The New City is Not the Church - Tammy Hill

Defending Watchman Nee Against Witness Lee

Summary

Everstill (Tammy Hill) writes in response to termin8d (Oliver Fisher-a leeist) to defend Watchman Nee’s 17 points of a physical new city in the new earth. The leeist rejects a literal city and thinks it is the church which disagrees with Nee. Where desired, termin8d is quoted. The revelation to take away from this reading is that leeists are looking for something completely different than what Christians are looking for. Christians are looking for a physical spiritual new city in eternity future, whereas leeists claim they will be in God, God is the New City and they are the New City. Dangerous stuff!

Nee wrote...Rev. 21.9 Now the name of the wife of the Lamb is given. Many people consider the church to be the wife of the Lamb since, they say, there cannot be a literal New Jerusalem in the future. Many are the proofs, however, that the New Jerusalem is a literal new city: (1) At that time the church as we know it today no longer exists, for she now becomes only a part of all the redeemed.

The church age ends with this dispensation. It does not continue on. None of the verses you gave said the church is actually going to go on forever or change. Those in the OT times were not in the church, and those in the millennial kingdom are not deemed the church. I am not going to be in the church in the 1000 years. When I am resurrected I will not be a member of the church anymore, for the church has passed. What will exist is the 1000 year reign of Christ with the mystery age of the church then passed.

Nee said the Wife of the Lamb is not the Church here as the New City, and I would agree. You said, "this verse clearly shows that the church will exist forever". No it doesn't. Ephesians 3:21 says, "To Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus unto all the generations for ever and ever amen." It says glory in the church, then it says in Christ unto all generations. It does not say the church continues on for all generations. That is not how I read this verse, nor did Nee. We can say in the future we can look back upon the glory of the church, but we can't say the church is going to go on forever. "And in" Christ continues on, but not the church.

So starting with the very first item, you are wrong and you disagree with Nee. I can assure you, Christians do not think the New City is the Church. Abraham was not looking for the Church, he was looking for the New City. Hence, the Church is not the New City so do not spiritualize the New City as the Church. The New City according to the first of 17 points by Nee remains still the physical New City.

Nee writes...(2) Being a book of revelation, its chapters 2 and 3 plainly point out the churches quite clearly and specifically; why then should the New Jerusalem mentioned in chapter 21 of this same book be something other than the clearly stated and specifically mentioned New Jerusalem?

Excellent point. Hence, the New City is not the Church, so do not spiritualize the New City as the Church. Thus, the New City would be a literally physical new city on the new earth (not the old earth). The only earth in vicinity would be Mars. It would be more reasonable it would be Mars than some planet in another solar system.

Those in the OT times were not in the body of Christ, and there is no corporate body of Christ in the 1000 year reign of Christ either. The body of Christ corporately only existed in the dispensation of grace which is almost over.

This church age is a great mystery how God has a separate body of people that are His own children and gather together and are not part of the world. It is a mystery how Christ and the church are one in the dispensation of grace.

In the New City there is no corporate body of Christ separated from the world because in the New City God's people will be pillars of the whole New City and not sojourners.

Again, we see how you argue against Watchman Nee, the Word of God and myself.

I think it takes a lack of faith or a false faith to need to spiritualize the New City when the 7 churches are not spiritualized. They are what they are, just as the New City is what it is. They are not the same. Because the Church is a mysterious body of Christ does not mean it is something else; likewise the New City is not something else. It really is what it is with all its physical dimensions.

Nee said...(3) According to 3.12 the New Jerusalem is what the church hopes for. If New Jerusalem is indeed the church, how could the church hope for the church? It would be senseless and illogical.

I didn't see you address this point, but chose to misunderstand Rev. 3.12 by spiritualizing it instead of there being a real literal place.

