Against the LC Practice of Prophesying

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Saying you got some good out of something is not the same as recommending it to others. I probably have gotten some good from Taco Bell, but I wouldn't go around recommending it because there are better restaurants.

Most of us got some good from the LCM, some of which may have been difficult to get elsewhere. The basic healthy teachings of the Brethren and the inner life teachers are only recently finding their way into the mainstream, forty years after we heard them.

But we are not just a bunch of exes, talking about what was before, understanding that we are not going back there. We are speaking in front of those who are needing to understand why they don't want to stay there. And while the past two days may not have had a comment about Lee as a gifted minister, it is a fairly regular statement made by some of our most regular exes and some newer ones.

Do we really think that? And is the challenge as to whether it is true so reprehensible that rather than think about it, we shoot at the messenger?

And when positive experiences are mentioned, are they clearly isolated from what we want to reiterate is just cause to reject Lee?

I have raised the issue of Paul's words concerning reasons for instructing or rejecting/refuting teachers and so far I can find no reason to exclude Nee or Lee from one or both of these categories. And no one has really given me a reason to rethink it besides pointing to something that they consider to be truth that Lee taught. But even if I agree on that particular point, does it excuse Lee from the general restraints on the ministers/teachers we should listen to?

So if an apparently great chef is working in a restaurant making really great dishes, but worked into virtually everything is just a hint of arsenic — not enough to kill, but enough to damage you and harm you a little — do we continue to recommend that restaurant after we discover the truth about it? (Arsenic may not be the best example since you can actually develop some tolerance for it rather than just getting slowly sicker and dying.)

I ask the question. If you don't want a discussion, don't respond. I am not in the habit of chasing around people who ignore what I say. Or if you respond that you don't care and don't want to discuss it, that is fine.

But just as you think it is not harmful to give out kudos to Lee and the LCM for certain things, if I disagree, am I precluded from expressing my disagreement? If I am, then I am being required to sit quietly while you and others say what I can only regard are potentially damaging statements without anyone providing any kind of challenge to it. If you don't want to take on the challenge, don't. But don't think that it means that others should not have the ability to assess both sides for themselves. Silence me and you silence a position that is tied to the Word. Ohio just challenged whether I had really considered and prayed about it. I have considered it over a fairly long period of time. It has been prayed about.

Maybe I should ask the same thing in reverse. Have any of you considered and prayed about whether it is a good idea to continue to suggest that Lee was a gifted minster of the Word? Or just a naturally gifted speaker that captured all of us at one time or another?

Or would you rather I just shut up and allow my ideas to fall back into the threads that are on the third page back of languishing threads and eventually be lost in antiquity.