Double Standards

[aron]

God is good and wonderful, and emanates His goodness and wonder throughout all of His creation. "The heavens declare the glory of God..." How much more, we who were made in His image.

But of course you know the drill - we disobeyed, and our species (human) was, although in the likeness of God, darkened and thrust away from His kingdom. Yet God did not give up on these failed and cut off creatures, and repeatedly sent messengers, emissaries, to turn them back to the light.

God's adversary Satan got wind of this practice, and alternately rebuffed and entangled the messengers, and sent his own emissaries, some of whom cleverly disguised themselves as agents of light, in order to trick the unwary. So you found seekers of truth and goodness and beauty and even reality itself, holed up in a bunker in Waco Texas, blasting away at ATF agents. Or in a jungle in French Guyana, being handed cups of poisoned kool-aid. Or committing mass suicide so that they could teleport to Jesus, who was coming to them on a spaceship riding behind the Hale-Bopp comet.

I once thought the passages in Jude and 2 Peter warning of "wandering stars" among us to be semi-raving paranoia. My experience over the years has made me rethink my position.

The great act of God was to send His Son, as the True Emissary of Light. We the failed believed into Him and were saved, and partook of His victory. We were transferred into light, and began to modify our behaviors accordingly. But here's the rub - the True Light is Jesus Christ. Any emissary who begins to presume for him/herself pride of place becomes separated from the light. And when the light turns to darkness, how great is the darkness!

Thus, the safety in the well-worn paths of old, and the peril in striking out anew. Anyone offering new and better teachings should be suspect. Especially when these new doctrines are essentially held as a contravention of our behavior. As if works were dead, and "eating Jesus" or somesuch were sufficient. I see this as teaching something novel and without scriptural basis, that being hearers (or eaters) of the word were enough. As if saying, "I am becoming God" or saying anything (reciting, declaring, chanting, pray-reading etc), would make it reality itself. No, it is the living that is the true testimony. Our faith is indeed in the teachings of Jesus, but not because they were cleverly presented, but because His living was pleasing to the Father, who furnished proof to all by raising Him from the dead.

Jesus taught, "Do not be hearers of the word only, but be doers of the word". If your theology merely tickles the fancy without the transformative power of the divine command - e.g. "Love your neighbor" - then what is it but distracting speculation? No value.

I think that the Father has rescued and restored us so that we might now obey, where once we failed: we obey by seeing the Obedient Son before us, now beckoning us onward. Theology should guide us in our quest, not distract us. Our theology should hone our steps.

The original message of this thread, "Double Standards", gives warning enough, what happens when the original message of repentance and return to the light gets distorted and contravened. Our thinking gets warped, and we begin to simultaneously spout sweet and bitter water, blessings and curses, light and darkness. And we contradict ourselves at nearly every turn, but think that because we do it, we won't be judged. Even though God judges everyone and everything, He will overlook our hypocrisy because, well... because. Because we want Him to.

I don't think "we become God" is a false teaching per se; it can be argued as false, and argued as true. But the arguing doesn't bring the reality. It is only the living that brings the reality. LSM now (I presume) trumpets the "God-man living" as the universal elixir for all mankind. But what has this phraseology added, and what has it side-stepped (love your neighbor, etc)?

And I don't think Lee was a decepticon, any more than I am, or anyone writing or reading this forum. Jesus alone is the witness to the Light. The rest are, at best, but pale imitators. "Imitate me, as I imitate Christ", said the apostle. Jesus alone is the way back to the Father. Nobody's theology, not yours or mine or Lee's, will fully capture, or match Him. My daily and hourly failures show me that I am nothing and have nothing. But today, at least, I am not so ignorant, that some smooth-talking profiteer and merchandizer will easily and quickly ensnare me with his/her speculative elixirs, his/her confidence games. Thank God for hard experience. It is worth something, after all. Thanks be to God for that.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Thus, the safety in the well-worn paths of old, and the peril in striking out anew. Anyone offering new and better teachings should be suspect. Especially when these new doctrines are essentially held as a contravention of our behavior. As if works were dead, and "eating Jesus" or somesuch were sufficient. I see this as teaching something novel and without scriptural basis, that being hearers (or eaters) of the word were enough. As if saying, "I am becoming God" or saying anything (reciting, declaring, chanting, pray-reading etc), would make it reality itself. No, it is the living that is the true testimony. Our faith is indeed in the teachings of Jesus, but not because they were cleverly presented, but because His living was pleasing to the Father, who furnished proof to all by raising Him from the dead.