Nee wrote...3.12 “He that overcometh, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out thence no more: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and mine own new name”—Just as Philadelphia frequently experienced ostracism in her history, so she will one day not be excommunicated any more. To be a pillar in the temple of God means to be permanently settled, because a pillar cannot be taken away. Philadelphia, like a pillar, will support the temple of God, having the three names of God, New Jerusalem, and Christ inscribed on her. The eternal purpose of God is then fulfilled. The Philadelphians satisfy the Lord as well as belong to the Lord.

What Nee is saying here is that like the overcomer believers will receive the reward of reigning in the 1000 years, they are representatives of the New City in the completed form of being perfected without sin which all those who had not yet overcome will be ready by the time of the new city.

Just as the New City is not the glorified Church, nor is Israel the glorified Church or the New City. And in same fashion the 1000 year reign is NOT the the New City. These are all different dispensations with different characteristics. For example, in the New City rewards are done away with, but in the 1000 years rewards still exist in reigning.

Nee said...(4) In 19.7-13 the New Jerusalem is seen as the bride whereas the church is a guest, thus showing that the church is not New Jerusalem.

I agree. The Bride in Rev. 19 here is not the same as the body of Christ bride or church, for the latter is a guest as a sojourner in this dispensation. The overcomer believers in the 1000 years are not guests as the body of Christ is now.

So in Rev. 19 we read by Nee..19.7 Who is this “wife” of the Lamb? It cannot be the church for the following reasons:

(1) The great multitude spoken of in 19.1 includes the saved among the children of Israel as well as from among the nations. The church is definitely included. Since it is the great multitude who proclaims the words found in 19.7, the church must therefore be

included among those who make such a proclamation. And hence the wife must point to someone else.

(2) In the parable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25.1-13), only the five wise virgins (and therefore not all who are in the church, for notice that all ten are virgins) are privileged to attend the marriage feast.

(3) This wife of the Lamb is different from the bride in Paul’s epistles. For she whom Paul speaks of is clothed with Christ, whereas the wife here is clothed with her own righteousnesses. In Paul’s epistles the church as a whole is viewed as the bride of Christ. In Revelation, the church is considered according to her components, therefore the responsibility of the church before God is stressed. In Paul’s epistles the church is accepted in Christ, but in Revelation the church is accepted in her works. In Paul’s epistles the church in totality belongs to Christ, while in Revelation she is divided into the saved and the overcomers.

This wife of the Lamb is none other than the New Jerusalem (21.9,10).

God is now in His holy temple, so that the voices of praise from the great multitude come also from the temple. During the millennial kingdom the overcomers shall be kings in the city and priests in the temple. But the temple shall gradually lose its prominence until it totally disappears, for God and the Lamb will be the temple in New Jerusalem in the new heaven and the new earth.

Of the church, some (for example, the five wise virgins) will attend the marriage feast, while some (for example, the five foolish virgins) will not be able to attend the marriage feast.

Nee is proves excellently the wife here is not the Church.

Rev. 19.7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. 8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

In my experience your cult is always wrong. The church does not hope for itself, but the new city. You have the mind of the unregenerate Lee, and yet need to be saved.

Nee writes...(5) How can there be no new city in the new heaven and the new earth? Where will people stay if they come to worship God? Did not our Lord expressly say that “in my Father’s house are many mansions” (John 14.2)?

Amen. You are not God, so you are not going to be in God when you said: "Thus the believers will be in the Triune God". No. Those who are resurrected-saved will be in the New City as permanent pillars and God and the Lamb will be at the center of the New City. There is no way you are saved.

God created the universe to last an extremely long time, if not trillions of years then hundreds of billions of years. He will bring heaven and earth together in the new city on the new earth. Whatever happens after that I do not know, but Nee made an interesting point. In the Bible God says He shall love us for a 1000 generations and that by the time of the end of the 1000 years, there will only be about 250 generations that have passed, so there shall be 750 more generations in the new city before the next event in God's plan arises.

