Cutting Straight the Word of the Truth
on the Divine Order in the Church (Part 2)
Feminism or the Pure Revelation of the Word of God?
The Word of God reveals that in God’s administration of His economy, a very important position is assigned to the women. After man was created, what happened to man was very much related to the woman. Whether or not God can have His way on earth in His purpose depends very much upon the sisters’ actions and reactions. If the women or the sisters will function properly, God will have His way; otherwise, there will surely be a setback. After the fall of man, God came in, not to do something through man, but through the woman. As the subtle serpent, the enemy of God, came in through the woman, God chose to defeat the enemy also through woman—the same channel by which he came. In Genesis 3 the serpent came in through the woman, and in the same chapter, God promised that this woman would bring forth a seed who would bruise the head of the serpent. Thus, the deliverance was promised by God through the woman just as the fall was brought in by Satan through the woman. This underscores the importance of the sister’s position in the Bible.
As important as the sister’s position is in the Bible, it also shows us that the role of sisters is the result of frailty and vulnerability of the woman and her not taking the man whom God had ordained to be her head as her head. Her privileged role to bring forth the promised seed is a fulfillment of a promise God made due to her failure. Following this thought, it becomes illogical for anyone to boast of being a woman and claim equality or superiority of the female over the male. It runs counter to God’s divine ordination, which is for woman to be subject to man before the fall, and for woman to be under the ruling of man after the fall.
The Sister’s Claim
On May of 2010, the dissenting sister put out an article on her website entitled “Machismo Useless.” In that article, she presented an illustration of three female characters in the New Testament in an attempt to wield them as examples of alleged equality, if not superiority, of women to men in the Bible. She began her article by saying:
“It is noteworthy to realize that it was a female who brought forth the Lord Jesus to the earth that He might fulfill the judicial redemption for us. It was also a female who first witnessed the Lord Jesus' resurrection from among the dead that eventually, He as the life-giving Spirit could accomplish His organic salvation in us. It is also a female, the bride, whom the Lord as the Bridegroom will come back for.”
As innocuous as it may seem to be, with the showcasing of three females – Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the Magdalene, and the bride of Christ in His second coming – it is nonetheless clear, from the tenor of her argument, that her purpose in mentioning these women is not to study their virtues and characteristics and what we can learn from them, but to serve as exemplary symbols of women’s supposed elite standing in the Bible. This is a point she made sure her readers would not miss by again emphasizing in her conclusion:
“Therefore being male is for the expression of the Son and for defeating the devil and not for a display of superiority over the female. Indeed is machismo useless.”
More than words, the conclusion is short but nonetheless speaks volumes about her spirit and intent. To prove a point on the uselessness of an alleged practice of “machismo” by the leading brothers who do not agree with her different teachings and do not support her eccentric practices, she actually exposed herself by bringing in a dangerous and different teaching of feminism into the church, a concept that is based on the principle of women’s liberation in the fallen world that advocates equal rights of women.
It is therefore the aim of this rejoinder to examine the principle of feminism as compared to the revelation of the Word of God. We shall firstly look at the teaching and exposition of brothers Nee and Lee to see what spiritual lessons we can learn from the women cited by the dissenting sister other than exalting their status of being female.
The Case of Mary, the Mother of Jesus
The birth of Christ was a fulfillment of many great prophecies in the Old Testament. The first prophecy in the Old Testament in Genesis 3:15 tells us about the seed of woman (Gen. 3:15). With the fall of man, after the serpent had worked himself into man through the woman, God gave a promise that the seed of the woman, Christ, shall crush the head of the serpent.
In Isaiah 7:14 we find another prophecy concerning Christ: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son.” This promise was fulfilled in Matthew 1:22 and 23 by a virgin conceiving a child. This child came to be the seed of the woman. In Galatians 4:4 Paul says that Christ was born under the law and also was born of the woman. Christ came not only to fulfill the law, but also to fulfill the promise that the seed of the woman would bruise the head of the serpent.
