Judas, James, and Peter: Each Presuming to Possess the Truth

Greetings, everyone. Today, we will delve into the theological perspectives of Judas, Peter, and James. Some may find it peculiar that, despite this being a summary of the Book of Jude, I feel compelled to discuss the theological leanings of these three figures.

Judas, James, and Peter, these three, effectively undermined the Jerusalem church. From its very inception, their approach was less than ideal, transforming the church into a mere dining hall. This hardly sounds like a divinely ordained institution. After contributing their offerings, they spent their days idly breaking bread, a peculiar practice indeed. Moreover, they were breaking large loaves, essentially turning church gatherings into meal services, a blatant misuse of the church's purpose. Yet, Peter, James, and Judas never acknowledged their role in the church's decline, nor did they admit that their actions were misguided, even to offer a lesson for posterity.

Not only did they remain silent on these matters, but they also presumed to possess absolute truth. In our current era, we observe a similar phenomenon among certain Christians who believe they hold a monopoly on truth. This self-assuredness is a lamentable state, a poison more virulent than any other. Having heard my words, you must discern the correct attitude: a continuous pursuit and exploration of truth. These individuals, however, eschew such inquiry, clinging instead to the notion of their own infallibility, quick to label others as heretics.

Does our God, from His vantage point in Heaven, find any who seek understanding? Fortunately, my own relentless pursuit has led me to question the teachings of Judas, James, and Peter. Further investigation revealed that their logic diverged from that of the Apostle Paul and Christ Jesus. They expounded at length, presuming to instruct others in piety and humility, cautioning against impetuous speech. This is a confused theology, of which they themselves seem unaware.

A careful reading reveals their penchant for ornate language, piling up words to address irrelevant issues. At times, I speak with a touch of irony, noting that these individuals seem to have barely completed elementary school. Their writings, though voluminous, often present statements that, while not inherently flawed, bear little relevance to the topic at hand, a troubling disconnect.

Therefore, brethren, we must adjust our attitude. What is humility? It is a continuous seeking and exploration, an acknowledgment that we do not possess the entirety of truth, but we are in pursuit of it. To presume to know is to invite tragedy. Brethren, in our time, we encounter Christians who, when asked, invariably declare, "I am saved." Further inquiry into the year of their salvation elicits responses such as, "I was born again in 2012," or "I was born again in 2014."

Recently, I encountered a former colleague who had embraced the faith. He recounted an incident within his group where an elderly member, in his seventies, would become enraged if his views were challenged, branding the dissenter a heretic. Such occurrences are distressingly common among Christians, each convinced of their own possession of truth. The true posture, however, is one of diligent pursuit, an admission that we have not yet fully grasped the truth. To believe otherwise is to invite ruin.

In my generation, only about 3% to 4% of students gained admission to university, even including the less prestigious institutions. Some would attempt the entrance exam year after year, failing each time. They would proclaim their understanding, their years of study, yet consistently fall short, their performance declining with each attempt.

We dubbed them "university rejects," those sifted out and left behind. Why? They lacked the correct attitude toward learning. I do not wish for any of you to become "Christian rejects," rejected by Jesus Christ. Such a fate is dire. Were Judas, James, and Peter, perhaps, rejects in some sense? I suspect there is a hint of that.

Judas, James, and Peter: Overly Concerned with Status

You must understand that they placed great emphasis on status, forbidding any criticism of those in positions of authority. I pondered their motivation for this prohibition. Were they referring to the chief apostles, the second-tier apostles, the third-tier apostles, or what? The elders of the church? The brothers of Jesus Christ? Why? Because after the church had been brought to ruin, the rank and file began to murmur. If I were to continue in this vein, James would undoubtedly be displeased, given my earlier remark about his lack of education. "I am a chief apostle," he would retort, "and you must not criticize me." To criticize him would be to criticize those in authority. They were exceedingly concerned with rank. I wish to teach you not to take yourselves too seriously. If you do, you will find yourself in an untenable position.