You misread Matt. 16.18, for it does not say Peter is the building material for the Church, but the Rock Jesus is. Peter is petros and Jesus is the Rock Petra. Jesus was building the Church on the Rock, not the small rock Peter.

Again as Abraham was looking to the physical new city, so are those in Christ when heaven and earth come together in the new city on the new earth. That is wonderful.

There are many mansions, rooms, abodes dwelling places in the Father's Home of the new city-very physical. Nee, I and others believe this universe has a long way to go; hence the New City is a physical city.

As you can see nobody could be accepted as apostles from your organization because you harbor many false teachings.

Just briefly looking through rest which is all in error, I happened to stop upon, "Even Mr. Brooks likes to point out that the number 7 represents God". If Mr. Brooks agrees with Nee that God's number is 3, not 7 and 7 is the number for the Church, then aren't you sinning bearing false witness against him? The Church is the Church. God is God. The New City is the New City. Stop confusing the Church for God or the Church for the New City. The New City is not God either. The number of the Church is 7 or multiples of 7. The number of God is 3 or 1. And the number of the New City is 12.

Nee writes...(6) If the woman mentioned in 12.1 refers to Jerusalem and the great harlot cited in 17.1 points to the city of Rome, how can the wife of the Lamb spoken of in 21.9 not be a reference to an actual city?

The woman in Rev. 17.1 points to the city of Rome. This is a location. This is introduced to describe the problem of religious Rome. It does not say the woman is religious Rome, but that religious Rome is what is being shown because the woman being the city where religious Rome is centered. Hence, “Mystery, Babylon the Great” is religious Rome.

“The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth” (17.9). Rome is built on seven mountains and she is called ‘the seven-hilled city.' There is no other way to view this. When the 7 hills of Rome were pointed out this is what we should be associating so we know the location which is Rome. God is telling us where religious Rome will be centered in the city of Rome; the Vatican City is in Rome or next to it-close enough! They will play games to say it is not actually in Rome, but that is petty. Roman Church thinks it is being sneaky.

The bride is the Church. The woman in Rev. 17 is no bride of Christ, but the city of Rome which religious Rome sits, for religious Rome is Mystery, Babylon the Great. Don't confuse the woman who is the city, the great harlot, with Babylon the Great of the Roman Church. They are not the same thing.

Can you yet realize why woman as the city is being pointed out to describe religious babylon? Religious babylon is not first pointed out by the city is to point you the matter of babylon where religious Rome is located. You can see how much more advanced Nee was in such a subtle explanation.

Christ is betrothed to the bride (body of Christ) which has no bearing on the woman who is the city in Rev. 17. As I see it, you missed a step. You mingle falsely the woman and mystery babylon and not see clearly they are two different things.

To simplify it for you, the woman is the city who sits on many waters. So the woman as the city is where religious babylon sits.

Nee shows us two steps here, but you mingle them.

You avoided dealing with Rev. 12.1. The woman who is Israel arrayed with the sun who is Christ shows us the dispensation of grace. It is the interaction of Christ with Israel (the woman) that reveals to us this dispensation and now the woman (Israel) at the end of this dispensation, then the New City in the new earth, not the church in eternity future, for the church will no longer exist.

As Nee said, She is none other than Eve in creation, the body of Christ in the dispensation of grace, this woman whom we see at the close of the dispensation of grace, and the New Jerusalem God will have in the eternity to come.

Paul treats the bride one way in the epistles, but John treats the bride differently in Revelation. This is the key to understanding. Yes, they are similar, but quite different, as the church ends in the dispensation of grace.

In Rev. the woman is always the city. But overall the woman is the eternal will of God. The city can't come down until the old Jerusalem is done with, then the Lamb and God become the center of that New City whereas those in the New City are the pillars. Yet another reason why I do not believe you are a Christian is because Abraham was not looking for the Church. He knew nothing of the Church. He did look for the city though as like a woman.

I think that is totally cool!