By reviewing the ministry of brothers Nee and Lee, we see the various characteristics of Mary through whom Christ was born:
Her Believing
“Of Mary being blessed among women (v. 42), being the mother of her Lord (v. 43), and being blessed because of believing (v. 45).” (W. Lee, Prophesying in the Church Meetings for the Organic Building Up of the Church as the Body of Christ (Outlines), Chapter 7, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Sober Mind
“In the New Testament there was another mother, Mary, the mother of the Lord Jesus. Being of a humble background, she was not highly educated. Her prayer, however, demonstrates that her mind was also very sober and her thinking was not at all confused.” (W. Lee, Lessons on Prayer, Chapter 6, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Rich Equipping and Exercise in God’s Word
“Mary’s word [in Luke 1:46-55] is not too long, yet it is very rich. Almost every sentence is quoted from the Old Testament. She put crucial points from the Old Testament together to produce a psalm of praise. Doubtless, she must have been very familiar with the Old Testament. Not only so, she must have been well exercised in it.” (W. Lee, Words of Training for the New Way, Vol. 2, Chapter 5, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Working in Coordination with God
“Mary’s prophesying was in the principle of the New Testament, which involves the cooperation of God and man, man working in coordination with God. God needed a woman like Mary who spent much effort to study the Scriptures, was well versed in God’s word, loved the Lord inwardly, and had fellowship with the Lord.” (W. Lee, Crucial Words of Leading in the Lord's Recovery, Book 2: Leading the Saints to Practice the New Way Ordained by the Lord, Chapter 6, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Being a Very Small Woman
“Mary was a very good woman. At the same time she was a very small woman. The better a person is in the world, the smaller his head is. Often, the best persons have the smallest heads; they are the most muddled ones.” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 1) Vol. 17: Notes on Scriptural Messages (1), Chapter 12, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Humility
“In 1:48-50 Mary says, ‘Because He has looked upon the low estate of His slave. For behold, from now on all generations will count me blessed; because the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is His name; and His mercy is unto generations and generations to those who fear Him.’ Both Mary and Zachariah stress God’s mercy (vv. 54, 58, 72, 78), realizing their low estate (v. 48) and humbly (v. 52) recognizing that they are not worthy of being favored by God.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of Luke, Message 4, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Being Not Puffed Up or Self-Exalting
“This kind of person can only say, together with Mary, ‘My soul magnifies the Lord’ (Luke 1:46). Such a one is no longer openly or secretly puffed up and self-exalting, but knows himself to be useless and is willing to humble himself and exalt the Lord. Now he no longer wants to steal the Lord's glory and give it to the self (soul), but he magnifies the Lord in his soul. If the Lord is not being magnified in the soul, then the Lord is not being magnified in any place.” (W. Nee, The Spiritual Man, (3 volume set), Chapter 14, Section 9, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Consecration of Her Body for the Lord
“Mary gave the Lord a body, and through this body the Lord manifested the life of God. In the same way, we should give ourselves to the Lord and receive Him into us. When we do this, He will make us live a life that is the same as His.” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 2) Vol. 36: Central Messages, Chapter 2, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Soul Being Pierced by the Sufferings of Her Son
“Jesus was the Son of sorrow [Isaiah 53:3], the Son of suffering. Rachel was not the only one to experience this sorrow; Mary, the mother of Christ, also experienced it. According to Luke 2:35, her soul was pierced by the sufferings of her son.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of Genesis, Message 90, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Love for the Lord and Her Willingness to Forsake Her Own Status
“If a person wants to allow Christ to be born in him, and if he wants to experience Christ’s death and resurrection, this person must be a Mary.... The first Mary loved the Lord Jesus to the extent that she forsook her own status…. For this pure virgin to receive this commission, she had to sacrifice her status. Even her fiancé misunderstood her and wanted to send her away. This shows that this Mary had experienced the Lord Jesus, allowed Him to pass through her, and entirely disregarded her own status.” (W. Lee, The Crucified Christ, Chapter 8, Section 4, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Absolute Surrender
“According to Luke 1:26-38, the birth of Christ was carried out through Mary's surrender…. After listening to the angel, Mary said, ‘Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word’ (Luke 1:38). This may appear simple, but the price was extremely high. To bring forth Christ Mary paid a very high price—the cost of her whole being. It is not easy to bring forth Christ; it is not cheap. If we would bring forth Christ, we must pay a price. Mary did.” (W. Lee, The King's Antecedents and Status, Chapter 5, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Submission
“We also need to see in this picture how submissive Mary was. She was so much favored with the Lord’s mercy, yet she was so humble and submissive to Joseph in everything. She had the ability to conceive, but she did not receive any leading from the Lord concerning the necessary moves. The leading to move came only to Joseph.” (W. Lee, The New Testament Service, Chapter 3, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Need for Coordination
“If you have read the two preceding chapters on the New Testament service, you now may be ready simply to be a virgin, so single and simple to conceive Christ of the Holy Spirit and bring Him forth. This may be so, but you still need Joseph. You should not think that you are so adequately prepared that you need nothing more. Regardless of how wonderful you are, you still need Joseph. The Lord may grant you the favor of conceiving Christ, but the Lord will not grant you the leading and guidance so that you will know where to go and what to do. For this, you need the coordination of Joseph.” (W. Lee, The New Testament Service, Chapter 3, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“The angel of the Lord appeared to Mary concerning the conceiving of Jesus. However, when it was necessary to move from the land of Israel to Egypt, the angel did not come to Mary, but to Joseph. You may be indeed wonderful, but you are wonderful only for conceiving, not for moving. The leading and guidance of the Lord’s move does not come through you, but through another to whom you are related. If you would know the Lord’s will regarding your move and the things you need to do, you need Joseph. The conceiving was by Mary, but the leading was not given to Mary, but to Joseph. This is wonderful! You may be today’s Mary, but you nevertheless need the coordination of Joseph…. Without Mary, there is no way for Joseph to conceive Jesus, and without Joseph, Mary does not know what to do or where to go, even though she has already conceived Jesus.” (W. Lee, The New Testament Service, Chapter 3, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
From the above-cited excerpts we find the proper humanity of Mary that was manifested in her various characteristics and virtues. In faith, she was blessed because of her unfeigned faith in the Lord’s word. In prayer, her sober-mindedness was demonstrated. In prophesying, her familiarity with the Old Testament and exercised manner in speaking the word of God accurately were exhibited. In spirit, she was humble, not puffed up or self-exalting. Nothing was more humiliating for her than to lose her own status. She was a sister who, though appearing to be small and lowly before man, actually stood tall in the eyes of God for her to have found grace with God (Luke 1:30).
