Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
Does anyone think that "shepherding words" and "co-workers in the Lord’s recovery" qualifies as a non sequitur? And also is a classic oxymoron.
|
It's biased and self-serving, but what else to expect. Were they honest, it might well be titled "A desperate attempt at damage control from the co-workers in the Lord's recovery". I suspect desperation because the 'Oracle' Witness Lee once told us that he was done talking about all this and he expected that henceforth these matters were closed for discussion. But now he's buried and the matters are once again being raised. Not good.
Three questions for those presuming to write shepherding words:
1. (a) If women can't teach, why sell Mary McDonough's book "God's Plan" right next to those by Nee and Lee? In LSM's online catalogue of titles under "G", there it is, available for the public. Why the inconsistency in application?
1. (b) How do you think Dora Yu or Ruth Lee would have fared under Witness Lee, or under today's blended co-workers? Or, how would Jessie Penn-Lewis fare today? Or Peace Wang? Or Margaret Barber? How would they all find any place today, in the recovery they supposedly helped to found?
2. Why do some psalms of imprecations have footnotes panning them for being "natural" and "fallen" in wishing others ill, while others have near-identical sentiments being hailed as Christ's victory over Satan? Why the inconsistency in application?
3. The apostle wrote to avoid every appearance of evil (1 Thess 5:22). Don't you think that a church leader pressuring church members to invest in his immediate family's money-making schemes looks bad? No matter that it collapsed and the money disappeared - the very fact that it was set up looks bad. How was this not a blight on the church? Daystar showed Witness Lee's true colors - how can anyone say that this was a "flow from God's throne", or a "manifestation of God's deputy authority"?