Watchman Nee

[Socialite]

My ideas, since Mike has stated his:

Scripture seems to picture humans for the most part as unitary beings. Seldom is their spiritual nature addressed independently of or apart from the body. Having said that, I recall passages which point to an immaterial aspect of human beings which is separable from their material existence. Scripture indicates there is an intermediate state involving personal conscious existence. This state is incomplete and abnormal pending resurrection (2 Cor 5:2-4).

I subscribe to the idea of "conditional unity." Our normal state is a materialized unitary being. Scripture nowhere urges us to escape from the body, as if the body were inherently evil. This monistic condition can be broken down, and at death it is, so that the immaterial aspect lives on even as the material decomposes. At the resurrection, there will be a return to bodily condition.

Contrast a chemical compound with a mixture of elements.
In a mixture the atoms of each element retain their distinctiveness because they retain their separate identities. If human nature were a mixture, then the spiritual and physical qualities would somehow be distinguishable, and one could act as either a spiritual or a physical being. On the other hand, in a compound the atoms of all the elements involved enter into new combinations to form molecules. These molecules have characteristics or qualities which are unlike those of any of the elements of which they are composed. IN the case of simple table salt, one cannot detect the qualities of either sodium or chloride. It is possible, however, to break p the compound where once again we can have the original elements with their distinctive characteristics. These characteristics would include the poisonous nature of chloride, whereas the compound product is nonpoisonous.

I like to think of humans as unitary compounds (material and immaterial). The spiritual and physical elements are not always distinguishable, for the human is a unitary subject. There is no struggler between the material and immaterial nature. The compound is dissolvable, however dissolution takes place at death. At the resurrection a compound will again be formed, with the soul (if we choose to call it that) once more becoming inseparably attached to the body.

So why the fuss over this subject -- what are the implications?

1. Each human is to be treated as a unity. One's spiritual condition cannot be health with independently of physical and psychological condition and vice versa. Psycosomatic medicine and therapy is property (or maybe we should say pneumopsychosomatic) The Christian who desires to be healthy will give attention to such matters as diet, rest and exercise. Any attempt to deal with the spiritual condition apart from the physical condition and mental and emotional state will be less than completely successful, as will any attempt to deal with human emotions apart form one's relationship to God.

2. Humans are complex beings. Their nature is not reducible to a single principle.

3. The different aspects of human nature are all to be attended to and respected. There is no depreciating of the body, emotions or intellect. The gospel is an appeal to the whole person. Significantly, Jesus became fully human, for he came to redeem us wholly.

4. Religious development or maturity does not consist of subjugating one part of the human nature to another. There is no part of the human nature that is evil per se. Total depravity means that sin infects all of what a human is, not merely the body or mind or emotions. So the Christian not aim at bringing the body under the control of the soul. Similarly, sanctification is not to be thought of as involving only one part of the human nature, for no one part is the exclusive seat of good or of righteousness. God is at work renewing the whole of what we are. This is why ascetism, the sense of denying one's natural bodily needs simply for its own sake, it false teaching.

5. Human nature is not inconsistent with the scriptural teaching of a personal conscious -- more of an eschatological tangent here.

Since we are unitary beings

[mfblume]

Socialite,

Have you hear do the trichotomist idea of how all of mankind must be made new by seeing the spirit made new at new birth, the soul being made new during Christian life, and the body made new at resurrection?

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Socialite,

Have you hear do the trichotomist idea of how all of mankind must be made new by seeing the spirit made new at new birth, the soul being made new during Christian life, and the body made new at resurrection?

Not sure I understand the question...

but I haven't heard or clarified the trichotomist position on what happens at salvation. I'd imagine it's just as you described above.

I see the total man being both saved, but yet not fully -- and the total man (not just his body) being completely redeemed at the resurrection.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Not sure I understand the question...

but I haven't heard or clarified the trichotomist position on what happens at salvation. I'd imagine it's just as you described above.

I see the total man being both saved, but yet not fully -- and the total man (not just his body) being completely redeemed at the resurrection.

The point is the total man was lost, not just a part of him, and trichotomy does not excuse two thirds or one third of mankind away as not requiring any salvation. You noted you did not believe a single part of us was lost, but rather all of us, and tripartite thinking agrees with that.

[mfblume]

[Michael The Disciple]

Heres something from him that is on a practical level.

