salvation is not the Biblical concept of Salvation". Sinlessness is not achieved at the believers baptism of death and resurrection, nor in hell fire. Since the believer still sins it is not achieved at burial and resurrection, but the power to be free of sin does occur in the redemptive design through burial and resurrection in the baptism of the believer. The problem is that the believer does not allow God's full redemptive design to work, and resists it. The believer is already dead and raised with Christ at initial salvation in spirit, and allows more of that baptism to work in his life daily. Nee does not believe in hell fire as the redemptive measure. At judgment seat hell-fire serves the purpose of burning of dross and the fire of Christ serves to illuminate those things the believer holds onto as he is cast into outer darkness, with even gnashing of teeth of regret for not having kept the Word of His patience (Rev. 3.10), nor having kept prayerful and watchful (Luke 21.36). Truly we can see Steve Amato's view of salvation is not Biblical, but antinomian and self-engrossed not with an eye on Christ. What he is teaching is a wide-path view, and I dare say many will not receive initial salvation from what he teaches, even himself.
Check this out. Next Amato says that in fact "While it may not be so to Nee". Isn't this amazing? All this time he spends accusing Nee and then says, that it may not be so after all as the Leeist teach or as the protestant purgatory is taught. I have seen this before in Dennis McCallum who was perplexed by Watchman Nee for Nee's energy and life and adhering to the Word. Something must be speaking to Amato that about what he is saying to himself that is not quite right and does not make sense. I love seeing the conscience in a person come out every once and awhile before it goes back into hiding. Indeed he would pay well to heed his conscience in stopping bearing false witness. Though that requires the man to actually change his article he has on his website. And we shouldn't expect that happen, after all, he took quite a bit of time to right it.
Amato's ceaseless errors never cease - "there is no point to discipling these people" as he tries to rationalize Matt. 18.34. According to Amato, a Christian can lie on a bed of fornication and then there is no point to disciplining these people. This is why Amato has the nickname Amatonomian. You heard it hear first, I just coined the phrase, hehe. Amato's thoughts are in error when he says believers "having been raised from the dead they are perfect". Legalism. When we are raised yet still lying on a bed of fornication, though saved, we are not yet perfect for we have a resurrected spirit, that is, a foretaste of heaven, not the actual day of the Lord resurrection, and on that day of the Lord, when we are given a new spiritual body, still God must deal in some fashion with Christians who remained in the flesh. That is by outer darkness and judgment seat. We have been given a new spiritual body, but not yet perfected, and that is where outer darkness comes in. In Matt. 18.34, this term "torture" is not singular, but plural, "delivered him to the tormentors", and it is a parable as that place of discipline for remaining a carnal Christian. How else would you expect God to express this point of outer darkness discipline? Do you prefer softer language? I am sure your flesh does. Or can you see this as spiritual language? God awakens you to His desire is not for you to go to this place. In our understanding it is like a torture, and we should consider it as such because it is torture to be without rewards of the kingdom. Remember we are speaking of spiritual matters applying words to the spiritual and must not think in human terms when finding spiritual meaning to what is being said. Our spirit is reached and we are moved when we hear of such a place of discipline and loss of rewards. For many it is a new thing, for their conscience has not been reached on this matter yet. Steve Amato is still thinking in human terms. All he sees are whips and chains as torture, but God is trying to show us that it is not whips and chains, but a spiritual torture of loss of reward and regret so that we are NOW spiritually motivated to overcome today, and not wait for outer darkness. We may be in the first resurrection and receive the reward of reigning (Rev. 20.4). This is why Amato says it is hard to concentrate when being tortured for he is only able to see with his human eyes. He is still thinking in human terms. He admits "discipline is helpful while in the flesh"; he says it serves no purpose while leaving the body as a carnal Christian. We must refuse such hogwash and not let our conscience fall down to Steve's level for indeed, we will be without rewards if we do for to say discipline is good for one setting but not for consequence of that sin to remove it and overcome it, is a mindless thought.
These are all worldly and mindless questions he continues to ask, "Is it by our good works that we escape from such a place of torment?" Yes, but not good works as in the OT, but abiding works in Christ those He has set for us. See point #9 and #10, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/SCLforums.htm On Luke 12.46 Amato's conscience is not yet reached. In King and the Kingdom of Heaven by Watchman Nee says (CFP white cover only, Nee on page 342 on Matt. 24.48-51, "(b)...simply indicates that he as a believer is as hypocritical as are the unbelieving hypocrites. It is made even clearer in Luke 12: ' Appoint his portion with the unfaithful [original, unbelievers]' (v.46)". How do we impress upon Amato that sin exists in believers and they still retain much of their sinful lives that needs to be overcome? Maybe we can't reach Amato because his spirit is dead, still unregenerated as he tries to perceive in human terms, all he is capable of doing in his natural self. To deny consequence and accountability IS amatonomian. Amato is convinced, "But in reality these are merely unsaved nominal Christians, which is why they are hypocrites." Not true. If the Bible itself makes the distinction that the hypocritical Christians are acting just as hypocritical as the unregenerated then why not accept this fact? How nonsensical it would be to say these unregenerated are acting like unregenerated for they are the unregenerated? They are not even pigs in the church, that is nominal Christians, because the pigs in the church are unregenerated. These who are hypocritical Christians though saved are not unregenerated, but very fleshly Christians that need some dealing in outer darkness if they don't repent in the body, and losing rewards. This is reality accounting for the fact today there are many a Christian living in much sin of the body and self of the soul. In Amato's fantasy life he has no account of such things and say it just does not exist. But look at Amato himself. He calls himself a Christian, yet he is sinning profusely with these seemingly countless errors on his part. He is unceasingly wrong. So full of mistaken assumption. This contradicts his fantasy life and his leavened unBiblical antinomian faith.