Nee writes...(7) After the blowing of the seventh trumpet the kingdom has arrived and the mystery is fulfilled. Since New Jerusalem subsists in the new heaven and the new earth, it cannot be considered a mystery, and therefore it must be literal.

Christ is known by the church. The mystery is how the church can be corporate body of Christ, not Christ who we already have a relationship with. 10.1 it indicates that “the rainbow was upon his head”, so it too is enveloped in the cloud. Although the rainbow signifies the remembrance of grace and mercy by the Lord, such remembrance remains a mystery which yet awaits manifestation. Here it is a being “arrayed with a cloud”, not a “coming on the clouds” (Matt. 24.30). Since the Lord is enveloped in cloud, this indicates that it is still the time of mystery, for He has yet to manifest His glory.

As the seventh trumpet sounds, the mystery of God is finished since it has now been manifested. At the opening of the seventh seal the book is still unopened because the seventh seal includes the seven trumpets. The book is opened only after the sounding of the seventh trumpet, for only then is the mystery fulfilled.

Rev. 10.2 "And he had in his hand a little book open...". “A little book”—Some say this little book is the Old Testament, others think it refers to Revelation chapters 11-22. However, none of these seems to be satisfactory. There are many evidences pointing towards it being the book mentioned in chapter 5. Please read those 6 reasons.

10.11 says “prophesy again”, thus showing that the prophecy is divided into two parts. The first part is from the first seal to the blowing of the seventh trumpet; and the second part is from the seventh trumpet to the new heaven and the new earth. After the sounding of the seventh trumpet there come forth the plagues of the seven bowls. How do we know that the second part of the little book not only speaks of the kingdom and the new heaven and new earth but also includes the seven bowls? It is because in 10.10 it is stated that after John has eaten the little book his belly is made bitter though it is sweet as honey in his mouth. And hence there is both bitterness and sweetness, thus proving both blessing and woe are included here.

Since the book is opened at the sounding of the seventh trumpet, it additionally can be said that the first part of the little book is sealed while its second part is open. Consequently, with regard to the prophecy contained in this book, the first part is a mystery; that is to say, it remains a mystery from the first seal to the seventh trumpet—from 6.1 to 11.19. But it can be said that the second part of the prophecy is open since not only in 10.7 is it clearly stated that at the sounding of the seventh trumpet the mystery of God is finished, but also in 11.15 it is distinctly declared that at that time the kingdom is come. The second part commences with the seventh trumpet (yet not its sounding) and continues on to the new heaven and the new earth, that is, from the time of 12.1 to 22.22.

The judgments of the seven seals and of the seven trumpets constitute the procedure for opening the book with a view to bringing in the kingdom and also eternity.

21.2 This is a holy city. Whereas in the past God had only a holy temple and not a holy city, nevertheless, on the earth and in that holy temple He did dwell; now, though, the holy city supplants the holy temple, and all its inhabitants are priests. The old Jerusalem was built by men and had become old; the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven and is wholly new. During the millennial kingdom the New Jerusalem is suspended in the air. It has not descended to the earth because on earth there is yet the old Jerusalem. When the New Jerusalem does come down from heaven it seems from the record here that she has not yet taken off her bridal attire. At the time of the marriage supper of the Lamb she is the bride. Now in eternity she is to be the wife of the Lamb.

21.9 Now the name of the wife of the Lamb is given. Many people consider the church to be the wife of the Lamb since, they say, there cannot be a literal New Jerusalem in the future. Many are the proofs, however, that the New Jerusalem is a literal new city (see the 17 points).

“The foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with all manner of precious stones”—There is a basic difference between gold and precious stone. The first is a single chemical element, but the second is a compound. Gold is directly created by God, whereas precious stone is the result of the fusing together of several elements under the earth after they have gone through extremely high temperature accompanied by pressure. In other words, what the precious stone represents is not that which God gives directly to man, rather it stands for the refining work which the Holy Spirit has done in man. The life which God gives to us is gold, the life which God forges in us is precious stone. God does not stop with merely imparting the life of Christ to us; He goes on to incorporate or work into us that life in us.

