Practice of Deputy Authority in the Bible

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

My issues with the teaching of Deputy Authority:

• There is no direct NT counterpart to Noah, Moses, King David, King Solomon, Samuel, or any other notable OT person except for Jesus Christ Himself.
• Jesus Himself instructs us never to rule as the Gentiles. He never even hinted that Peter, or John, or James would one day rule the church.
• NT leadership is always a plurality. There is no justification whatsoever for a Pope, MOTA, the oracle, the acting god, etc.
• The concept that Paul, the senior worker, ruled all the other workers in "the work," is nothing more than a convenient circumvent to modern day popery.
• I Tim 5.20 stresses accountability by the elders who have "sinned" publicly for all to learn. Matthew 18 instructs us in some cases to tell "it to the church."
• The concept of "covering" is rife with dangers because "absolute power corrupts absolutely." When do we stop covering "nakedness," and start covering up serious "sins?"
• The concept that "God alone will deal with His deputy" has no basis in the scripture or in history -- just read up on the popes.

Originally Posted by Nell

Your points are well taken. With all the "unknowns" both of you make, it further weakens the case for Nee's "deputy authority". There is not enough scriptural justification for a "deputy authority".

"Deputy authority" is a convenient means to "spiritualize" men's attempt to control the members of the Lord's church.

Whose church is it, anyway?

Nell

Ohio does make a good point. The Old Testament shouldn't be evaluated in the absence of the New Testament. Perhaps that was Nee's problem. He came across Old Testament examples of what he thought supported his teaching, but he didn't go on to consider how the same issue is handled in the New Testament.

The verse that Nell points out, 1 Tim 5:20, presents a completely different view of authority than how those in the LC view it. I can guarantee if someone tried to challenge an elder in the LC, things wouldn't go down so well.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I can guarantee if someone tried to challenge an elder in the LC, things wouldn't go down so well.

Unless he is president of a publishing house in CA.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The verse that Nell points out, 1 Tim 5:20, presents a completely different view of authority than how those in the LC view it. I can guarantee if someone tried to challenge an elder in the LC, things wouldn't go down so well.

From Indiana's article of Hear the Cases, never is it so blatant.

To many cases of an elder's/coworker's (Samuel Liu) abuse to numerate here, but here is how it was resolved:

“James Lee said, we got the letter and we will take care of it. I waited and waited and nobody responded to me, to my May 18, 2005 letter sent over two years before. The brothers in Ontario saw how bad the situation was getting, so they called JL, and asked him if they could meet with him. Tom Serratti, Benjamin Liu, Damaso Flores, Samuel Liu and I from Ontario met with James Lee. Samuel Liu was forced by his flesh brother Benjamin Liu to come to this meeting. James Lee said; “I am only going to listen to you, since I can’t do anything”.

“I (Mario) said, this meeting is for brother Samuel Liu and I to be reconciled. Samuel Liu started doing the same thing, he said, “everything is in the hands of the blended co-workers”, cross his arms, bow down his head, close his eyes, and foam came out of his mouth. The meeting was over and nothing was done. His brother, Benjamin Liu, came to me and said, Mario this time we couldn’t do anything, maybe next time.
“After calling and calling Benjamin Liu for at least one month for us to meet again with James Lee, we were able to meet see if at this time SL would reconcile with me. We had the second meeting but sad to say the same thing happened. At the end of the meeting, SL said the same thing, “everything is in the hands of the blended co-workers”. SL would not talk to me and did not want to be reconciled with me.

“After the meeting was over brother James Lee came to me (Mario) and Damaso Flores, and said, “brothers, Samuel has a sickness; it is the same sickness that his two children have, and if you want to follow him in Ontario, that is up to you.” Also, he said that everything SL was doing in Ontario he didn’t believe, especially with the statistics. Samuel counted the brothers and sisters 4 times, the same people. Here again the second meeting with James Lee and nothing was done. And, still we have not received a response from our letter sent May 18, 2005 to the co-workers."

Point is here an elder is being confronted to reconcile. In this instance Samuel has his prerogative if he wants to reconcile. It's mind blowing the unwillingness to act by his peers (fellow responsible brothers). Even more when James Lee says: “Samuel has a sickness...." What's he doing in this capacity when there's not only a sickness, but an anger management issue. In my mind completely unqualified to be an elder by scriptural standards.
Who knows how many localities in the Inland empire has to kowtow to every little whim of Samuel Liu?
The end result for Mario Sandoval, well when James Lee said he couldn't do anything to help Mario, he could use his influence to keep Mario from meeting in Vista.
This is how bad things can go when an elder is challenged.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Terry

and foam came out of his mouth..

Okay...so apparently the BBs practice of covering the deputy authority extends to the those possibly under the influence of a demon? And the reason the BBs want to protect the "foamer" is what? Isn't one function of true shepherds to protect the flock? So the BBs protect the "foamer" at the expense of the flock? Dear LC-ers do you perceive anything wrong with this? Oh wait a minute, you're not for right and wrong, right? Just for life and the "spirit", right? So tell me which "spirit" seeks to cover up the damaging deeds of the "foamer" so he can continue to abuse the flock just to protect the demonic hierarchical control practiced by the BBs? What would happen if the dear small potatoes together grabbed the "foamer" and tossed him out the door? Kind of like a couple of flesh brothers at a large family reunion grabbing and throwing out an old uncle who molested some of the nieces at the last reunion. What's the healthiest response? Cover the molester so he can continue to molest the children or throw him out on his ear?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by HERn

Okay...so apparently the BBs practice of covering the deputy authority extends to the those possibly under the influence of a demon? And the reason the BBs want to protect the "foamer" is what? Isn't one function of true shepherds to protect the flock? So the BBs protect the "foamer" at the expense of the flock? Dear LC-ers do you perceive anything wrong with this?

I have seen plenty of LC leaders who are unfit for their roles. It blows my mind to think that so many could blindly follow such leaders. At one point in time, I bought into all the nonsense about the LC not having any hierarchy, so it never occurred to me that there was anyone in particular exercising authority or control.

In the past, I might have said that if there was any major problem among LC leaders, it might be that they are overzealous. When you consider some of the things that have been brought to light on the internet, it is clear the overzealous leaders are probably the least of the problem. There are leaders who are utterly lacking in transparency, and as is seen from this excerpt, even demon possessed.

Every LC member should ask themselves, what kind of system enables these kinds of leaders? For the most part, those leading churches outside the LC are in a leadership position because that is what they are fit for. I don’t hear about the issue of authority coming up much outside the LC. It really makes you stop and think.