Consider the content of Judas' and Peter's teachings. They spoke of addressing Satan, of commanding the devil, "May the Lord rebuke you." What sort of talk is this? In my own blunt manner, I would simply declare, "Satan, be gone! Devil, be gone!"

What nonsense is this? How can the devil hold a position of authority? It sounds utterly misguided. As one who casts out demons, I know how malevolent they are, afflicting people with countless ailments. Even after we have embraced the faith and been cleansed by the blood of Jesus, they refuse to depart. Must we then implore them politely, "Please leave? This place now belongs to Jesus. May the Lord rebuke you"?

This is not a discourse on Satan; it is a veiled assertion of their own authority. Is this analogy not somewhat peculiar? You are Satan, yet you demand respect? I fail to comprehend it. While James did not invoke angels, he could not tolerate any criticism of those in positions of authority. Today, it is my turn. In this church, do not mistake me for an emperor. Criticize away; I am but a pile of dung, with no need for status or false pride. Thus, I am impervious to injury.

Some have questioned me, noting discrepancies between my teachings of five years ago and my current pronouncements. They expect me to defend my past statements. I offer no such defense. If I was wrong, I was wrong. I have grown rapidly in these years, overturning past notions in a mere five years. Is there a problem with that? No. I was mistaken five years ago, but I have since grown and continue to strive for truth. This response has frustrated some, who find me resistant to interrogation. Of course, I am. What sort of fellow am I? I am that dung fellow.

Therefore, an excessive concern with status is a grave issue within the church. "Why do you not heed my words? I am your spiritual parent." We have no such nonsense among us. In some churches, the concept of spiritual parents is promoted, with small group leaders cast in that role. In my day, I too was assigned a spiritual parent, whose dictates I was expected to follow. I will refrain from commenting on his level of education, but I did not engage in confrontation. While his Bible studies were nonsensical, they did not affect me. I focused on diligently reading the Scriptures. On the same topics, I would write my own notes in the margins of my Bible, a practice now made easier by smartphones.

Do not take yourselves too seriously. Whether their humility or pride, it all pointed to challenges to their authority. But the question arises: if the church has become a dining hall and has lost its mission to minister to the Gentiles, what purpose does your authority serve? I find this quite poignant.

But my logic is sound. Later, I exposed these issues, revealing their theological system. So, what is correct? It is not to honor the individual, nor to honor their teachings. You need not submit to me; you must submit to the Word of God. If you are like them, I will tell you: you need to go back to elementary school. Your notes are a mess, your Bible studies are nonsensical, and yet you demand submission. To what should one submit? Brethren, be careful not to make yourselves foolish. Submit to the Word of God, honor God, for He is our God!

This notion of spiritual parents is quite insidious, demanding absolute obedience. If, one day, I demand absolute obedience from you, know that I have become like James, Peter, and Judas. I do not wish to become such a person, for I am unconcerned with your obedience or disobedience, with my own face or reputation.

Some have observed that those who possess genuine substance are often unconcerned with appearances. I thank God that, among us, I do not wish to make you foolish, but rather to make you wise. Is that not good? Why would I want to make you foolish? I tell you, this system can often be quite insidious, capable of making people foolish.

Judas, James, and Peter: Their View of Life as Utter Vanity

Some have said, "Teacher, you also speak of the vanity of life." What do I mean by vanity? I mean that life on this earth is vanity, but living out the glory of God is not vanity. Consider the words of James, echoed by Peter. Peter did nothing but pray and preach, living off the church. While this is not inherently wrong, I believe God can sustain one more or one less without consequence.

But to do nothing at all is incomprehensible. For example, James spoke of those who plan to travel to a city to conduct business and earn money. Is there anything wrong with that? No. But to sit idly by, consuming the resources of the Jerusalem church, and then to declare that life is but a mist, that man is like grass that withers and flowers that fade, vanishing in an instant, is to embrace a Buddhist perspective if one does not live out the glory of God. This is vanity. What, then, is the most important thing in life? In Genesis chapter one, we learn that man was created in the image of God. By partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, man lost that image.