Don't confuse the working of the Holy Spirit with our own refinement by the Holy Spirit. We shall not be fused into God. Yes, we are spirit, soul and body; but, we are not God. Those such as myself who will be resurrected for the new city shall be its pillars. The New City is not the Church, nor is it God. God and the Lamb are at the center of the new city.

“And names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel”—Israel represents the law of God. “And the twelve gates were twelve pearls” (21.21)—Pearl stands for the righteousness of God. Together they show that the entry into the city of God is according to God’s law and righteousness. “And the twelve gates were twelve pearls”—Pearl is formed by the secretion of a mollusk in the sea after it is wounded by a grain of sand or other foreign matter. Hence pearl signifies that life which comes out of death. It represents the life which the Lord Jesus Christ has released in His death on the non-atoning side (that is, not the redemption on the cross, but resurrection life).

Rev. 15.1 is a great sign of the bowls of the 7th trumpet which is part of the mystery still because the mystery is not fulfilled until Jesus steps down on the mount of olives, and He will not step down until the bowls are done in the 3rd woe.

The Church as we know it today no longer exists in the 1000 years or the new city. It does not becomes something else leaving others out. The Church never includes within it others, so those saved in the OT times and those saved in the 1000 years make up something new along with those who were saved in the dispensation of grace...just like the Lord's day is not the Sabbath, but something completely new and different.

The church was only for the dispensation of grace in this mystery age of the church. You will not be saying in 500 or 1000 years from now, if you are saved, "look at us, we are the church". The mystery is finished which is the church arrayed with Christ. And you never see Nee mentioning a future church, so don't misread him.

Nee’s words are clear: Now the name of the wife of the Lamb is given. Many people consider the church to be the wife of the Lamb since, they say, there cannot be a literal New Jerusalem in the future. Many are the proofs, however, that the New Jerusalem is a literal new city.

Nee is clearly saying here the church is not the New City. I believe him, because his evidence outweighs yours.

Nee writes...(8) At the time of chapter 17 when John sees Babylon, he cannot cease wondering because it is a mystery which must be explained by an angel to him. Here, though, John is not amazed at all, neither does he need an angel to interpret to him. Hence what is here before us must be an actual city.

John is wondering what this religious Rome in Rev. 17 is all about, but there is no wondering in Rev. 21 because he knows what it is. If there was the same kind of unknowing in Rev. 21 as there was in Rev. 17, I think the Bible would have indicated it. There is no wonderment in Rev. 21, so we know he is not wondering as he did in Rev. 17.

Rev. 21.9,10 "I will shew the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem". The woman is a city, the New Jerusalem. In it are the pillars of resurrected-saved. God and the Lamb are at the center.

Rev. 22 is the last warning so John prostrates himself. He is not wondering as though he can't understand like in Rev. 17, for he knows the city which is spoken of in Rev. 21.

Nee writes...(9) People deem the wife of the Lamb to be the church because they adopt a totally spiritual view of eternity. Who knows, though, but what in the new heaven and the new earth everything is real and substantial? If God chose to use gold and silver in the building of Solomon’s temple, why can there not be gold and silver in the building by God of a new city in the new heaven and the new earth?

If this new city is to be on Mars and it is not on Mars now, that would make sense because the 1000 years has not started and then finished.

The eye has never seen such a thing as a city 1500 x 1500 miles, let alone on Mars. I don't even think we can fathom it.

The spirit of man is permanently existing yet unseen, and God is spirit and cannot be seen. He will be seen at the center of the new city in the form with the Lamb having one face, because He is one with the Son and the Spirit. He is one Being. Do the things that are eternal which are unseen require the New City to be unseen? Would you like to live in an unseen city? Of course not.