Amato false points continue to make his case, "However, as I interpret this verse, it seems to me that it is not the man who is burned" - 1Cor 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. The works are so attached to the believer he can't let them go so let the Lord use the fire to burn them off. Though you don't really have any choice in the matter. He will do it anyway. But what you can do is overcome while still in the body and not live the life of an antinomian. Praise God! Fire can be not only a burning off of dross during judgment seat but also an illuminating fire of Christ as Watchman Nee wells explains, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/fireilluminates.htm The lake of fire will burn off the dross of dead works and what is necessary so that in order the believer can enter outer darkness, outside the light of the kingdom reigning. We do not know where this outer darkness is, whether it is in the kingdom or somewhere else, but we know it is without rewards of reigning as Christ comes to collect all that are His at His return in the darkness of the condition of the world. Outer is in relation to the air. This is not something for us to quantify for this is done by the power of God. Instead simply accept in our spirit that God will have some dealing with believers who stay in sin.
Amato self-life goes on and on, "Isaiah 43:25 I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more. But Lee seems to think that God will remember the sins of the believers and visits punishment upon us in the next life". Actually in all fairness to Lee, Lee does not believe that. A sin that is repented is a sin that is forgiven. A believer has the power of forgiveness in his life because of Christ at the cross. Forgiveness of sins is dealt for sins past, and provides the power over sin in co-death. Forgiveness is integral to repentance. God will forgive this sin you let go of now. But he can not forgive even though you stay in it. No. This is easy believism. Amato has no dealing with the differentiating carnal Christian and the spiritual Christian while still in the body. Fantastically he says all Christians are perfect already it seems so they can sin as they wish. How devastated he will be will his conscience finally sees the light. But, may there be rejoicing afterwards. God has a way of dealing with those who have eternal life. It is called the Bible. Amato is getting redemption and sanctification all mixed up. He likes the former, but forgets the latter. This is Amatonomianism (fun play on words) because his self-life way teaches that God has nothing to say about a Christian who thinks he can get away with sinning not keep the Word of His patience. Who can say someone who makes this statement is a Christian at all?
Matt 18:34 In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. This verse applies to Christians for look at the context. The difference between the RCC teaching and the one shown by Watchman Nee (I have no interest in Witness Lee's lake of fire during the millennium teaching) who believes that the lake of fire is for a quick burning off of dross at judgment seat is just as Amato says:
1. "God's discipline happens in the
millennium, but Catholics say that there is a purging going on today." I
am not so sure Amato understands the catholics here properly because if
catholics mean that we have to overcome things now, then that is a type of
purging.
2. "He doesn't believe in Catholic praying nor paying for the dead." That's an
easy one. We should therefore hear no more about purgatory from Steve, but he
continues to use it when Watchman Nee doesn't even believe in it. Stupidity to
say the least.
3. "That contrary to the Catholic concept, his purgatory is for discipline and
chastisement (which are not for salvation, but for sanctification.)".
Amato misconstrues as usual the part in paragraphs because of his own antinomianism
not being able to see how salvation includes sanctification. He only sees
salvation as initial salvation. Amato is walking around half-saved or should I
say, not at all, as this teaching of his is reflective of unsalvation. If he had
the Holy Spirit in his spirit he would be able to say there is a life of
overcoming and sanctifying as part of salvation, not accusing others by saying
overcoming is not for salvation. Sanctifying is integral to salvation.
No doubt, you can see everything Amato says is very inaccurate and dissatisfying which makes one think he has an agenda which could be some premillennial onlyism beyond the antinomianism. It could be just that he is an all out antinomian, which would be my guess. He is just plain only unregenerated antinomian and the spirit in him can't see past redemption.
In Romans 4, Paul quotes David saying, "Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him." When we see this verse stated we see what the believer has been forgiven from his sins before being born again and initially saved all completely forgiven through repentance, and all that they repent from afterwards also, but those unrepentant sins must have yet further dealing. We need to distinguish between SINS FORGIVEN and POWER OVER SIN. Christ forgives all sin in the believer. But if the believer keeps sinning, that sin is unforgiven and must be dealt with. It is only unforgiven when it is repented of in the believers new life.
Amato says "they have failed to show the consistency". Watchman Nee is being married to Lee's lake of fire in the millennium. I have not found a single mistake in Watchman Nee's writings to date for he was so incredibly consistent more than any Christian writer that I know of. To understand this consistency in greater detail we may find exactly what Watchman Nee did say in Matt. 24 and 25 of the unrepentant servant, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Matthew_24.htm and of those unwise virgins, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Matthew_25.htm, for what is exactly their discipline. Understand we are talking to Christians here, for this is all for Christians, not the unregenerated. The unregenerated as goats are dealt with in the latter verses of Matt. 25 so we must treat the unrepentant servant accordingly as a Christian which deals with the problem of sinful Christians who just can't let go of their flesh, as their flesh wars with the Spirit (see Rom. 6,7,8). Amato's problem is tradition as he says "traditional evangelical thought" is his touchstone. Let us not live by our preconceived schooling of what is right and wrong about popular evangelicalism that is touted so much, but instead let us see God's Word as it is as believers have held throughout the centuries and the overcomers constant attempt to bring us back to these very important things to be seen in God's Word. Amen!
Assembly
Amato says "If the local church humbly allows its leaven to be removed, then I think it could indeed become a great movement of God." With Witness Lee as the LSM icon, and its calvinism, they will never let go of screaming, calvinism and modalism, that much is certain. Calvinism and OSAS Arminianism are mutually exclusive. The only way to change is for Christ to return and destroy their structure and beliefs completely, and for many that is destroying all of them that take the mark of the beast, even now in their hearts.
Amato love of marrying Nee and Lee, says on assembly, "Furthermore, if its own anti-dogmatic stand ('that we may forsake all of those teachings, regardless of whether they are right or wrong' Witness Lee) could be applied to Lee and Nee's teachings." Watchman Nee does not have such a thought. This is more marrying Nee to Lee. It always slips in mindlessly. It is a proclamation. A selfish declaration. A false association. What else can you call it but an undiscerning spirit? When you bear false witness of someone, this is what happens, you engender all kinds of stinking thinking with an evil eye, though it is not reality. It is the sin of false association putting the blame on someone for someone else's sin. We are not responsible for someone else's sin.