In service and coordination, she considered herself but a humble slave of the Lord (Luke 1:38) and so she absolutely surrendered herself to the Lord’s will and arrangement for the fulfillment of His purpose. She realized that although it was she who was carrying Jesus in her womb, as it was God’s ordination in His creation for woman to give birth instead of man, God has revealed Himself and spoken concerning His move to Joseph instead of her. Hence, she kept her standing by humbling herself and was fully submissive to the man whom God has spoken to and entrusted to lead her all the way.
Never did Mary consider her being a vessel to carry the Savior in her womb and being the channel to bring forth Christ an elevation of her status to be superior to, or equal with, Joseph. Mary’s submission to follow Joseph signifies that she acknowledged herself to be the weaker vessel in God’s divine administration (1 Pet. 3:7). As one who is well-versed with the Scriptures, Mary realized that there really was nothing to boast or be proud of, for after all, her bearing a child as the seed of a woman was a fulfillment of the first promise of God after the fall of man which resulted from the weakness of the woman (Gen. 3:1-7, 15). Her being chosen by the Lord for the task was not of her own merit but as one who has been graced (Luke 1:28).
The Case of Mary, the Magdalene
Mary the Magdalene appeared in four different occasions in the four Gospels.
First, in Luke 8:1-3 we find Mary, from whom seven demons had been cast out by the Lord, together with many other women, ministering to the Lord and the twelve disciples out of their own possessions as they were preaching and announcing the gospel of the kingdom of God from city to city and village to village.
Second, in each of the four accounts of the crucifixion (Matt. 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-41; Luke 23:49; John 19:25), Mary was present, either standing at a distance with other women, or standing near the cross.
Third, in Matthew 27:61 and Luke 23:55-56, Mary watched as the Lord’s body was sealed inside the tomb provided by Joseph of Arimathea. She and the other women prepared the spices needed for the proper burial of His body.
Fourth, on the eighth day, at early dawn, Mary went to Jesus’ tomb and found that Jesus’ body was no longer in the tomb. She received a message from an angel that Jesus had resurrected and was the first person to see the risen Lord. She was thus the first witness of the resurrection (Matt. 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-11; John 20:1-18).
We do not see great exploits in Mary Magdalene in the four Gospels, yet with the help of the ministry, we have come to appreciate what is in her heart more than what is in her work.
Her Love for the Lord
“Many people followed the Lord but did not love the Lord. After they saw that the Lord died and was buried, they all went home. However, there was one among them, Mary, who came early to the tomb while it was yet dark on the day of the Lord Jesus’ resurrection. Did she not know that the Lord was in the tomb? Yes, she knew. So why did she still go there? She did so because of her love for the Lord.” (W. Lee, Crucified Christ, Chapter 9, Section 5, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Seeking After the Experience of the Lord
“Perhaps you have never realized that in this chapter, Mary the Magdalene is herself a sign. This sister signifies the ones who love the Lord and who seek the experience of Him.” (W. Lee, The Fulfillment of the Tabernacle and the Offerings in the Writings of John, Chapter 59, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Heart Being Completely Occupied, Captured, and Seized by the Lord
“Oh, many people had their demons cast out by the Lord, but only Mary the Magdalene sought after the Lord…. On the first day of the week, early in the morning while it was still dark, she came to the tomb. She did not care for anything; she came to seek the Lord…. Mary's heart was a heart completely occupied by the Lord. Mary's heart was a heart captured by the Lord. Oh, the heart of Mary the Magdalene was seized by the Lord!” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 1) Vol. 18: Notes on Scriptural Messages (2), Chapter 1, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Heart Being a Widow’s Heart
“What did Mary do? ‘But Mary stood outside at the tomb weeping.’ She had nowhere to go! She could not go away! How profound is the word ‘but!’ Mary thought in her heart, ‘You have a home to which you can go, but I cannot because the Lord is not here. You think that the disappearance of the Lord is not important, but I cannot feel the same. Who has taken Him away? How can I leave?’ She stood outside of the tomb weeping. In her eyes the world had become a void! The Lord was not there. What else could she do? She could not do anything but stand outside of the tomb and weep. Oh, Mary's heart was a widow's heart!” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 1) Vol. 18: Notes on Scriptural Messages (2), Chapter 1, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Tarrying by the Empty Sepulcher
“But Mary Magdalene remained there. Her tarrying was a positive act, a proof of her love for the Lord, and it was through this act of hers that the Lord Jesus revealed Himself to her. You see, the reason the Lord Jesus revealed Himself to Mary was entirely positive.” (W. Lee, How to Meet, Chapter 6, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Eagerly Waiting on the Lord’s Promise
“After Christ's death and burial, Mary had no heart to eat or sleep. Instead, she waited for something to happen. I do not believe that all the disciples could have forgotten that before His death Christ had said that He would be resurrected after three days.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of Genesis, Message 112, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Being the First to Discover the Fact of the Lord’s Resurrection
“Mary the Magdalene had no knowledge. She was absolutely in life and was altogether not in the tree of knowledge. She did not know anything. In a human sense, it was foolish for her to come to the tomb and especially to come early in the morning. Nevertheless, she was the first to discover the fact of the Lord’s resurrection.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of John, Message 45, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Persecuting the Lord