Though the New City will have a life span to it in being transformed from 1500 x 1500 in area then 1500 x 1500 x 1500 in volume, further changes will occur in eternity, things we cannot even fathom. "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him" (1 Cor. 2.9).

The church which is "enrolled in the heaven" (Heb. 12.23) is because the New Jerusalem is still in heaven. We are enrolled, because we who are saved will be in the New City one day that will one day come down after the 1000 year reign.

We have to reject the notion of a leeist that "we have already come to it! That means, in the church life we are the New Jerusalem, and we are becoming the New Jerusalem."

Nobody can come before the high priest naked. We first need spiritually clothed resurrected new bodies. Our spirit is raised up in resurrection life and we touch the heavenly. But, never think you are the New Jerusalem, for we are to be inhabitants of the New Jerusalem.

Nee said...(10) Since many at that time are to be resurrected bodily, that is, they are to have a spiritual body, will they not need a place to stay?

To have a spiritual body resurrected does not mean it is invisible. Was Jesus' resurrected body invisible? No.

We need to reject a leeist who says, "We will stay in the Triune God. Where will the Triune God stay? In us!"

When a leeist says this they confuse its meaning. That God is in us and we in God is showing perfect according in agreement and harmony. It is not saying we are permanently in this place called God, but rather we are to be the pillars of the New City and God and the Lamb will be its center to be with us. For us humans a physical city is as good as it gets; it can't get any better. For if we live in the unseen we can never see anything like a blind person forever blind. Our soul and spirit are invisible, but not our bodies. This is ok for God, because He is advanced and far beyond us, but not for humans. Just like characters in a computer game cannot come out of the computer, so we cannot come out of God's design for us.

Nee wrote...(11) Here we are told the structure, dimensions, and materials of the city of New Jerusalem. These can hardly be applied to the church.

The OT has many shadows and types, but this is less so in the NT because we are moving toward the physical new city.

The spiritual significance of the size of the new city is not numerology, but for our expectations of how many will be saved so we align our salvation with the size of the new city. For example, many people think at least 1 in 10 people are saved or even better than that. This is unrealistic considering the size of the new city.

We should not think as a leeist that the new city is invisible because "Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it" (Rev. 21.22), as Nee said...21.22 There is no temple in the new city. During the Old Testament period only the temple was holy, the rest of the land was not reckoned holy. At the time of the Lord Jesus the temple was still on the earth. During the church period there is a temple in heaven but none on earth. In the millennium, however, there will be a temple on earth as well as one in heaven. In the new heaven and the new earth there will no more be a temple, since there will be no need to offer sacrifice for sin. The entire new city is most holy. Formerly, men communed with God through the temple; now, all who live in the city can commune with God directly because He and the Lamb have become the center of this new city.

A spiritual dwelling of God is not only invisible in our spirit, but has outward manifestation as well such as in eternity future at the center of the New City. God's ultimate aim is to walk with us, not just dwell in our spirits by His Spirit.

Nee said...(12) 21.27 plainly implies that many will enter the city. If the city is the church which is itself made up of people, how can people enter into people? Furthermore, 21.25 says that the gates of the city are not shut by day. How can this fact be something related to the church?

Never believe a leeist when he tells you, "The church is the organism of the Triune God." An organism is a single conscience collective creature. We are not that. We are member individuals of the body of Christ, not a single organism.

This is not the meaning of the 12 gates as said by leeists, "believing into Christ and being baptized into Christ who is the gate" for Jesus has us enter through the door of salvation. What then are the gates? There is the gate and the narrow path in Matt. 7.14. All who are saved should enter the gate representing our choice to do so and the path outwardly in conduct. This is the meaning of the parable: there are two gates and two pathways. There is the small gate and the large gate. There is the narrow path and the wide path. Choose the small gate to walk the narrow path instead of the big gate with the wide path otherwise you shall lose the reward of the kingdom. And the gates of the new city are also to be entered by choice to receive renewal of their bodies.

