Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
We have had much good discussion on this forum about Lee's excessive use of allegorization and interpretation of O.T. types. The exclusive Brethren teachers became masters at this, and to this day can utilize bible stories to say anything they want.
|
What you said about W.L. is true. What you said about the exclusive Brethren is not. The Brethren were and are dispensationalists, and it is well known that dispensationalist hold to a Literal Grammatical Historical Method.
Watchman Nee held the same principles of interpretation.
“All the words in the Bible should be interpreted literally unless the literal interpretation is nearly absurd. Parables, visions, and signs should not be interpreted literally. Everything else should be interpreted literally.”
(Collected Works of Watchman Nee, The (Set 1) Vol. 15: Study on Matthew, Chapter 6, Section 5)
Witness Lee followed the same teaching, at the least up to the 1950s.
“No matter how difficult or out of place a literal interpretation appears to us, we have to adhere strictly to the literal meaning.” (On Knowing the Bible, Chapter 4, Section 1)
What happened since then, we all know. W.L. turned from the literal to the allegorical method, producing sometimes very aberrant interpretations.