Love vs. Purity

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Brother, now you are starting to think, which makes you useless for the 'building up'.

Looking back at my experience, it seemed as if "purity" was kind of positional: if you did whatever the local church leadership dictated, that was pure.

And purity from them was a moving target.

When I started this thread, my hypothesis was that the Spirit of God did move in history, especially during times of religious corruption and hypocrisy, to initiate something afresh based on the desire for "purity," but how that eventually deteriorated into a misguided pathway for the leaders to walk. I had in mind Luther, Darby, and Lee, because I am more familiar with them.

Luther, who supposedly started the "recovery," thus becoming the first so-called MOTA, became keenly aware of the corruption in the priesthood around him. Being intensely sincere for the "purity" of religion, he went so far as to visit the Vatican in Rome, thinking that surely the "purity" he so longed for would be found among those closest to the "Holy See." Needless to say, the shock he encountered was rudely awakening. Thus his goal was to reform the mother church to her original state.

Fast forward his life, and we find brother Martin so entrenched in this same goal, that "love" for the brethren has been severely compromised. He and the Swiss leader Zwingli agreed on 14-1/2 of 15 critical items, yet he refused to offer the Swiss brothers the right arm of fellowship. His disdain for the Jews and the Anabaptists also reflects this point succinctly -- if your original goal is purity of the church, and you continue this path rigidly, you will end up loving none but your own.

John Darby also began with the lofty ideals of all brothers, without hierarchy, as a holy priesthood to God, yet, in his very core of thought, as evidenced by his first tract, he felt the unity of the believers was based on the common judgment of evil -- "if we all agree what is evil, then we will be one." Though he had an intense desire to serve the Lord in new found "purity," he imposed his will upon all the assemblies, and they were forced to judge all things as he did. Exclusivism at its very core is a judgment of evil based on the views of the leader.

History tells us that the "lynching" of Benjamen Newton, the leader of the Plymouth assembly, and George Muller, the leader of the Bristol assembly and founder of the orphanages, was based on a struggle for power and control by John Darby. Both Newton and Muller were both rivals that had to be eliminated, but the smokescreen of Brethren "purity," clouded the minds of Darby and his followers. Once Darby decided to judge these "evils," men like George Wigram wrote scathing tracts to destroy their reputations and warn all the other assemblies. What began as a move of the Spirit to return to church "purity" and simplicity of worship concluded as a narrow, mean-spirited, "loveless" society of brothers, with a succession of MOTAs on top.

Does any of this sound familiar?

.

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Luther, who supposedly started the recovery and thus became the first so-called MOTA...

Ohio, Martin Luther was a sinner saved by grace, no better or worse than the rest of us. PLEASE STOP REPEATING LEE'S STORY OF LUTHER "STARTING THE RECOVERY". Luther NEVER said or even insinuated this and NEVER called himself a MOTA. In fact, he called himself a snow-covered piece of sh*t (real German translation). The MOTA thing was entirely Lee's fabricated mythology. If I am wrong, quote Luther. Don't quote Lee on Luther and attribute the quote to him. It's dishonest and unfair and misleading to those still stuck in the "recovery mindset", by giving credence to Lee's lies.

Sorry for yelling brother.

Ray

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Ohio, Martin Luther was a sinner saved by grace, no better or worse than the rest of us. PLEASE STOP REPEATING LEE'S STORY OF LUTHER "STARTING THE RECOVERY". Luther NEVER said or even insinuated this and NEVER called himself a MOTA. In fact, he called himself a snow-covered piece of sh*t (real German translation). The MOTA thing was entirely Lee's fabricated mythology. If I am wrong, quote Luther. Don't quote Lee on Luther and attribute the quote to him. It's dishonest and unfair and misleading to those still stuck in the "recovery mindset", by giving credence to Lee's lies.

Sorry for yelling brother.

Ray

Sorry NFNL, but I said "supposedly," and I AM communicating with former LC members who speak my slang. And I think the MOTA thing started with Nee. I am not giving credence to anyone's lies.

and .... IT'S MY THREAD AND I CAN WRITE WHAT I WANT TO.