Nee explains... 21.12-14 “Having twelve gates, . . . and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: . . . And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb”—Whom does this corporate man include? Having the twelve names of the tribes of Israel on its gates and the twelve names of the apostles on its foundations, this city includes all the Old and the New Testament saints. At the time of the new heaven and the new earth, all who have the life of God are to be included in the New Jerusalem. 22.2 “And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations”—In 12.4 it is said that there will be no more pain or death, which in addition intimates that there is no more disease. But nowhere is it stated that there will be no more weakness (see Matt. 8.17 and cf. “infirmities” with “diseases”). There is a difference between disease and weakness. Where will this weakness come from? Well, since the people on the new earth possess a body of flesh and blood, they will still be subject to weakness. How, then, can they live forever? Apparently the leaves of the tree of life must heal their weakness continuously so that they will not be wearied.

The gates of the new city are for entering by those outside the new city to receive renewal of their bodies
May this then establish the New City is not the Church, but the House of all those who are saved.

We should reject this notion by Witness Lee when he said, "Each gate of the holy city is one pearl, signifying that the entrance to the city is unique and is once for all" (Revelation 21:21 footnote 2, taken from the Recovery Version).

A gate is something to continue to go in and out of especially with those living outside the new city who needed renewal of their physical bodies and so many gates. These gates remain open to continue to receive renewal by eating of the tree life in the city.

“And names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel”—Israel represents the law of God. “And the twelve gates were twelve pearls” (21.21)—Pearl stands for the righteousness of God. Together they show that the entry into the city of God is according to God’s law and righteousness.

Nee said... (13) Here in 21.9 the wife of the Lamb is shown to John. Now if the wife of the Lamb is a mystery and the New Jerusalem is an explanation, how can an explanation not be taken literally?

Exactly! A leeist will try to tell you that the Woman is the New Jerusalem is something else. I don't buy it. The imagery of the woman is explained as being the New City which is really the place the saved will live which is physical, visible and we shall see God and the Lamb in the center of the New City.

If you say (a) means (b) means (c) who is to stop you from saying then (c) really means (d)? I think God simply said (a) the woman is (b) the new city, and (b) does not mean (c) church. The church was done with in the dispensation of grace. All who are saved will be in (b).

Let us not fall into the trap of thinking physical things cannot be spiritual. Even a walk to the store is can be a spiritual affair. Was Jesus' resurrected physical body unspiritual? Of course not! Neither is the New City just because it has physical dimensions.

Nee said...(14) The New Jerusalem is contrasted with the Old Jerusalem. As Old Jerusalem is a literal city, so New Jerusalem must also be a literal city. It therefore cannot be taken as the church.

Don't confuse the old Jerusalem in the 1000 year reign with the Jerusalem in the OT. The New Jerusalem is not the divine life of God. The divine life of God is the Holy Spirit, not a city. A leeist is wrong saying "the New Jerusalem...it is the divine life of God."

The reason why in Rev. 21.22 God and the Lamb are its temple is because the old Jerusalem has passed away which had the Temple.

21.22 There is no temple in the new city. During the Old Testament period only the temple was holy, the rest of the land was not reckoned holy. At the time of the Lord Jesus the temple was still on the earth. During the church period there is a temple in heaven but none on earth. In the millennium, however, there will be a temple on earth as well as one in heaven. In the new heaven and the new earth there will no more be a temple, since there will be no need to offer sacrifice for sin. The entire new city is most holy. Formerly, men communed with God through the temple; now, all who live in the city can commune with God directly because He and the Lamb have become the center of this new city.

Nee said... (15) Galatians 4 distinctly tells us that “the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother” (v.26). This Jerusalem is quite different from the church, so Paul says it is our (that is, the church’s) mother. Thus we cannot maintain that New Jerusalem is the church.

Remember what is indicated here that the church is not the New Jerusalem. Matt. 12.50 has nothing to do with mother here in this verse. Matt. 12.50 is talking about those in Christ who do His will, not the actual New City.

