Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Evangelical
Regardless of the word he used, Witness Lee clearly stated he does not believe in being worshiped. He clearly stated it means to be a son of God. He clearly stated that it is blasphemy to say we should be worshiped. Clearly, he is not teaching "believers become objects of worship". So what's your problem? Given Lee clarified himself, you cannot claim he taught that we should be worshipped.
|
Actually, WL has been reported as stating that he liked being 'exalted'. Read and weep:
The brothers in the Los Angeles area invited him to have a conference and arranged the place in Pasadena. He said that when he heard that it would be in Pasadena he was happy. These people, he said, "exalt" me: I am happy to be exalted.
-John Ingalls, Speaking the Truth in Love
Consider the title of a book that WL published -
Watchman Nee - A Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age. Is this not the uplifting of a man? Lee obviously viewed Nee as some sort of larger than life figure, and there are hints that he viewed himself as such also. To
exalt someone is only a step away from
worship, and in certain cases it may already be synonymous.
So what I'm getting at is this: WL spoke against the worship of man, but in LC practice, there is something that strikingly resembles this. The question here is not even whether or not the worshiping of man actually happens. It's a question as to whether or not WL was really against it. He of course spoke against it, but can we take is word for it? When we consider the evidence that contradicts his LSM published statements, these kinds of difficult questions arise.