On the matter of Assembly, you can see the Witness Lee cult tries to make themselves less like traditional church of a speaker and an audience, yet they go too far with their screaming sessions and too many people are speaking out. I find that Watchman Nee's work, which was so excellent, in "The Church and the Work" Vol. 1-3, CFP white covers only, fills those shoes of explanation of the deep intricacies of assembly life which does not involve screaming sessions. There is much complexity to this intricacy, but suffice it to say it would not look like Witness Lee's business operations around the world through screaming sessions. Though church needs to be dynamic, the problem exists because denominations are not of God, nor are LSM-LC modern-day cities true Biblical locality. Once we begin to realize the source of the problem, that only true Biblical locality is what God is looking for which is responsible unto itself, only then will we be able to see that dynamic church rise up to become what it could be and it will happen in locality after locality like independent cells, all in agreement on the position of Biblical locality. This is the way it will be in the millennial kingdom, and will increase at the end of this age much to the chagrin of onlookers, and will be perfected in the new earth. Read the above link on Watchman Nee's "Which church should I join?" if you haven't already to see how it differs from the LSM system and Amato's also liking the LSM system also. True Biblical locality deals with Gordon Melton's errors also, "having only one church in each geographic location or each city" is his impression of Watchman Nee's writings on locality, which is bearing false witness. It is such a simple matter, and yet people can't get it. T. Austin Sparks didn't get it, LSM warped it to modern-day cities and Melton is equally confused. People were too quick to misread what Watchman Nee meant about true locality in which he said it was more like "postal districts" small communities of varying sized for fellowship and able to assemble together. That is one locality. One can imagine such a size has much liberty so let us not legalize it as Watchman Nee did not legalize it. Though Witness Lee did legalize it to modern day cities.
Bible Accuracy
Amato believes Nee is "somewhat a lack of interpreting the Bible". More marrying Nee to Lee as he says again, "Nee's and Lee's works", for there is just no getting away from that in his petty mind. It makes me chuckle. It is so hard for certain types to talk about Lee without mentioning Nee or Nee without mentioning Lee. They are wholly unalike. I know Witness Lee was unregenerated. I know Watchman Nee may have been the foremost writer in all of Christianity, not even a single one above him in authority in the church for his writings each time stand above the rest in accuracy and effectiveness for our lives in Christ. If this is not so who's writings are comparable? Apart from the Word of God do you know who is more accurate to the Scriptures? I do not know of another do you? Others I have read, I find error. Nee has not shown me his error yet. I have heard one deceitful thing heard before. I heard it said in an article, "when reading Nee, some hold him above others and use him as the guidepost to test against other writings." To this, I say, Praise the Lord for his writings are so excellent! We are believers of comparison unto maturity. We learn from each other. The reason we have the blood of Christ is because we will literally be accused of the truth so all that we can really do then rely on is the blood. Amen!
Amato bellies from the gut, "one gets more of a gnostic and subjective sense of the Christian message" of Nee and Lee. Though this is certainly true of Lee in that he builds his organization based on modern-day city control hubs, calling themselves God-men, and saying Jesus is the Father, you can not say this of Watchman Nee at all, not even one smidge for he never said these things, nor others that he is accused of. This is an accusation of Watchman Nee unfounded, unsupported which relies on Amato's constant misunderstanding of how Witness Lee changed Watchman Nee's writings, and added new writings, none of which agree with what we find at CFP, Watchman Nee. On many matters it is like night and day which I am very spiritually attune to. Since Amato has no concern his mistake refusing to from CFP, we must not pay concern for Amato's shoddy work, and should consider his thoughts of no account. I wrote this piece for the main purpose of helping Amato and those that will be deceived by him that need help. We must be careful not to take the spiritual knowledge God encourages us to have in the Word of God for our spirit to give us life and then call it gnosticism inaccurately and shut our minds down to gaining spiritual knowledge, otherwise we fall into the deceitful trap of Amato's antinomianism. Pro 2:5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God. His comments are similar to Leeism for emotionalism. Perhaps that is what he was first attracted to Leeism for in the first place. Our spiritual life is subjective which must agree with the objective Word and Cross. Let us have our inner life for it is in that life we sense God's working and it is very much subjective yet very much in agreement with the Word if we are abiding in Him. Men of the mind who live for the mind and deny the spirit of the man, and man's tripartite nature is a sign something is not right in the man. Stephen Kaung's audios are good to teach this matter as well as the first chapters of Watchman Nee's, The Spiritual Man, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Christianity.htm The reality of the situation is Steve Antomato subjectivity and traditionalism is a matter of the mind not giving control the spirit of the man which is what is keeping him in his antinomianism for he so loves to hang his hat on redemption and talk down co-death identification. Let this be a lesson to us all not to be this way and learn from Amato's mistakes.
The real cause of Witness Lee's teachings is not Watchman Nee at all as Amato needs to say, "Witness Lee derived his theology from Watchman Nee" but since Nee is not a calvinist, does not believe in modern day city locality, does not believe in screaming sessions, does not believe we are God-men, does not believe in modalism, does not believe in suing Christians, does not believe in several other items, we can see that what Lee took from Nee was what Lee could get for himself for his cult to introduce untruths. I try to address this problem by saying when spiritual men reach the truth, then the unspiritual are quick to manipulate that information as noted on my Watchman Nee page, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Watchman_Nee.htm
To show you there is something heinously wrong with Steve Amato, and now I am utterly convinced Steve Amato has not received initial salvation, all we need to do is look at his fruit. See it for yourself, and study it carefully. Steve Amato is unregenerated. I so know it for can sense the Holy Spirit saying it, and able to prove it. God has revealed to me that it is so. Steve said he highly recommends this article for its excellent work http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/wnee.html but in response to its consistent misrepresentations and blatant error throughout, I have been able to expose the whole piece for everyone to see here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Richard_Fisher.htm Compare both pieces and you will see there is something rotten in Steve Amato's heart that he could read so badly. Richard Fisher, no doubt is also unregenerated. There is a point at which you may know someone is unregenerated, when you see in everything they do, that behind it, there is no life, and that is what you find in Richard Fisher and Steve Amato. It is all dead works, misrepresentation, error to the bone. How dangerously they deceive people for antinomianism. I am able to see underneath their workings, but how many Christians can not see and will be taught by them their false teachings for their easy-believism leading into even more untruth. Truly these two men are pigs in the church, with cloven hooves with the appearance of being clean on the outside, but inside they are so dirty, unsaved.