What, then, is salvation? It is through Jesus Christ that we can live out the image of God, for we were originally created with His glorious image. This is a different perspective. If you conduct business with creativity, you will not become a burden on society. Therefore, in our church, I tell you that we must address the issue of many who are unable to earn a living. My abilities are limited, but I long for all of you to be raised up. If you are skilled in accounting, can you teach those who are less proficient? If they are lazy, correct them. Why? To mold them into the image of God's glory, which is not to sit idly by, consuming resources.

What did they do? James spent his days in prayer, doing nothing else, his knees calloused from kneeling. I wonder if his approach is not akin to becoming a Buddhist monk. This has echoes of Buddhism, specifically Mahayana Buddhism, with its emphasis on personal cultivation. But the problem arises when they demand respect, unwilling to be criticized, while simultaneously doing nothing and declaring life to be but a mist. Is this not contradictory? It is truly lamentable.

Judas, James, and Peter: Lacking a Conception of the Church

Brethren, you must understand that once you enter into personal cultivation, you will find that the teachings of Judas, James, and Peter are largely based on the logic of personal cultivation. But Jesus Christ calls us to build His body on earth, to establish His glorious church. What did these three lack? A conception of the church. What did Jesus say to Peter?

"And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:18-19)

What was lacking in their conception of the church? A lack of shepherding. Therefore, Chinese Mingding Doctrine is essentially a theology of shepherding. What is the purpose of building the church? To shepherd. And what is the purpose of shepherding? Not to train you to be a monk, but to train you to be a person with the image of God. This sounds good, does it not? Who would not want that? To live well, to live out the glory of God, not because of anything else, but because you are in the church, in the body of Jesus Christ.

In the body of Jesus Christ, all the promises of God are yes, and they are yours. So, how can you say that with so many promises from God, you cannot live them out? It is not about us seeing through things and becoming monks, doing nothing, and wearing out our knees to the point of forming calluses. Can those calluses be cut off and used as medicine? Do you think you are Ji Gong, rubbing some mud from your neck and giving it to people as medicine? That will not do.

Therefore, I want to establish a church, and I must know that the most central thing in the entire Bible is that all things are united in Jesus Christ. So, when it came to old John, besides Judas, James, and Peter, there was another good brother named John. This John lived several decades longer than Peter and the others, even though he was only ten or eight years younger.

In fact, this old John did not initially agree with Peter, James, and their approach, but he kept it to himself. Later, after they all died, this old John wrote the Book of Revelation. If you read the Book of Revelation, you will discover the revelation of the victorious church. To establish a church is to establish a victorious church because old John personally witnessed the entire decline of the Jerusalem church. Later, old John systematically wrote the revelation of the victorious church in the Book of Revelation, re-presenting the gospel. So, the view of the church is very important; it is not individual cultivation, but it is in the church.

So, everyone, start to see me make a comparison of these, but I probably will not finish speaking about it today. I will extract these points, and I do not have time to take out the scriptures one by one. Everyone can go and read them. Lacking a view of the church is a tragedy in life. Building a church must establish a victorious church. Many of those who listen to my sermons and Bible studies are pastors who lead a church.

Remember, even if you lead three or five, lead ten or twenty, you are establishing a church there. You must shepherd well there, and you must establish a victorious church. It is troublesome if people do not establish a victorious church. It is not God's will for the church not to be victorious. God wants us to possess the gates of our enemies, so in building a church, we must establish a victorious church. How can you establish a victorious church? It is built on the rock of Jesus Christ. How can it not be victorious? God has predestined us to be victorious; it is not difficult. This is Mingding Doctrine.