“In order to experience Christ… we need to persecute Him…. Mary Magdalene was an example of one who persecuted the Lord Jesus in a positive way. Early in the morning on the day of His resurrection, she pursued Him. She persecuted the resurrected Christ and persuaded Him to do something that He was not willing to do. We all need to seek the Lord in such a way.” (W. Lee, The Experience of Christ, Chapter 20, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Receiving the First Manifestation of the Lord
“In John 14:21, the Lord says that ‘he that loveth me...I will manifest myself unto him.’ Mary of Magdalene, on the morning of resurrection, because of her keen love for the Lord, sought for Him. She received the first manifestation of the Lord to His disciples after resurrection and became the first one who knew the resurrected Christ (John 20).” (W. Lee, The Knowledge of Life, Chapter 11, Section 9, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Receiving an Inward Knowledge of the Lord
“‘Jesus said to her, Mary! She turned and said to Him in Hebrew, Rabboni!’ (John 20:16). It is strange that as soon as the Lord mentioned her name, Mary recognized the Lord. This calling of her name by the Lord is a kind of revelation…. The Lord did not say anything to her; all He did was call her name, and she became clear within. She received inward knowledge. This is the meaning of a revelation.” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 2) Vol. 37: General Messages (1), Chapter 2, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Receiving the Best Portion from the Lord
“Mary the Magdalene was the last one to leave the site of the cross; she was the first one to come to the tomb…. Some may even have thought that she did not have a good mind; but she received the best portion, a portion which we may not have. Her better portion was her love for the Lord. Every Christian should desire and pursue after this.” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 1) Vol. 18: Notes on Scriptural Messages (2), Chapter 1, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Need for the Leading Brothers
“Sisters, you may love the Lord very much and might be the first to see the fact of His resurrection, but, like Mary, you still need the brothers to help you. Mary immediately ran to the two leading brothers, Peter and John, and told them of her discovery.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of John, Message 45, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Her Receiving of Corporate Blessings
“Mary the Magdalene met the Lord personally in the morning and obtained the blessing (John 20:16-18), but she still needed to be in the meeting with the saints in the evening to meet the Lord in a corporate way to obtain more and greater blessings (20:19-23)…. However good Mary’s fellowship was with the Lord during the morning watch, she still needed to come to the evening meeting to obtain all these blessings. These blessings are greater and more important. We may receive something from the Lord and even of the Lord during the morning watch, but… (w)e must also come to the meetings to receive something more important. The morning watch and the church meetings are two aspects. We need the personal blessing of the first aspect as well as the corporate blessing of the second.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of John, Message 47, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
These clear and profound speaking from the ministry tell it all. Mary received an exceedingly great blessing because she loved the Lord to the uttermost. She was not only the first one who discovered the Lord’s resurrection but also the first one whom the Lord contacted after His resurrection. Before Mary came to the tomb, the resurrection had already been accomplished. But Mary had to discover it by desperately loving and seeking the Lord, and she found it! The Lord’s word to Mary indicated that in resurrection, His disciples had become the same as He is insofar as they also were sons of God. On the day of His resurrection, the only begotten Son became the Firstborn (Rom. 8:29), and His disciples became His many brothers, the many sons of the Father (Heb. 2:10-11). Before that day, God had only one Son, the only begotten Son; but in Christ’s resurrection many sons were born.
It is noteworthy that Mary did not take pride in these revelations and experiences from the Lord on that day. Immediately after she found out the fact of the Lord’s resurrection, she ran to the disciples to relate her discovery (John 20:2) and sought their help. As soon as she received the revelation concerning His resurrection, she ran to the disciples to report to them (Matt. 28:8; Mark 16:10; Luke 24:9), not teach them. She did not go to the whole world and tell everybody of her new revelation to single herself out as a chosen vessel; rather, she went and reported it to the brothers and let the brothers do the teaching in due time, which Peter did on the day of Pentecost.
Moreover, when Mary was told to tell the disciples and Peter of the Lord’s charge to them (Mark 16:7), she did exactly as she was told to do despite knowing the condition of Peter at that time – weak and guilt-stricken. Even though she had the first-hand experience and knowledge from the Lord, yet she obeyed the Lord’s charge to go to the brothers and Peter. She acknowledged that she needed the brothers; she needed Peter also, even if he was weak. Despite apparently being the stronger one, she kept her standing as a sister in the divine administration and realized that it was not her portion to scorn or criticize the brother, whom the Lord has called for His purpose, who may be temporarily in weakness during that period in time. Finding the brother, not his fault, was what the Lord commissioned Mary to do, and she did just that. Nowhere in the Scriptures can we find any trace of her intention to try to “perfect” the brothers, or overstep her portion as a sister, like what the dissenting sister is doing and promoting. May we all learn these precious lessons from her in our service and coordination in the church.
The Case of the Bride of Christ in the Coming Millennial Kingdom
The church is the bride of Christ (Rev. 19:7, 9). The bride is the increase, the enlargement, of Christ (John 3:29-30). The bride of Christ is the counterpart of Christ, typified by Eve as the counterpart of Adam (Gen. 2:20b-23; Eph. 5:31-32). Eve was not created; she was a rib that was taken out of Adam. God built the rib into a woman to match the man. The man is the husband, and the woman is the counterpart of that husband. After Eve was built, she and Adam became one. The same is true of the church in relation to Christ.