Gordon Melton, Amato cites "Both Watchman Nee and Witness Lee, who are among the founders of what we call the `Local Church' here, were formerly members of one branch of the Plymouth Brethren, so the thought world is very much the same." This is incorrect, technically speaking. Watchman Nee never started a Local Church movement. Watchman Nee was never a Plymouth Brethren member either. He fellowshipped with them for awhile and then when they wanted his exclusivism with them, he denied them. You see, this is reality. Melton is wrong. What Watchman Nee saw in the Brethren was a holding to truths in a deeper way than those in the rest of Christendom and indeed he was right, for in the history of the church, the Philadelphia church represents the keen preservation of the Word of God in the 1800s by such men and women. Prior to that was the Sardis church of reformations and revivals, and today we are in the Laodicean church age, the last of the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3.
Melton is further in error as agreed by Anton (I am having fun with Steve's last name. I have to make this writings fun for me too), "But what Melton has failed to realize is that while Nee derived his Ecclesiology from the Brethren, much of the rest of his theology was not derived from the Brethren, but rather from a group of women, who discipled him early on, and who held to more Charismatic and Catholic concepts." Amato is in error too because everyone is under the impression, for that is the way of men, to believe that Nee took from people, but rather the truth is that what Nee received as revelation in the Word led him to certain people, certain types that he could fellowship with. There was no one quite as accurate as Watchman Nee for even the Brethren had some problems, T. Austin Sparks had some problems, and some of these women had some problems, but Watchman Nee was unphased by it all and just let the Holy Spirit to guide Him. Why is it that Amato needs to believe that Nee's writings are from people? They are not. His writings are from the Holy Spirit in his spirit. They are from God, meaning, they are well pleasing to the Lord. It is very true that Nee did not take from Brethren. Just because Nee had the presence of these women does not mean he approved of their doings teachings in all cases, as noted here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/guyon.htm It is all well documented, but in Nee's words, not in others' impression. Let us not be so concerned about what others think, or making false connections, and instead focus on the person and stay true to what that person said, instead of bearing false witness. This bearing false witness is so profuse. It's amazing, for it is like a virus. No doubt Nee learned from this various sources, for he read over 3000 Christian books and sought after that which was most holy, but to say someone took from a person a teaching vs. it was led to him by the Holy Spirit, let us have a spirit of discernment and not be so quick to judge.
As to the various aspect of the brethren teachings as they differ from Watchman Nee's we can leave that to another write-up. Suffice it to say, Watchman Nee's writings on assembly are more accurate, even than the brethren which can be proven by comparison as it will touch life in seeing the difference.
Emotion
Witness Lee's comments are too emotionalized for initial salvation. Though there is something to be said against the rigidity of denominations today because God does not ordain denominations, we can not follow the Witness Lee system either. Let us study Watchman Nee's writings at CFP, in "The Church and the Work" and compare these writings to the Word to see what we can glean on the matter. Please, stay away from Watchman Nee's writings at LSM. You will not get the true Watchman Nee. We do not want to come to Christ at initial salvation by the Witness Lee way, which will lose the foundational support, as it becomes self-induced emotionally and not by the grace of God giving His life. It must be a real authentic choice coming to the cross as a helpless sinner. Mouthing self-convincingly, but not receiving real authentic life will never work for it is a sugar coated approach, and Amato is right, it is easy believism. Eternal life sticks and it keeps sticking forever.
Amaton attempts to go at marrying Nee to Lee on the matter of emotion, "Lee and Nee's teachings also contained a degree of leaven" and "criticizing Nee and Lee". You should criticize Nee if Nee is the Nee, that Lee says Nee is. But he is not, and never was. Amato puffs himself up, "But as I have developed a good reputation in the church to a degree, and while I am known for being frank, clear, direct and sincere, yet also polite". Amato's experience in the Local Church like so many before him that turned out badly, and is two part. First, he should not be there to begin with and should have been able to discern that instead of wasting a year of his life there, and secondly, the Bible is being used as a weapon, by the Leeists, but also Steve Amato is doing the same exact thing, in that there is some things Amato does not have right in his heart as we can see. Yes Leeists, have a "feel-good" Christianity, but Amato has an antinomian Christianity killing rewards thus increasing the vanity of his life and letting in sin which he does not recognize, with an overassuming self-righteous attitude, not heeding God's word he will be left without rewards in so doing. However, as I have stated above, I do not believe Steve is a Christian in reality for recommending the Richard Fisher article. That is a blatant misnomer. If you have studied this, specifically my response and examine the quotes of Nee you see how badly someone can misread another. You see no discernment in his heart about his comments. He is wrong, one wonders how they can be that wrong if they have a quickened spirit. Maybe this this article will change Amato's life. I have spoken to Richard Fisher. He is a zombie, through and through, unwilling to deal with anything. I produced this article because in the coming years Amato will do much damage to christendom in his very awful teachings about rewards-everyone-party, and bearing false witness against the uttermost spiritual of Christians such as Watchman Nee and Stephen Kaung and Jessie-Penn Lewis and T. Austin Sparks in good agreement. For when you go after one you are going after the others. Even Sparks was wrong about locality, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/PrideofSparks.htm. For scores of more believers who think the same see Joey Faust's, The Rod. They would all refuse Steve Amato's antinomianism.
There is a truth to what the Leeist said to Amato, that the "letter killeth" for it does not just apply to the ten commandments. It applies to life. We do not live by the letter of law. We live by the spirit of the letter of the law. That is the Spirit giving life. Amato's tried to play this down as Moses' law. Amato is as wrong as the Leeists' emotionalisms. This whole Jan 2000 experience Steve Amato describes of himself trying to rationalize himself is self-satisfaction. I really have no interest in that. He does not even discuss the issue of the scenario but rather enters in the middle of the conversation between two people in a cult, himself and another, both of them trying to exalt each other. Totally dead works. Without life. What was the initial cause of this confrontation? No specificity is given as how the argument started. It is merely a reflection of emotion verses antinomianism. Though Amato's letter was an antinomian letter, the Leeist used an emotional response. Both were in error. Both methods were at fault. There is a better way. It is called truth. Leeists don't want to accept their emotionalism. Amato doesn't want to accept his antinomianism, and there you have a stalemate. This is christendom, not the true church, but a bunch of men trying to exalt themselves. This is a one sided affair of Amato's recollection of events accusing the Leeists of saying they said Paul sinned, which was not the case at all. Paul did not sin but wrote a necessary letter. And we can not be certain Amato is even telling the truth. I don't want to side with the cult or the antinomian position for I see a better way.