James Has a Deep Prejudice Against Wealth

When I was analyzing this matter, how could James develop this prejudice? He has a deep prejudice against wealth. He said, "Woe to you who are rich!" There is something wrong with this statement. Why? Because Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and David were all wealthy people. How can wealth be unspiritual? How can being poor be called spiritual?

I tell everyone why, because the Jerusalem church became poor. You see, people like to protect their faces. If they become poor, they will definitely say that being poor is good. I actually hate poverty. I really do not like poverty. If there are brothers and sisters among us who are poor, I always worry about it.

Our young pastors must cooperate with me. Who likes poverty? Have you lived in poverty? If you have lived in poverty, you will know that poverty is really not good. I once met a pastor who was very poor, so poor that, my goodness, he was already sixty years old and had a child who was ten years old. The couple lived with a child in their teens, and do you know how they lived?

They were so poor that they did not even have a house, just renting. The church became stagnant and it was very difficult. Later, I said, "Then you have to buy a house." Houses are not expensive, in those third- and fourth-tier cities, buying a house does not cost much. But he cared about his face. He said something to me, and I could taste the meaning, he said, "Pastor, now I am so poor that all I have left is spirituality." If you are really spiritual, would you be poor? If you are really spiritual, you would not be poor.

Why this sentence? He has to protect his face. I do not blame him. If I were them, I would also love my face. But because I do not love my face, I am not poor. To be honest, it is just that things were not done right. That James squandered all the church's money. Jerusalem was actually very rich. He had a bunch of people eating there every day. How could it not be poor? Let us say one person has a bowl of noodles for twenty yuan, a bowl of noodles for fifteen yuan, and you have three to five thousand people doing this every day. How much money is that? The church spent all its money on that.

So, after James became poor, he had his own explanation for wealth: wealthy people are not spiritual, and poor people are more spiritual. This is James' logic. Of course, what I say may not be right. If you really challenge me and say, "Where is that written in the Bible?" It is not. James could not have written this, Peter could not have written this. I dug it out for him. You have to analyze why he does not like wealth. He feels that wealthy people are not spiritual, and poor people are spiritual.

Later, I will tell you, I observed many pastors, those who especially like to preach from the Book of James are all poor. They quote the Book of James as soon as they cite anything, because they have not understood it. James did not write it clearly, and they have not understood it, and then they use it like this. Is that not foolish? Take it slowly.

The Theology of Judas, James, and Peter Is Difficult to Live Out

Why do I have so many opinions about these three? Everyone really has to give me some grace. Do not immediately think, "How can you say that?" I actually honor them very much. Where is the honor? I really want to implement what they wrote, because Chinese Mingding Doctrine has a logic called reading God's word and then doing it. I cannot live it out, so I pray hard and ask God, "How can it not be done?" Can everyone understand this now?

When I read Genesis chapter one, God initially created the heavens and the earth. How can that be done? Can it be done? Then I prayed to God, "How can this be done?" The first chapter cannot be done. The first chapter of the entire Bible, the first chapter of Genesis, cannot be done. I am stuck. God said, "That is not right. You are created in my image. How I do it, you should do it."

I said, "How do I do it? You initially created the heavens and the earth, should I recreate one?" God said, "That is not it." What did God say? God said, "People often encounter situations of emptiness, chaos, and darkness on the face of the deep. You must let my Spirit move there, and you declare hope, and there will be light." Ah! These words immediately awakened me. God said, "You are created in my image. You should do what I do. How I do it, you should do it."

Oh, my goodness, I was so happy! After I finished praying in the office that day, I jumped and danced. Anyway, no one was watching. I was happy, happy! That day, when I studied Genesis chapter one with the brothers and sisters, everyone was so excited. They had never heard such a lecture.