“The ultimate consummation is the bride, the wife of the Lamb (21:2, 9). The entire holy city is a bride.” (W. Lee, The Basic Revelation in the Holy Scriptures, Chapter 8, Section 8, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“In Revelation 19 the bride is revealed on the wedding day, and in Revelation 21 this bride becomes the wife of Christ for eternity.” (W. Lee, Crystallization-Study of the Gospel of John, Message 4, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“The bride is the wife of Christ, and this wife will be consummated in the New Jerusalem (Eph. 5:24-25; Rev. 21:2, 9-10)…. In the New Jerusalem, all the saints, including the Old Testament and the New Testament saints, become the consummated wife of Christ.” (W. Lee, The Apostles' Teaching, Chapter 2, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“Revelation 19:7 says, ‘Let us rejoice and exult, and let us give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife has made herself ready.’ This refers to Christ’s marrying the New Jerusalem as His bride in the millennium. When Christ comes back, He will marry not a ‘male,’ but a female, a bride.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of Exodus, Message 4, Section 4, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“According to life, all the believers are males. However, according to love, we all are females. Christ is our Bridegroom, and we are His Bride. The relationship between the Bride and the Bridegroom is a matter of love, not a matter of life. Love is the unique requirement of married life. Therefore, we are living sons of the living God, whereas we are the loving Bride of our dear Bridegroom. How, then, would you answer this question: Are we, the believers in Christ, males or females? The proper way to answer is to reply that according to life we are males, but according to love we are females.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of Galatians, Message 5, Section 1, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“As regenerated beings, both male and female believers are a part of the wife. Since Christ is our husband we must depend on Him and take Him as our Head (Eph. 5:23).” (W. Lee, Life-Study of Romans, Message 12, Section 3, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“All the brothers are males in the old creation, but we are females in the new creation. In the new creation we are the bride of Christ; we are God’s building. The Body of Christ, the church, is a bride that was not created, but built up. God’s building, of course, is much finer than a physical building. The church’s building is organic by the growth in life. Because it is organic, it is intrinsic. Anything that is intrinsic is fine. The building up of the church is typified by God’s fine work of building a woman for man.” (W. Lee, The Organic Building Up of the Church as the Body of Christ to be the Organism of the Processed and Dispensing Triune God, Chapter 3, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“We are the virgins. Whether I am male or female, as one going forth to meet the Bridegroom I am a virgin. We are all virgins going out of the world to meet Him. We are all virgins looking for His coming. That is our goal. He is the coming Bridegroom. We are the virgins—we love Him, we are waiting for Him, we are eagerly seeking His coming. We are the children of the bridechamber with the Bridegroom, we are the guests invited to His wedding feast, and we are the virgins going out of the world to meet Him.” (W. Lee, Christ Versus Religion, Chapter 1, Section 5, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
The relationship between the bride and the Bridegroom is a matter of love. As females, like the bride is to the bridegroom, or a wife to her husband, our relationship to our beloved Lord to whom we have been betrothed is that of love, and our standing in relation to Him is that of submission.
In the church age today, as females in the eyes of God, we must keep ourselves as chase virgins loving our Lord, waiting for Him, and eagerly seeking for His coming. Hence, to be the future bride of Christ, we are all females who bear the sign of love, submission, and anticipation of the coming of our beloved Bridegroom.
The Proper Application of the Three Women Cited
There are at least six Marys mentioned in the New Testament. Two of them were cited by the dissenting sister in her article. The word Mary or Maria is the Greek form of Miriam or Mariamme, which means “their rebellion” (Num. 12:1, 10-15). The name connotes how the Lord’s salvation can transform the rebellious ones into submissive ones; the rebellious Miriam in the Old Testament becomes the submissive Mary in the New Testament. In nature Mary was rebellious, but she became submissive not only to the Lord’s compassion and love but also to His desire and preference, as in the cases of both Mary the mother of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Therefore, in the New Testament, the Marys were the ones who have been transformed by the Lord and have touched the Lord’s desire to the uttermost. For this reason, they were set forth as an example for the followers of the Lord.
In Revelation 22:17, we see the universal couple, the mingling of the processed and dispensed Triune God with the regenerated and transformed tripartite man. This couple is the ultimate consummation of the divine romance revealed in the Bible. According to the entire Bible, there is a divine romance between God the Creator, the Redeemer, who is the male, and His redeemed people who are the female. This is a basic matter revealed in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament God told His redeemed people Israel that He was their Husband and that they were His wife (Isa. 54:5; Jer. 3:14; 31:32; Hosea 2:19). When the Lord Jesus came, John the Baptist told his disciples that Christ was the Bridegroom coming to take the bride, which is the church (John 3:29). In Ephesians 5 Paul tells us that the church is typified by the wife and Christ by the husband. Paul also tells us that he has betrothed us as a virgin to one Husband, who is Christ (2 Cor. 11:2). Furthermore, Revelation 19:7 says, “The marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife has made herself ready.” This wife is the aggregate of all the overcoming saints from Abel until the Lord comes back. Finally, the New Jerusalem will be the consummation of God’s counterpart, the aggregate of all His redeemed and perfected people.