Witness Lee certainly allows for bad doctrine in favor of emotion. There is no question by his comments. You can really sense the emotion in his writings that is smothering the spirit of his readers cutting off life. What the Leeists are certainly doing is degrading their soulical self. The soulical is that part of the man that God that is naturally desirable. It seems to me there is a drug induced experience going on in Leeism with the Leeists screaming and being surrounded by these Witness Lee comments about cutting off the mind.
Doctrine
Various doctrinal matters Amato is correct in as they pertain to free grace, Lordship salvation, charismatic, evil calvinism, synergism, but these things were never Amato's problems. His problem was that of a fantasy version of Christianity that by legalizing the letter in his teaching, believing Christians don't sin and when they are resurrected that fixes everything with God having no consideration for a believer who lives a life a sin so that in effect that believer can live a life of sin according to Steve and it is ok, even when he admits different Christians bear more fruit; but who cares, he conveys to us, because he says there is no such things as overcomers and non-overcomers. Do you see how antinomian this is? It does make one cringe this teaching of his? For you just know there are lots out there just like him. The sense I get from Steve, is he is constantly pointing back to himself. I sense in his experience he musters a pride he likes to express of how he likes to come up with a winning thought and preserving it for posterity. This is all a cover up for his well hidden antinomianism. You should know what I mean by now when I say this. It is not that complicated and really only takes a paragraph to explain.
In confusing the Son with the Spirit in Leeism, there is a confusing of who exactly should be exalted. We should, instead exalt the Son. To exalt the Spirit is to be introspective. To exalt the Father is to downplay the Son. We must see the Son to get to the Father.
Atomaton said that in 1 Cor. 14.45 that "life-giving spirit" is not the Spirit. Yes it is the Spirit. The verse is correct with "spirit". God's life is the Spirit, and it is the life of the Son. Or should I say He is the life of the Son. It did not say "resurrected body", it said "spirit". Yes, 1 Cor. 15 is about the resurrection and rapture, but v.45 is very clearly stating that spirit apart from the physical, and is a spirit that is life giving which so happens to be God's life, the Holy Spirit. Jesus gave His life to us when He was raised and resurrected. Prior to this men did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit could only come upon men. I wonder if Amato is having troubles with man being spirit, soul and body to not see the spirit is the spirit given to believers is the Holy Spirit in 1 Cor. 14.45. The reason it says "spirit" and not "Spirit" is because it is a comparing of the natural life to the spirit life. It is not speaking of a spiritual body. Nor is it talking about Jesus becoming the Spirit. It is simply God's expressing a change. Just like the transfiguration on the mount, we see a transformation occur, a foretaste of what will be, and in so seeing, we discern that Jesus transforms Himself by His life to us as He is raised up, and it is no longer we that live, but Christ in us, that is, by the Holy Spirit. People get all legalistic about this one way or the other. They get tritheistic or modalist, but there is a way to give reverence to the 3 Persons of the Godhead and God shows us.
Amato is right in Leeists' misuse, but in 2 Cor. 3.17, the problem is I don't like his explanation. A better way is to say, the Lord Jesus is that Spirit, meaning, simply now that Jesus is raised, His life is now ours so that the Lord is now the Spirit, so that again it is no longer we that live but Christ in us. By His life. All Amato says is it is "metaphorical". Let always remember that in the new city that God and the Lamb have the same face from henceforth in appearance to us, Rev. 22.1,4 when that day comes. If this be so then what is really going on is application for what we ready to receive in God's loving mercy, and it is appearance that God asks us to stay within the truth that God is 3 Persons and not start confusing the 3 Persons for that time has not come to see God and the Lamb with one face yet. That is humility. This is a very special principle. Leeists are getting ahead of themselves in pride causing them to shut their minds down confusing the Godhead, while Amato is not expressing himself adequately to be helpful enough. If you read this Amato, please do not make the same mistakes the Leeists made in using 2 Cor. 3.6 against me for I will just point you back to the truth of 2 Cor. 7.8-10 and 2 Cor. 10.5.
"In the past, I taught many people how to speak in tongues", Witness Lee. Help is found here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/FalseTongues.htm which shows us today's tongues is false. Amato correctly treats the term, "release of the spirit" that is not an inhibition matter as misused by Leeists, that is, if that is what the Leeists really believe. I am not so sure they do, and Amato is notorious for jumping to conclusions. However, in practice the Leeists do seem to tend to treat this phrase as inhibition released rather than spirit quickening. However, this is where I disagree, for Amato says "The viewed communicated to me is that Jesus is a non-corporeal spirit that pervades everywhere and you take him in by breathing saying the words" speaking of 1 Cor. 14.45. This is not right as it pertains to 2 Cor. 3.17 also, because all these verses are saying is that Jesus is giving us His life, the Holy Spirit that is the life of the Father also. That is all that is being said. All these other things Amato speaks of about the body are not relevant in these verses. It shows Amato is having some trouble understanding. God, in this verse, is not a pervading of everywhere, but a directly speaking of God giving His life that will enter the spirits of those men who are regenerated. God is omnipresent, but this verse is talking about Jesus giving His life to us. That is all. Let us not assume more than what is said. It is not about specifically "non-corporal" and "say the words" for these are not the point of these two verses. It is a matter of God giving His life.
Overcomers and Non-Overcomers
Here we see Amato's antinomianism come out again for really this is what he is fighting, rewards for overcomers, and discipline, readying and preparing non-overcomers for the new city. He is really hostile to this. He says "The main problem I have with this is that the Bible makes no such distinction among those who have been born of God". Of course it does. That is why spiritual Christians believe it, even most babes in Christ get it, and all Scripture is an agreement with this fact. Let's see how Atomaton misreads Rev. 21.7-8. The truth of his misreading of this verse is that overcomers here are not the same as those in Rev. 2 and 3 that overcome out of the 7 churches. The overcomers here in vv.7-8 are a comparison of believers with the unbelieving world. But look further, see how those in vv.6-8 are different than those in verses 2 and 3. Please review these verses here as Nee wrote about them giving a 6 point proof, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Revelation_21.htm for he did a most excellent job of proving. So we can say therefore, that all Christians are overcomers, but the question only remains when do they overcome? Do they overcome while still in the body, or do they overcome through outer darkness. Praise God!
