Quote:
Originally Posted by testallthings
But if we assume that the footnote is correct, which is not!, and that he deserved to lose his leadership, we would like to ask,
When Witness Lee lost his leadership, due to his negative influence by words and works? |
Very interesting question!
It was so characteristic of WL to highlight the failures of others, especially other ministers. He spared no one, except of course, himself and Nee.
The laws of the Bible and of our land have always placed higher culpability on pre-planned or premeditated crimes. Peter's "crimes" were always in response to his impulsive nature. He had no intention to deny His Lord on the night He was betrayed, nor did he give that meal in Antioch much thought. Peter simply reacted wrongly. Yes, what he did was wrong, but easily repented of, which he obviously did. Imagine how much grace was bestowed upon Peter during his repentance following both these failures! Especially when the entire church of God got to read about them. Today Peter is rewarded with the martyr's crown.
Witness Lee was different, however. In the late 1980's, Lee orchestrated a massive coverup to protect his son Philip, which included the public slander and libel (
Fermentation ...) of scores of godly men including John Ingalls. Lee carefully planned this course of action for months on end, during which he had ample time to change his mind (
think: repent). He assembled a team of accomplices to carry out his criminal operation. He never repented for any of this. He even went so far as to expedite the restoration of his profligate and absentee son to the good graces of the church in Anaheim, as if that will ensure his salvation in the after life.