Watchman Nee On Headcovering

http://annawood.wordpress.com/2010/0...ead-coverings/

Leave a comment
The matter of head covering belongs to God’s government. For those who do not know God’s government, it is impossible to exhort them to have their heads covered. They will not be able to understand how much is involved in this matter. But those who have seen God’s government in God’s revealed Word are able to appreciat…e the tremendous connection between head covering and God’s government. ~Watchman Nee

God has shown us that there are three different heads: God is head, Christ is head, and man is head. ..God has sovereignly willed that the head of Christ is God Himself, so Christ must obey; the head of man is Christ, so man must obey; and the head of woman is man, and so woman should have the sign of obedience on her head.~Watchman Nee

The meaning of head covering is: I submit myself to God’s government; I accept God’s appointed position; I dare not nullify His government by the grace I have received; I do not even dare to think about it; on the contrary, I accept God’s government. ~Watchman Nee

As Christ accepts God as His head, so should every man accept Christ as his head. Likewise, woman should representatively accept man as her head. In covering the head, the woman signifies that she is not head, that she is as if she has no head—for it is covered.~Watchman Nee

Here I would like to tell Christian women that God has appointed man to be woman’s head. In these days when God’s authority is unknown in the world, the Lord demands this order only in the church. It therefore affects the very fact of our being Christians. God requires us in the church to accept what He has appointed governmentally.~Watchman Nee

When a sister covers her head, she is standing before God on the basis of Christ’s position before God and man’s position before Christ. God wants the woman to cover her head in order to manifest His government on earth. This privilege falls only to woman.~Watchman Nee

“If any man seemeth to be contentious.” There are many who like to argue that it is not necessary for woman to have her head covered. They argue that God being Christ’s head, Christ being the head of every man, and man being woman’s head are matters which concern the Corinthians, not the universe. ~Watchman Nee

“But, thank God, to be a Christian is a universal, not a Corinthian, concern. Thank God, God being the head of Christ is also a universal, not a Corinthian, affair. And I too, the least of all God’s servants, say likewise: being the head of woman is a universal matter, not just a Corinthian matter.”~Watchman Nee

“If any man seemeth to be contentious.” Some seem to imagine that the sisters need not have their heads covered. They withstand Paul’s word and oppose what he has received from the Lord and delivered to them. What does Paul reply? “We have no such custom.” The “we” points to Paul and the apostles. There is no such cust…om among the apostles that the sisters are not covered. This is a matter which is non-negotiable. If any still wish to contend, the answer is “neither the churches of God.” It is therefore beyond contention.~Watchman Nee

“If any man seemeth to be contentious.” Some seem to imagine that the sisters need not have their heads covered. They withstand Paul’s word and oppose what he has received from the Lord and delivered to them. What does Paul reply? “We have no such custom.” The “we” points to Paul and the apostles. There is no such cust…om among the apostles that the sisters are not covered. This is a matterwhich is non-negotiable. If any still wish to contend, the answer is “neither the churches of God.” It is therefore beyond contention.~Watchman Nee

“When many of the sisters in the church take the place given to woman and learn to cover their heads, they send out an unspoken word of testimony to the angels in the air, to the effect that God has obtained in the church what He desires. Because of this, woman must have on her head a sign of authority, a testimony to the angels.” ~Watchman Nee

‎”If any church does not believe, Paul’s answer is, “We have no such custom, neither the churches of God.” None of the local churches which the apostles had visited had any such custom of arguing about woman’s head covering. So the answer to any who argue is that there is no such practice as arguing about it.”~Watchman Nee

‎”I have on my head a sign of authority. I am a woman with my head covered. This is a most excellent testimony to the angels, to the fallen and to the unfallen ones. No wonder Satan persistently opposes the matter of head covering. It really puts him to shame. We are doing what he has failed to do. What God did not receive from the angels, He now has from the church.” ~Watchman Nee

“Today woman has a sign of authority on her head because of the angels, thatis, as a testimony to the angels. Only the sisters in the church can testify to this, for the women of the world know nothing of it. Today when the sisters have the sign of authority on their heads, they bear the testimony that, “I have covered my head so that I do not have my own head, for I do not seek to be head. My head is veiled and I have accepted man as head, and to accept man as head means that I have accepted Christ as head and God as head. But some of you angels have rebelled against God.” This is what is meant by “because of the angels.” ~Watchman Nee

[mfblume]

Study of spirit, soul and body is VERY practical.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Talk about thread resurrecting! lol