A mother is caring, just as the New City is a caring place with all the amenities needed. Don't get caught up in the physical being unspiritual. The physical is most spiritual as long as it is according to God's will.

We can disregard obstinacy of leeists regarding this verse when they say, "the verse does not say that the Jerusalem that is above is free which is the church's mother". Let me quote the verse again, "the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother" (v.26). What do the leeists worship I do not know, but it is not God of the Bible.

Suffice it to say the New Jerusalem cannot be the Church if the New Jerusalem is the Church's mother. Very simple!

Nee said...(16) Hebrews 11 says that Abraham “looked for the city which hath the foundations, whose builder and maker is God” (v.10). The New Jerusalem is a true city with foundations. Did Abraham look for the church? He could not have known the church at his time.

The foundations of the city are said to have been made by God. Foundation is not the key word, for obviously it must be approved by God. The key word is “city”. All cities are physical, even the New Jerusalem when it makes contact with the new earth. All cities need foundations, even eternal cities. Thank God we don't have to live in an invisible city with invisible foundations and an invisible God, but we will be in a physical city with physical foundations that are eternal and we can physically see God and the Lamb at the center. Physical is spiritual if it is God's will. While leeists seek a land of invisibility and call it spiritual, I do not believe Christians, my brothers and sisters, want that.  

There is a prize waiting which is the millennial reign with Christ given to some believers. Does Nee agree? Of course! He said... What they have received through faith are but demonstrations to assure them of obtaining the promised kingdom: “And these all, having had witness borne to them through their faith, received not the promise, God having provided some better thing concerning us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect” (Heb. 11.39-40). What is the promise referred to here? None other than the kingdom: those people have already had the witness borne to them that God will give them the kingdom.

Gal. 3.16 "But to Abraham were the promises spoken and to his seed". What then are these promises to Jesus? It is for Him to have the millennial reign and to be the center of the New City with God the Father.

Luke 3.8 says the descendants of Abraham are nothing, but like rocks. What counts is your repentance. Believers will be the pillars of the New City, not the actual New City, for we need a place to live with God. If we are the New City, then we have no place since we cannot be God. God would not leave us naked and unsheltered. The New City does not depend on the sun.

Nee writes...(17) Hebrews 12.22 mentions the heavenly Jerusalem and the innumerable hosts of angels. Verse 23 of the same chapter speaks of the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven (this means the church), speaks also of God who is the Judge of all, and of spirits of just men made perfect (the saints of old). There are altogether five classes enumerated here; namely, (1) God, (2) angels, (3) saints of the Old Testament time, (4) the church, and (5) the heavenly Jerusalem. The church and the heavenly Jerusalem are listed separately, therefore they cannot be the same.

I have to tell you how grateful I am to God for Watchman Nee's writings to enumerate these things. I may have missed many things.

Heb. 12.23 in our coming to the New City does not mean the New City needs to be presently physical. Only when on the new earth will the new city be physical. Presently it is in heaven and has not come down yet.

We know God and the Lamb are the same uncreated God. That they are distinct is to show God revealing Himself in His 1st and 2nd Persons. Other verses tell us there can only be this One God so that Father, Lamb and Spirit are One Being. But nowhere do we find in the Bible a city is the church, not even in church locales. There is the church of Ephesus, because it is in the city of Ephesus. Ephesus is not the church. It is just a town. Just as the believers in a locality need a city, so do believers in eternity future need a city. Don't confuse the Godhead's 3 Persons as being different beings just because the church in one dispensation is not the new city in eternity future. John 1.1 tells us the Father and the Son are One Being. I can find no verses to say the Church is the New City. And don't be modalist by saying God the Father is the Son. This can happen if you think the church is the new city and Godhead is the new city and you don't make the distinctions by enumerating. You mingle everything together mindlessly. How lost are leeists without life!
 

Sincerely,

Tammy Hill