Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
This was a common sales pitch for Witness Lee. In order for TLR, by then steeped in stagnation, to accept such an extra-biblical teaching, Lee would dangle the carrot of revival before all the faithful. Who could resist such a temptation? Who in their right mind would resist the promise of such blessings? The "new way" had come and gone with only doctored statistics and little increase, but Lee convinced us all that the failure was due to a global conspiracy led by none other than John Ingalls.
Now that all these leperous rebels were properly disposed of, the road to revival was freshly paved. God had just revealed to our brother the final recovery "high peak crystal," which would bring in unprecedented revival, like the days of Elden Hall, consummating in the marriage of the Lamb, and the coming of the New Jerusalem.
Twenty five years later.
What? No revival? We lost Brazil and the GLA? We're going backwards. Ugh!
Blendeds: It's all your fault. You have become Laodicea. You never took brother Lee's word.
|
In the LC, there has been a cyclic pattern of
bad idea/
failure. The bad ideas abound, the failures are eminent. Again and again, before anyone had a chance to give what happened a second thought, it's onto the next "bright idea". The pattern repeats itself over and over again. Conveniently missing from the equation is a simple assessment of what has/hasn't worked.
The matter of deification needs to be considered in conjunction with the outcome (or lack thereof) of the "new way". As the dust was settling, WL was already onto the next thing. I think one distraction was the "Lord's move to Russia". I actually remember this as a kid, wondering why suddenly everyone was talking about Russia.
Of course the other distraction was when WL began talking about the "high peak". In a historical context, it is highly suspect that such things were marketed when they were, especially considering the unresolved situations that preceded this.
Why did leaders have such a strong reaction to writings such as what
Indiana produced? It attempted to call into question the very things that leaders had hoped would go unnoticed. The new way left lots of unanswered question and broken promises. Why would members think the "high peak" would offer anything different? The fact of the matter is that everyone was accustomed to taking anything WL said at face value. If WL quickly moved on to something else, so did the rank and file. 25 years after the "high peak" was released, it is time for LC members to engage in an honest assesment of the "net added value" of WL final teachings. What is posted on this forum is in no way an 'attack' on what WL taught, rather it is a call for members to ask themselves this question.