What Amato is doing is misusing 1 John 3.9,10 and 1 John 5.3-5 to stay in a spirit of antinomianism NOT ACCEPTING that most Christians are still hold onto sin that the redemptive design is needed to work out in such believers. Mindlessly, not unlike Leeists, though in a different way, he takes these verses to allow him to, ironically, stay in sin, and call it not sin because he legalizes these verses living by the letter of the law, and not the Spirit of the law, still not allowing his god to deal with Christians who sin as God of the Bible does.
I am not fond of saying when Witness Lee says something right because he always leads to untruth, but I must say what Witness Lee said about Rev. 21.7-8 is true. Amato having troubles understanding only saying that these verses in John speak of behavior, and that that somehow nullifies what Witness Lee said for Amato says, "he gives no other explanation as to why these should be interpreted any differently than in Rev 2,3". As we have come to see in Watchman Nee's proof just above, he explains it perfectly, which I need not indulge further except to say that the comparison we are seeing in vv.7-8 are of the saved and the unsaved, but the comparison of those in verses 2 and 3 show us those who live outside the new cities with bodies of flesh and blood while those who live in the new city are those in vv.6-8 with spiritual bodies. The last generation from the millennium are transferred livingly to outside the new city on the new earth. Watchman Nee gives the most excellent proof. Six points are mentioned found on pp. 226-227 of Come, Lord Jesus on chapter 21. Do you see how wonderful Watchman Nee's writings are, as he explains so precisely why! I assume you read the link on chapter 21 above. If you haven't, do that first.
Amato says of Witness Lee, "He simply does so to fit his view of eschatology into the Bible rather than allowing the Bible to speak for itself. But I don't mean to sound like I'm accusing him of doing so intentionally. It's just that in interpreting the Bible the way he does, his theological presumptions are revealed." As we can see that Amato is denying this reasoning automatically presuming, and already deciding his position, Amato's own words really do come back right to him and reveal his own error NEVER DEALING WITH THE CARNAL CHRISTIAN. He couldn't have said it better himself about himself.
That doesn't stop Amato from puffing himself up as per the norm, "But as I interpret the Bible, in accordance with the Bible's way of saying things". No he doesn't. He love his antinomianism, and he can't let go. Here we have a case of man living by legalizing the word, OVERCOMER. He can only see one meaning, that is, all Christians are overcomers, now they are free to sin with no consequence by saying they don't sin. Yet God does not say this in 1 Cor. 6.9,10 and Gal. 5.19-21 that Amato tries to use to rationalize his position that all Christians overcome while still in the body. This is such vanity on his part. He can't see in his conscience that all Christians are overcomers, but the matter of timing of the completion of overcoming through the redemptive design is yet to be determined unto rewards, and also being raptured at first rapture if accounted worthy to escape the hour of trial having no need to go through the time of testing (Rev. 3.10, Luke 21.36). To reach his conscience is by no means an easy task because he hath not an ear to hear.
Amato didn't provide any quotes of Witness Lee on these above verses so he is simply proclaiming what Witness Lee believes with no proof. Have you by the way notice the easiness of error of the closeness of Watchman Nee's name and Witness Lee, and if I am not careful, I could easily mistake one name for another in typing so fast. This no doubt was manipulatively done by Witness Lee which is a trick that causes part of the confusion in people. Obviously Witness Lee is very cognizant of this sneak play. These verses in 1 Cor. 6 and Gal. 5 are speaking of not non-overcomers, but unregenerated. So much false accusing to make one's point is such vanity, and misusing the verses of the Bible to do so. Rev. 21.8 are all Christians also. Discerning non-overcomers and overcomers, Amato is using the wrong verses. It's too bad Amato didn't provide a verse from Witness Lee and just proclaimed his selfish opinion instead. Oh well.
Again, I don't like agreeing with Witness Lee, but I do agree with him about the kingdom of heaven, kingdom of heavens, and the kingdom of God, and thus since, Amato seems to be disagreeing with him, but gives no proof, plus the fact that Watchman Nee gave countless proofs of this fact in King and the Kingdom of Heaven, CFP white covers, it is to me more than obviously that the kingdom of heaven is three things: christendom now, outward conduct Matt. 5-7, and a reigning in the millennium (not the millennium itself). Kingdom of God is the same in each respect except for not being outward conduct but inward, deeper knowing as shown here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Matthew_13.htm I can see Amato is having a hard time wrapping his brain around this, but let me say I have its deep acceptance in my heart in that I can really see it. The kingdom of God extends from the OT to eternity future while the kingdom of heaven started with Christ, and ends at the end of the millennium. This is a very satisfactory answer, and very encompassing, so I am certain this is God's explanation and his accurate meaning of these terms, and why he uses them differently. Amato doesn't say anything about this, stopping short as usual.
As Witness Lee states "As most Christians do today, the disciples confused salvation with entering into the kingdom of the heavens. The Lord's word to the young man concerned entering into the kingdom of the heavens but the disciples thought that it referred to salvation. Their concept of salvation was natural and common. They did not grasp the Lord's revelation concerning entering into the kingdom of the heavens", we can say to this that "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." What is possible? This most amazing period of the millennial kingdom AND eternal life. Surely we should include both in reaching what God can accomplish in us, especially when He returns to make it so, reigning for a thousand years. Even so, let us not speculate what the disciples thought or didn't think. Who is to say they did not recognize a future millennial kingdom. After all there is many references in the OT to this fact, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/millennium.htm
Steve Amato says for this verse, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you- unless, of course, you fail the test?" that we are already matured. In 2Cor 13:5 there is a matter of maturing for that is part of testing, but Anto says "not a matter of maturity but of being" as if to say we all are already sinless and matured. This is so wrong. Now that you have deluded yourself, you can delude yourself to other things. For once you see that you pass the test, what about increased faith? Maturity comes with increases faith that God gives believers. It doesn't just stop at initial salvation like zombies. Antinomianism is the love of initial salvation, but the despising of maturing in Christ as we see here expressed yet again by the Antinomian never endingly, even unto hell. Here is the explanation of why we see Matt. 7.21 as speaking to Christians, not the unregenerated, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/enteringkingdom.htm for it is simply having to do with the fact of not only believing, but doing the will of God. Many believe, but don't do God's will and thus will be without rewards of the kingdom. Call these works abiding works, abiding in Christ doing His will. Let us not confuse works based salvation with doing God's good pleasure unto rewards of the kingdom. Praise God! Don't let these guys fool you. Many of them are unregenerated if not most.
