[OBW]

The first verses of 2 Timothy 3

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God — having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.

So let's consider those attributes:

Lovers of money. Daystar. Tennis rackets. Chairs. Suits. Requiring the church in Taiwan to sell some of its property to pay for Lee’s business debts. LSM, especially to make his essentially reprobate son its manager (paid) and contact point for the churches. And don't forget that this is not just a complaint that he had business ventures. Most of these were designed to use the money of the people of the church for his own personal gain.

Boastful, proud, conceited. “I kind of like being exalted.” “That Lee! . . .” When asked what we would do when and if he died, “It’s all in the books.” Constantly directing that no other sources of spiritual nourishment is required than Lee’s writings.

Unforgiving. John Ingals. Al Knock. Bill Mallons. John So. (need I go on?)

Slanderous. The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion. (again, need I say more?)

Rash. Spitting on the Lang book. Cutting off fellowship with Sparks because he did not agree on the ground doctrine. Two significant places where he took somewhat sudden and apparently rash positions on people. Probably could say the same about his sudden about-face on Max R.

Having a form of godliness but denying its power. Not sure how else to describe his own declaration that we should not bother reckoning ourselves as anything (like dead to sin) because he couldn’t do it. Rejecting being righteous by faith and instead saying we should wait until it comes out of us (after enough dispensing). And this is why he could not stand James. It required that he at least try to be righteous.

Can we find every sin in Paul’s list? Not likely. But Paul was not requiring that someone be guilty of all before they fell into the category of someone with whom we were to have nothing to do.

This is a troubling phrase because it seems to stand opposed to Christ’s own statement of loving everyone as you love yourself. So somehow it does not mean to literally write them off entirely. But it is still serious. Yet I surely cannot imagine that however it should be understood in a more moderate form would be to continue to listen to such a one as a teacher of the Word.

You don't see it? I can't seem to avoid it. It is everywhere.