All the three women whom the dissenting sister cited in her article surely stood out in the Bible in many ways, yet their experiences are meant to serve not as a legacy of or bases for feminism, but, rather, as a model of how we all should be like Mary in following the Lord and in serving Him, not in our natural way which is rebellious, but in a transformed way by having His element mingled with us, and with His Spirit joined as one with our human spirit as the mingled spirit. As His bride, corporately we have our head covered as a sign that we have surrendered our headship to Him, in full dependency on Him and with unreserved love for Him through all eternity. Our being the bride does not in any way represent any symbol of sisters’ equality with or superiority over the brothers as championed by feminists, like what the dissenting sister has been teaching.
Feminism Refuted in the Word
Feminism as a principle and movement fighting for women’s equality in right is prevalent in the fallen world and had infiltrated the church right in the very first century of the church age with the toleration of the teaching of Jezebel, the self-appointed prophetess in the church in Thyatira (Rev. 2:20). It is a direct challenge to the divine order both in the old creation and in the new creation. This was a result of man’s first fall, when Satan found his prey in Eve, who failed to subject herself to Adam whom God in His governmental arrangement had set over her as her head.
“Now we must see the inward cause of man's first fall. I am strong on this point. The inward cause of man's fall was the woman's assuming the headship (vv. 2-3, 6). Eve was ensnared by the serpent because she forgot her husband. The Devil was crafty, knowing that the woman was weaker than the man (1 Pet. 3:7), and he chose her as his target. Regardless of what the woman said to the serpent, as long as she stood there and spoke to him, she was wrong, for it indicated that she had assumed the headship. The safest way for her would have been not to talk to the evil one, but to turn to her husband and hide behind him. If Eve had done this, the subtle one would have been frustrated. Therefore, the basic cause of man's first fall was the assuming of the headship by the wife. Although she had a husband, she nonetheless stood on her own.” (W. Lee, Life-study of Genesis, pp. 232-233, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
In the New Testament, Paul says, “And Adam was not deceived; but the woman, having been quite deceived, has fallen into transgression” (1 Tim. 2:14). It is significant that the fall of man was initiated by woman not taking man as her head (Gen. 3:1-6; 1 Tim. 2:14). In short, the fall occurred because God’s governmental arrangement was not maintained.
“Eve was deceived by the serpent (Gen. 3:1-6) because she did not remain in subjection under the headship of Adam but overstepped her position to contact the evil tempter directly without her head being covered. This is the strong ground for the apostle not to permit the sisters in a local church to teach with authority and to assert authority over men. Rather, the apostle directed them to learn in silence and to remain in all subjection. Man's headship is woman's protection.” (Recovery Version of the Bible, 1 Tim. 2:14, fn 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
In 1 Corinthians 11:10 Paul says, “Therefore the woman ought to have authority on her head for the sake of the angels.” Authority here denotes the head covering, which signifies the authority of man’s headship over the woman. For this sake, the sisters should have a sign, a covering, on their head. It is significant that Paul says that the woman ought to have authority on her head for the sake of the angels. The covering on the sisters’ head is a sign declaring this to the angels. Not only in the coming kingdom age in eternity shall the sisters be under God’s headship, but even in this rebellious age the sisters must submit to His authority. The covering on the sisters’ head is a sign declaring this to the angels. Hence, the teaching that sisters do not need to submit to brothers is to teach feminism and introduce a “Women’s Liberation Movement” in the church. It is unscriptural, satanic, and fallen. [Cf. “Is it Unscriptural for Sisters to Submit to Brothers?”]
Feminism Refuted in the Ministry
Both Brother Watchman Nee and Brother Witness Lee have these strong words to say against “Women’s Liberation Movement”:
“Because men rebelled against the teachings of the Bible, they drifted with the current of the world. Adam was created first and then Eve (1 Tim. 2:13). Man is the head of the woman (1 Cor. 11:3), and the woman was created to help the man (v. 9; Gen. 2:18). These are unchanging principles of the Bible. The present women's liberation movement tries to overthrow God's ordained order. How sad it is! Originally, women did have their own position; to oppress them or to take advantage of them is not permitted by the Bible. However, for anyone to change the positions which God has ordained for male and female is abominable to God. It is not because I am a male that I speak this way. If I were a female, I would also insist on the same. The Bible is the only standard for our words and actions. We do not want to hear what worldly philosophy says. We dare not say whether it is sinful for a woman to pray with no head covering and to preach in the meetings. But one thing we know: to do this is against the commandment of the Scripture. Some may ask, ‘If the Bible says this, will it not be standing in the way of the tide of the age?’ Our answer is this: ‘When have we ever seen the Bible going along with the tide of the age?’” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, (Set 1) Vol. 07: The Christian (5), Chapter 17, Section 4, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“First Timothy 2, 1 Corinthians 14, and Revelation 2 all show that God forbids a woman from teaching. Any sect that is started by a woman or headed up by one, or any group in which the woman occupies the same place as the man is highly suspicious. More than half of the heresies in the world have been started by women. For example, the founder of the Christian Scientists was Mary Baker Eddy, and the founder of the Seventh-day Adventists was Mrs. White. When the Bible speaks about Roman Catholicism, it also refers to the teaching of the woman Jezebel.” (W. Nee, The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, Set 3, Volume 50, Messages for Building Up New Believers (3), p. 951, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
“Let us now go on to consider 3:1-7 verse by verse. Verse 1 says, ‘In like manner, wives, subject yourselves to your own husbands, that even if any disobey the word, they will be gained without a word through the manner of life of their wives.’ The phrase ‘in like manner’ refers to the subjection of the household servants to their masters, as described in 2:18. Therefore, as a household servant submits himself to his master, so the wives should subject themselves to their own husbands. This kind of word is certainly contrary to the emphasis of the so-called women’s liberation movement. That movement is against the Bible, for it is against God’s ordination in His creation with respect to male and female. Using Peter’s expression (3:7), God created the females weaker vessels. What country would use women as the main fighting force in the army? Females are weaker physically and psychologically. For this reason, it is easy for women to shed tears, which are often a sign of weakness. Furthermore, it is easy for a female to be troubled in her mind or emotion. All these are signs that the female is a weaker vessel.” (W. Lee, Life-Study of 1 Peter, Message 22, Section 2, LSM) [Emphasis Added]
Conclusion
The sisters need to keep in mind the principle behind man’s fall. Eve believed the lie that eating the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil would bring her wisdom. She lusted and took to herself something that God had forbidden, and overstep her bounds by assuming the headship instead of deferring to the man God had provided as her head covering. This is the basis for the feminist movement.