The not knowing here in Matt. 7.23 is not any normal not knowing since it is the past tense for the same Greek word translated “know” in Romans 7.15. In the original it means to recognize or to understand. “I never knew you” may therefore be translated as “I never recognized you”—which means “I never recognized what you did as right.” Therefore, you will be without rewards of the kingdom. Your choice.
Amato has a knack for using the wrong verses right at wrong time to make his case as in the misuse of John 6.37. This is clearly a matter of initial salvation, not of maturing in Christ. This line of reasoning is pervasive to make his case but what does it really show about Amato? Antinomianism. For he refuses to look at himself see he holds what? Sin and claiming his god won't deal with it now forever in his salvation. May I say Amato has been around this matter long enough to know better, and he still doesn't get it. This is truly a sign of unsalvation. If a young believer was first confronted with this matter it would take them some time to consider it, but with Amato, and with desire to teach, he is trying to corrupt the church with his false logic. He is totally unregenerated. I know Amato is not a Christian as of this writing. What Amato has is a well refined system to allow and rationalize and justify sin in his life by altering the Word of God. His arguments are from false premises, and then he goes on and on about the false premise, which is just wasted computer screen space, not unlike my panhandling this article to him, when he may never come to Christ ever.
Look at the degrading terminology Amato uses treating outer darkness as "purgatorial hospital" and "make them better people" and "condemnation". Actually none of these terms fit outer darkness. Outer darkness again, is simply out of the light of reigning in the millennial kingdom. It is truly a loss of rewards so let us think of it in proper context and not all these human ways of understanding as Amato struggles with negatively. Look at the positive side of being made ready for the new city. It should also be noted that he won't get much of a correct view of outer darkness from Leeists anyway since there is so much emotional upheaval there in which Amato still carries much baggage, seen in his reactionary article. Let us calm the emotion down through strengthening the spirit of the man, exercising our spirit in the Lord.
Amato believes that because vv.15-20 speak of the unregenerated, that therefore so should the following vv.21-23 in Matt. 7 must also be unregenerated. But again, with a little effort, I find a most excellent proof why this is not so, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/enteringkingdom.htm There of course is no basis for believing that in Matt. 7.21-23 are the unregenerated since Matt. 15-20 speaks of false prophets, while Matt. 7.21-23 does not. So what does Automaton do? He brings all these verses together in error. This is out of context. Read these verses over several times and you will see such is not the case at all according to Steve, then make sure you read the detailed proof here. It should be noted in all fairness to the LSMers that Amato provided no quote of them on this verse as he just presumed what they say about these verses. If they agree with what Watchman Nee said here, then this proves Amato is wrong again for the umpteenth time.
When we overcome the world as Christians we do so by the blood of Christ and the cross. This is a starting point. Therefore 1 John 5.4 speaks of having the authority of Christ in our lives to overcome the world. It does not speak of the distinction of non-overcomers and overcomers. It just speaks of the power now vested in believers because they have the Holy Spirit dwelling in their spirit for believing Jesus Christ. This is its meaning, giving us literally now the ability to obey His commands. The way Steve uses this verse is really off topic, yet we can see in this verse that some will obey more than others. "Ye work inequity", or as Amato uses "evildoers", is a stern warning to Christians the reason for God's disapproval. In Greek this word is actually, "lawlessness" and so therefore it is not a work according to the kingdom of heaven, and will most certainly be without rewards. You can see the error going on here in legalizing words so emotionally bringing them down to human reasoning and man's emotional appeal. In fact Amato is getting emotional in his reading the Scriptures which is clouding his judgment. Can you sense this loss of objectivity?
We do see stark contrast, nominal Christians according to Nee are unsaved, but Witness Lee says they are saved as per Amato's statements. Amato makes the argument that the Father doesn't treat His children this way, by saying "I knew you not", yet this phrase is not saying "I send you to hell", but rather it is saying as previously mentioned, "I knew not what you did as being right". This is where a spirit of wisdom and discernment are very necessary. We must always keep in mind Christians are abiding in Christ in varying degrees, and God therefore will need to deal with this in some form or another, whether now while still in the body or in the after-life. To just say that God does nothing is antinomianism is that of an automaton.
The mindlessness continues, "Yet the Bible declares that there exist no such people who have been born of God yet live a lifestyle of sin." This must mean then that because of Amato's sin of these various mistaken assumptions and bearing false witness that he is not a Christian sinning profusely. Well that is what I already know, but not because of this verse really, but because of how wrong he is on everything and the bearing false witness incessantly like he is in his own little world. In this comment he legalizes the Christian condition to be sinless, in spite of the fact of what we see in Romans 6 and 7 of Paul testifying how his flesh still wars with the Spirit. This can not be something that is continued to be blithed away. Amato may have convinced himself utterly that God will have no dealing in such matters, but boy won't Amato be surprised at GWT when he wakes up from that place of unawares in the bad side of Hades. There will not be a single thing he can say. So full of words now, such vain words. Therefore, the above verse speaks of the life of the new life in the Christian. That is the spiritual meaning of this verse.
Instead what does Watchman Nee say -
"If a Christian has any unrepented of and unconfessed sins, which are not forgiven, he will suffer the Gehenna of fire." And he also says "In the coming age, there is still the possibility of forgiveness, but one cannot come out until he pays the last quadrans and clears up everything with his brother." Albeit this is the short application of the lake of fire at judgment seat. It is what we are looking to overcome so that we are not faced with burning off of the dross at judgment seat and are not without rewards. This quote by the way is of Amato's Watchman Nee at LSM which I won't recognize unless I can find the same verse at CFP so though there may be a hint of lake of fire throughout the millennium, in Watchman Nee's own words at CFP, he says there is no lake of fire about outer darkness. Much more detail is done here, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Revelation_20.htm I did a search in CFP's Complete Works of Watchman Nee and there is no mention of quadrans or the above quote.