We are not creating the heavens and the earth there, but we are to live out the image of God. God does it this way, and we do it this way. God does it according to its kind, and we must do it according to its kind, do you understand? But when it comes to the Book of James, I also prayed like this, but no matter what, I could not do it. I could not live it out. I tell everyone, I have read the Book of James more than a thousand times. Absolutely no less than a thousand times. I am very serious. I actually honor James and Peter very much, but I just cannot live it out! After I prayed to God, and God revealed it, it was bad. James, Peter, and Judas were criticized. Do you think I really wanted to criticize them? They are included in the Bible. Do not have opinions about me. Later, I argued that they themselves could not live it out! Do you think Peter lived it out? No! He could not even write. What could he do?

For thirty years after Jesus ascended, he could serve, but later Peter could not write, and Silas and Mark had to be his secretaries. Is that not sad? Is that called having knowledge? They themselves did not do it, and he wrote it and asked others to do it. This is ruined. The logic is completely chaotic. I like to read things and then implement them, because I cannot implement them. I can give you N examples. Do not say that the matter of hating the rich cannot be implemented. Let us talk about "not doubting at all." I dare to challenge everyone, who among us can do it without doubting at all? Jesus did not say that.

Jesus said, "Because of your little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you." (Matthew 17:20)

Can everyone understand? As long as your faith is like a mustard seed. I have never met a person who does not doubt at all, and then what he says, wow, he does not doubt at all. You raise Jesus' requirements so high, I ask you, who can do it? James also mentioned "faith without works is dead." If a person is bedridden, what can he do? He cannot even walk. How can he do it? Wait until he does it and then be healed?

I tell everyone, these words especially corrupt people's faith. So why do I say this is so corrupting? You brothers and sisters among us must know that even if you have only a mustard seed of faith inside, as long as his faith is a living faith, like a mustard seed on its last breath, it is okay. When my faith was on its last breath, do you know? I prayed, and God listened. My tears flowed down. Why? I really did not have that much faith. Can the brothers and sisters understand?

How many brothers and sisters among us are on the edge of struggling, unable to see the future, really struggling. So when I serve you, I hope you have that mustard seed of faith. He will not extinguish the dim wick, and He will not break the bruised reed. This is our God.

Jesus' requirements are much lower than James' requirements, and also much higher. Why are they much lower? The threshold is very low, but the road to growth is very long. Can you understand this now? It is not about doing "not doubting at all" right away. I tell everyone, even Abraham could not do it, Isaac and Jacob could not do it. Everyone, tell me, how can it be done? Can it be done? Is it not? So after I read it and gained these feelings and revelations, I knew that although James was Jesus' brother, his theology is not the theology of Jesus Christ.

The Theological Logic of Judas, James, and Peter Is Extremely Chaotic

These three have a characteristic: they hear a sentence and think, "This sentence is very good. It sounds especially good." How are those words said?

These people are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever. (Jude 1:12-13)

Do you feel that, wow, the words are too beautiful! But the logic is chaotic. What is the point of saying this? I tell everyone, I tried hard to sort out what he wanted to say inside. Oh, this Judas wants to contend earnestly for the truth. But after he finished speaking, he did not discuss this topic. Whether we write a book or an article, we have a point to be discussed, and then we have arguments, such as the first, second, and third, and then explain that our point is tenable.

Judas, James, and Peter, oh, I do not know what their logic is. They put together unrelated words that sound and speak beautifully, and they list them together, and the logic is chaotic. He himself does not know. What James wrote is actually in contrast to Paul's letter to the Galatians. After James finished reading it, he wrote a rebuttal letter in contrast to the letter to the Galatians, called the Book of James. If you compare them, you can definitely match them.

But James' logic is chaotic. If you go back and carefully look at my Bible study of James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, and Jude, you will know that it is really quite chaotic. He did not argue about this matter, and he also likes to use beautiful sentences, wild waves of the sea, Enoch, the seventh from Adam, etc. Anyway, he just puts these things together. I do not know what he wants to say. I can only say that he did not study well in elementary school. I hope that our brothers and sisters can become clear-headed. I put James, Peter, and Judas together and said something. I did not wrong them.

May God bless everyone!

null