Feminism is a counterfeit, humanistic solution to human and societal problems. To bring it into the church is reprehensible, because it is in direct opposition to the Word of God. It seeks to destroy all traces of distinction in the roles God has assigned for men and women in His church. A believing woman, who is seeking to obey God and walk in peace and grace, should remember that she has equal access to all spiritual blessings in Christ. There cannot be Jew or Greek, slave or free man, male or female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28). However, this does not eliminate distinctions between male and female in the church life, because Brother Lee pointed out to us that Paul’s omission of “male” and “female” in 1 Corinthians 12:12-13 show that in Christ, the problem of male and female has been done away with, but in the church there is still male and female.
We see clearly from our series of two articles how, on the one hand, the leading co-workers and elders were faithful in following the scriptural principles and biblical charge in dealing with rebellion among God’s people, especially by a woman, and that the dissenting sister’s allegation of “machismo” is totally baseless. On the other hand, the sister’s writings on the subject, analyzed in the light of the Scriptures and the ministry speaking of brothers Nee and Lee, as well as those of Brother Liu [Cf. “Masculinism (Machismo) or the Pure Revelation of the Word of God?”], show that she has been infected with feminism, and that she has been covertly and overtly spreading this fallen and satanic principle and teaching among the churches, especially the sisters.
In a follow-up article published on her website championing feminism entitled “Price to Pay,” the sister painted a picture of herself as an “absolute, principled, and transparent” woman who does not mince words and cuts straight the word of the truth, citing as supporting basis what she read in an international magazine on male chauvinists underestimating women in the field of banking and finance. In a further show of disdain towards the leading brothers, she used deprecatory terms like “so-called highly positioned ecclesiastical people” involved with “compromising, crookedness and hidden agenda.” She justified her harsh public criticisms and tirades against the co-workers and elders as being motivated by her desire “to perfect the more mature ones who are supposed to be leading the Lord’s flock in their own locality.” Like in her previous articles touching the divine order in the church, the dissenting sister patently missed the mark again in every major point she brought up.
First, the sister borrowed a pagan, feminist illustration from the world to apply in the church. Feminism is something of the fallen world, and not of the Bible. It is squarely opposed to and defies the divine order in the church that God has ordained for men and women. To introduce it subtly into the churches is to bring in a mixture, a leaven, and even a teaching of Satan. The fact that the sister writes to advance feminism in the churches based on “an article in a leading international magazine” is very telling of where her teaching comes from and what it is based upon! Can we expect healthy teachings from one who reasons not from the Scriptures but from fallen and worldly concepts?
Second, the saints should not miss the fact that the sister herself tells us that her writings are out of a purported desire to “perfect the more mature ones who are supposed to be leading the Lord’s flock in their own locality,” undoubtedly referring to the elders among the churches. The fish is often caught by the mouth. In so saying, she has exposed herself that, in her mind, she is higher and greater than the elders, who need her perfecting. The tone of her writings in talking down to the co-workers and elders here, as in other places, is significant. It shows how she has arrogated unto herself the leadership in the work and in the churches. In this regard, we need to point out that she was not the apostle who appointed or fed the elders, so it is not within her portion to do this “perfecting.” Furthermore, Scripture is clear that women are not allowed to teach with authority over men (1 Tim. 2:12), as against what she has insistently been doing. For the church to tolerate a woman teaching is to tolerate “the woman Jezebel,” a self-appointed prophetess who presumed to be authorized by God to speak for God. The Lord strongly rebuked this in Revelation 2:20. Here, it is significant to note that God called her “the woman Jezebel.” Jezebel was unmistakably female and it is unnatural to stress the obvious, but God would do this to emphasize how He disapproves of women usurping authority and assuming the headship to teach in His church. He compares women who presume to be authorized by God to teach with the heinous Jezebel who killed many of the Lord’s prophets in the Old Testament. Her teachings are full of leaven, bringing in mixture, decline, and apostasy to the church.