Here is a comment in King and the Kingdom of Heaven by Watchman Nee on "outer darkness" at CFP:
"And cast ye out the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness" – This is a second punishment. Outer darkness is a relative, not an absolute, term. In order to understand this word "outer" we need first of all to know where the Lord will speak these words. As we have noted earlier, the Lord will come to the air, to where as well His saints are to be raptured. There they appear before His judgment seat where these words are spoken. And hence the "outer" spoken of here is "outer" in relation to the air. Never in Scriptures, not even once, is hell called outer darkness. As a matter of fact, hell is not dark but has about it the element of fire! Let us see that when the Lord comes, He shall be surrounded by darkness, although there shall be glory within (see Ps. 18.9-11). And hence the "outer" mentioned in the parable is in relation to this darkness that shrouds the darkness of the Lord’s glory at His coming.
According to 1Cor 6:9,10 "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God", not only will the unrepentant believers not receive the reigning in the millennial kingdom, but obviously so won't the unregenerated. This verse is very much like our verse in Rev. 21.7-8. How precise are the Scriptures. Yet Amato will actually use this verse incorrectly, just as he does with Rev. 21.7-8 to try convict Lee, even Nee as he tries to marry them together. This is really a study of practical logic and works through like this. If A is true and B believes in A, and if C says B is wrong because he doesn't believe in A because of D, even though B does agree in A, it really makes C look like mindlessness. You see there is no connection made between A and D. It is false cause presented from D to A, based on the false presumption that D necessarily is combined with A when it is not, yet in the fantasy life of C, Amato overassume that B thinks A is D. B doesn't. Nee does, I don't, T. Austin Sparks doesn't, and not even Lee does.
Amato legalizes the term "inequity" to his hard term, not unlike Witness Lee likes to use hard terms as seen here that are so far askew they literally change the meaning, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Spiritual_Man.htm Amato is trying to see things that aren't there. He is trying to make connections that are too overassuming on his part. Why is God not given the right to say not only unregenerated will not come into the kingdom of heaven, but also the non-overcomers in Christ who no doubt held onto much of their old man will not enter either. What Amato is teaching is unBiblical to lead Christians to believe they can remain in sin, and it is ok by not letting their conscience be reached that indeed they are sinning a lot more than they realize, and holding onto the self-life and even supernatural intrusion of evil spirits. Yes, Christians can be possessed too. I believe Amato's teaching is even more problematic revealing his own unsalvation with his nicely packaged way to sin, not acknowledge it thinking he goes to heaven. It sure makes life easier in his faith doesn't it? But it is also soporific and dull too isn't it? You sense that it is not reality. After all Christians don't sin in Amato's world, and since Steve Amato is a Christian, he is not sinning. Yet this goes completely contrary to Romans 6 and 7.
Amato gets more warped, "And thus his purgatory idea is not simply a place of sanctification, but a place of justification in which one pays off their sins which had not been forgiven." No, outer darkness is not purgatory, nor is it a place of justification of substitution of Christ, but it is a place for Christians who sin as much as Steve Amato in all his errors and mistaken assumptions and thoughts, and these outward conducts. It is a loss of rewards. God has to deal with so much sin in the believer somehow. This is how. His mistaken assumption is he thinks all this sin is forgiven, but God never said any such thing. God said past sins repented are forgiven so that all sins are forgiven, but Amato holds onto sin, committing them profusely and calling God a liar telling Him that He forgave these sins when He did not. Steve Amato doesn't sin according to his teaching, that is true, but his treacherous teaching is not of God. Such are legalisms of the Scriptures. Amato rationalizes his view of Nee misusing Matt. 18.23-35 hostile to the truth, because Watchman Nee believes that His servant are saved believers which I agree. We must remember, The Bible is speaking to believers always warning them, time and time again, stop backsliding. Amato says otherwise. Amato says pretend like you are not sinning because Amato's god says you are not sinning. God does not know him not because not only rejects what Amato is doing, but because Amato has not accepted Jesus Christ yet. And the proof is found in Watchman Nee's writings so beautifully. Compare, http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/kingdomforgiveness.htm
Conclusion
In Matt. 18.34 This cannot be read as God taking back His word concerning His initial grace towards redeemed sinners; but God’s subsequent grace, as illustrated in this instance, must be withdrawn by God in order to maintain His righteousness. “Pay all that was due”—After the thousand years of discipline come to an end.
Let us pray Antinomianism dies on the cross with all carnal Christians so they no longer deceive themselves from false prophets who teach antinomianism. Let us not read the Bible like some 3rd grade novel to feed our emotion, but treat these as spiritual words with deep spiritual meaning that give life to our spirit. All you see Anton doing is fighting this tooth and nail gnashing of his teeth back and forth. May I say so much legalism is hardly the fruit of salvation. Yes, Steve is trying to appeal to the reader's emotion and that is perhaps what attracted him to the Leeist cult to begin with, because they are involved in attempting inordinately stimulate emotion to give them a rush, albeit dead emotion for it seems so forced and contrived as dead works. Anton's disrespect for using a term that Watchman Nee does not even use of himself, that is purgatory, is the telling sign something is amiss in the heart of Amato.
It is quite a mess indeed isn't it? False brethren being sowed in the Leeist cult for their love of false doctrines and confusing emotion for the spirit, and Amato's love for concealing sin and thinking God will not deal with it. I believe the Holy Spirit is angry with these false believers with a Holy anger. He is disgusted with the whole lot. This is why so few are truly regenerated. God's wrath is coming and these two groups in christendom, the Leeists and the antinomians will fall brutally to the hand of the righteous Jesus Christ in His coming parousia. If God asked me right this moment, I would without hesitation say that Amato is not saved and most Leeists are not saved. If this offends, them, good. Maybe they will come to Christ after all.
There is a couple of other articles on Amato's site which I should make a few quick comments on. Here we find another Leeist fallout member, not unlike Amato himself. These guys are all damaged men from Leeism, and they react as they should, but they do so with some error, and that is where I come in, to discern what is true and what is not, since I never had their problems or any association, http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lcx1.html You can be certain Leeism is hellbound and Amato is riding on their coat tails.
Troy Brooks