Re: StandfortheTestimony.Org
I just did a perusal of DC's web site. Lot's of good stuff. And lot's of stuff to try to direct people back to the old LRC ways.
My conclusion is that to those who are not entirely enveloped in the LRC's garlic, the errors of practice as seen by the BBs' attempts to purify the LRC's theology to take only the old, established words of Lee are quite evident.
What is not evident is that this is not the problem. It is the symptom of the root problem. My brother, who works in the defense industry, has mentioned that when something is not working right, their response is to dig until they find the "root problem." In this kind of case, they would not stop with "what are the BBs doing wrong?" They would further ask, "why are they doing it?" And if the answer to that does not appear to be the source of the problem, they would ask further.
So if the answer to the second question is "because they believe in a "one trumpet" rule for ministry in the LRC," then the next question might be "how do they determine that there actually is such a rule?" If they say, "because Lee taught that it was so," then there might be two questions to answer; 1) "did Lee really say such a thing?", and 2) (assuming it is determined that he did) "is this teaching actually taught in the Bible in the manner Lee taught it?"
And if there is a question about how the BBs have the authority to make such sweeping determinations, like quarantining certain ones, then they might find that there is a thing called "deputy authority." So the inquiry then is "where did this come from?" The answer is Nee and Lee. "Where did they get it?"
DC has correctly pointed out that in normal Christian circles the actions of the BBs would be seen as wrong. But it is based on the theology that underpins the very thing that DC is trying to "salvage." Lee taught the things that the BBs are using to make only the LSM the source of LRC writings and teachings. Unless you undermine the very theology upon which that is built, you cannot eliminate the problems.
And the problems go all the way back to the very teachings of the "ground of the church." You cannot simply focus on Christ and automatically be "on the proper ground of the church." There are too many requirements. You have to be careful about what you call yourself. You have to be "open" and "one with" all Christians, yet they must come with you for there to be any real fellowship. (I'm just not sure how "oneness" and "one-way" are compatible positions.) You can't think that there is a special group that is a "remnant" and be one with anyone but yourselves. You can't think that the Lord's table has not happened in Rome for 1,500 years and actually be one with any of the Christians there who have been having the Lord's table there for all of that 1,500 years.
Blessed are the pure in heart, not the pure in doctrine.
And you can't pretend to be some kind of spiritual Mecca if your so-called spirituality is not always coupled with real action in righteousness. There is grace. And there is dispensing (just not exactly how Lee taught it). But if you expect grace and dispensing to do all the work, you will be in a spiritual wasteland. It has always required that you accept the grace, take in the dispensing, and simultaneously step out in faith to obey.
That is not the theology of the LRC. As a result, it needs lots of meetings to keep everyone pumped-up so they can pretend that their defeated daily lives are irrelevant and that joyous feeling you get from saying something in a meeting and hearing all those "amens" is their substitute for the peace and satisfaction of obedience to the one you claim to believe in.
__________________
Mike
I think . . . . I think I am . . . . therefore I am, I think — Edge
OR . . . . You may be right, I may be crazy — Joel
|