Third, her writing advocates for sisters to be liberated, outspoken women in the church, to speak and teach in an unbecoming way that oversteps their proper position as sisters, instead of being clothed with modesty and sobriety as the Bible directs. By using herself as the example of a woman who is able to speak “far too directly,” she is promoting herself as a paragon for the sisters to follow. As we have learned from the lessons gleaned from the cases of Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the Magdalene, and the bride of Christ, such a woman is farthest from the virtuous sisters the Bible speaks of, but instead is characterized by the untransformed and rebellious Miriam whom God judged for her rebellion against God’s delegated authority by being stricken with leprosy.
Fourth, her allegations of “compromise, crookedness and hidden agenda” leveled against the leading brothers has no basis whatsoever in truth or in fact. As she had been prone to do, she again openly and irresponsibly attacked the co-workers and elders with crafty innuendoes here without offering any scriptural or reasonable bases. Her actions are a mark of one who has a rebellious spirit within and is devoid of the reality of head covering without.
Fifth, she asserts that the leading brothers have “lost their biblical clarity regarding the application of 1 Corinthians 5,” in another deliberate attempt to mix up her quarantine by the churches based on Romans 16:17 and Titus 3:10 with cutting off in 1 Corinthians 5 to confuse the saints and win their sympathy. To be clear about the principle and practice of quarantine according to the Scriptures, we encourage readers to review “Quarantine in the Bible and in Practice,” published by the Defense and Confirmation Project in www.afaithfulword.org.
Sixth, she has repeatedly misapplied “Philadelphia becoming Laodicea” to the churches by comparing the “opinion of the people” or “opinion of the majority” in Laodicea to the stand the elders and co-workers have taken against her different teachings and divisive practices. Such a comparison is outright absurd because the rejection of different teachings and the consequent rejection of the factious ones in the quarantine by the church as represented by the elders and the warning issued by the co-workers to the saints are a proper exercise of authority based on the Word by those whom the Lord has delegated this function to. As clearly seen in the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3, the Lord’s speaking to the churches is always through the messengers of the churches, who are the leading ones taking care of the testimony of Jesus. The speaking of His proper representatives is the speaking of the Spirit to the church, and the speaking of the Spirit to one church is His speaking to all the churches. Hence, it is the fellowship of the Body. The affirmation by the elders of the churches of the fellowship to quarantine the divisive ones, like the resounding “Amen” by the elders in Revelation 19:4, is a testimony of oneness and one accord. Ironically, while she and her followers derogated the decisions and affirmations made by proper delegated authorities among the churches as mere “opinions of the majority,” it is in fact the dissenting opinions of the sister and of those she had goaded to join her in disparaging the elders and co-workers that constitute the “opinions of the people” which the apostle John referred to in describing the degraded condition of Laodicea.
Seventh, she called the corrections made to her different teachings as “baseless criticisms.” All the articles in this website written to chronicle and correct her misaiming are solidly based on facts and the truth in the Word as expounded by the ministry. Again, we commend these articles to the saints for their careful reading and consideration before the Lord.
Eighth, she cited her previous articles “Cutting Straight the Word of the Truth,” “Flow and Atmosphere of the Meeting,” and “Residency and Testimony” as examples of her “perfecting articles” that are “blunt in the presentation of truth accompanied by experience.” These writings have previously been analyzed and found to be grossly deficient in the light of the Word and the ministry. Readers who want to be clear on the subjects should read our earlier articles “Is it Unscriptural for Sisters to Submit to Brothers?” and “Residency and Testimony – Truth or Twisting?”, as well as those classified under “Concerning the Lord’s Table Meeting” for inoculation and equipping.
In yet another deplorable rejoinder on “Philadelphia becoming Laodicea” entitled “Albert Einstein Quotes,” she also misquoted and misapplied Einstein’s word that “Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” His famous words, contained in his letter to Professor Jost Winteler on July 8, 1901, were revolutionary and instrumental to the advancement of new ideas in the sciences, but used by atheists and agnostics widely in the last century to attack the Christian faith. Albert Einstein himself was not a Christian, so her quotation of Einstein to bolster her teachings begs the question: “Why is the sister quoting an eminent physicist who was not a Christian in teaching the Bible and spiritual principles?” In her write-up, she again misrepresented the fellowship of the co-workers and elders, who are the proper delegated authorities in the Body of Christ, as the “opinion of the majority,” and falsely accused them of “fraud, deceit, slanders, hypocrisy, threats and lies.” The fact is: the fellowship of the co-workers and elders are solidly grounded on the Scriptures and the ministry, while her own teachings and opinions are founded on worldly fallen thoughts and concepts.
Let us take refuge in the Word and refuse to be dragged into a limbo of suspicion, doubt, discontent, mistrust, and instability. Let us not allow ourselves to be tossed by waves and carried about by every wind of teaching in the sleight of men, in craftiness with a view to a system of error. But holding to truth in love, may we grow up into Him in all things (Eph. 4:14-15a). By holding to the faithful word, which is according to the teaching of the apostles, we will be enabled both to exhort by the healthy teaching and to convict those who oppose (Titus 1:9).
(June 24, 2010)