Sorry for yelling bro.

[james73]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When I started this thread, my hypothesis was that the Spirit of God did move in history, especially during times of religious corruption and hypocrisy, to initiate something afresh based on the desire for "purity," but how that eventually deteriorated into a misguided pathway for the leaders to walk. I had in mind Luther, Darby, and Lee, because I am more familiar with them.

Just putting it out there, but what about Jesus? Everything you say there points to Jesus: Spirit of God, religious corruption and hypocrisy, something afresh, purity, eventually deteriorating into a misguided pathway. JC quite nicely proves your hypothesis correct, in some respects.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by james73

Just putting it out there, but what about Jesus? Everything you say there points to Jesus: Spirit of God, religious corruption and hypocrisy, something afresh, purity, eventually deteriorating into a misguided pathway. JC quite nicely proves your hypothesis correct, in some respects.

What do you mean "what about Jesus?" I'm not understanding your comments.

[james73]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What do you mean "what about Jesus?" I'm not understanding your comments.

I meant, does Jesus not fit your hypothesis very well too? You wrote:

When I started this thread, my hypothesis was that the Spirit of God did move in history, especially during times of religious corruption and hypocrisy, to initiate something afresh based on the desire for "purity," but how that eventually deteriorated into a misguided pathway for the leaders to walk. I had in mind Luther, Darby, and Lee, because I am more familiar with them.

When I read what you wrote there, I had in mind Jesus, not Luther, Darby or Lee. That's what I meant by "what about Jesus?". Jesus seemed to fit what you wrote perfectly.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by james73

When I read what you wrote there, I had in mind Jesus, not Luther, Darby or Lee. That's what I meant by "what about Jesus?". Jesus seemed to fit what you wrote perfectly.

The way Jesus took never deteriorated over time to display exclusive judgmentalism. He lived and walked by the Father in the way of love. Never once do we see Jesus struggling with others in order to dominate or lord it over them. He came to serve and to lay down His life for us. He would leave the 99 in order to find the lost one.

[awareness]

Purity can't be found or achieved. And love covers a multitude of impurities. If you have to be pure for me to love you then I will never be able to love you. God loves sinners, Jesus died for them. And when we love our neighbors we're loving sinners ... or impure ones.

Brotherly love is the only way to live with each other without killing each other.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by awareness

Purity can't be found or achieved. And love covers a multitude of impurities. If you have to be pure for me to love you then I will never be able to love you. God loves sinners, Jesus died for them. And when we love our neighbors we're loving sinners ... or impure ones.

Brotherly love is the only way to live with each other without killing each other.

We'll never be perfected in the flesh, but I believe there is an expectation in scripture for us to grow in holiness. We should encourage each other to do so in a non-judgmental way via love and not criticism.

If a brother, especially one in a position of responsibility, grows in wickedness and does not turn from his sin when asked to repent, he is probably not a brother. Think of when John Ingalls et. al confronted Witness Lee and the honored Minister of the Age didn't repent. WLee simply became more evil and hard of heart culminating in his writing of Fermentation of the Present Rebellion which was apparently a book of lies and unwarranted character assassinations.

Philippians 3:12
Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.

Hebrews 12:14
Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.

Galatians 6:1
Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.

2 Thessalonians 3:15
Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.

1 Timothy 5:20
As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Purity can't be found or achieved.

Of course. How pure is really pure? Dove soap only made it to 99.44% pure.

But when Tetzel was selling indulgences for salvation, Luther knew that the "purity" of God's people on earth was being corrupted. So my point in starting this thread was to point out how "purity" (perhaps you have a better word?) often was used to initiate positive change in the church, but this causation can eventually lead to their downfall.

No church or ministry can survive long or well by embarking on a negative mission. Witness Lee built the Recovery in the US based on how bad the rest of Christianity was. This was not readily apparent in the early days, but eventually it became undeniable. With all his "weapons" constantly aimed at the rest of Christianity, it became so easy to point them at "concerned" members within the Recovery, and that seems to be one the critical constituents of exclusivism.