Jesus taught, "Do not be hearers of the word only, but be doers of the word". If your theology merely tickles the fancy without the transformative power of the divine command - e.g. "Love your neighbor" - then what is it but distracting speculation? No value..

Lee taught that just being in his "recovered church" would transform the vessels of mercy into glory. He said that you could sleep in the back of the meeting, and leave with "more God" than when you arrived. You could get "sonized" simply by hanging out in the local church; a sort of divine osmosis would take place. This, looking back, was a confidence game. We took his confidence as our own, and became hearers of the word (Lee's word, to be specific) and not doers of the word.

And then we all wondered why we were getting old, and why there was no fruit. Then we'd burst into local church activity, as some new move from Anaheim was prescribed to fix our lukewarmness and deadness.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by aron

God is good and wonderful, and emanates His goodness and wonder throughout all of His creation. "The heavens declare the glory of God..." How much more, we who were made in His image...

I believe it is the cogent truth-filled comments on this forum that prevents any of the LSM senior blendeds from participating in a continued meaningful discussion here. It's one thing to parrot back WL's teaching to other blendeds, or perfect the young trainees whose minds are not mature enough to mount up a defense, or pummel straw men in the A&C journal, but when they face the mature minds of intelligent and assertive lovers of Jesus it seems they quickly withdraw back into their LSM cave to prepare for the next training.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by HERn

I believe it is the cogent truth-filled comments on this forum that prevents any of the LSM senior blendeds from participating in a continued meaningful discussion here. It's one thing to parrot back WL's teaching to other blendeds, or perfect the young trainees whose minds are not mature enough to mount up a defense, or pummel straw men in the A&C journal, but when they face the mature minds of intelligent and assertive lovers of Jesus it seems they quickly withdraw back into their LSM cave to prepare for the next training.

This is what Unregistered initially posted on this thread:
I would very much be interested to hear your lucid and carefully considered 'opinion' on this topic. What do you believe, Ohio? (or IntotheWind, or Awareness, or OBW, or HERn, or Freedom, or Aron, or Terry, etc, etc)...

Many of those he/she named in this post have provided responses and their 'opinions'. I've only seen one response from Unregistered and whoever this person is still hasn't registered for the forum. I afforded this person a response to a post addressed directly to me. Now I expect the same courtesy in return. This person said we could feel free to "be in our minds" so clearly the issue here has nothing to do with the LC stigma against engaging in debate.

I don't like to make assumptions, but it's hard not to assume that this person can't support WL's teachings, and that is the reason why he/she hasn't returned.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by HERn

I believe it is the cogent truth-filled comments on this forum that prevents any of the LSM senior blendeds from participating in a continued meaningful discussion here. It's one thing to parrot back WL's teaching to other blendeds, or perfect the young trainees whose minds are not mature enough to mount up a defense, or pummel straw men in the A&C journal, but when they face the mature minds of intelligent and assertive lovers of Jesus it seems they quickly withdraw back into their LSM cave to prepare for the next training.

I've said this more than a few times. Even if it's an elder or an occasional conference speaker in regard to former leading ones it has been uttered, "they should have a response". Once the materials of "their response" has been provided, the elder/co-worker would say to effect; "I feel to honor the feeling of the body".

My interpretation even if the material providing response of former leading ones has merit, those elders/co-workers will defer to the senior blendeds as if they possess "feeling of the Body". So whatever the brother's opinion might be, and especially if it's contrary to groupthink, that opinion will stay between his ears.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

My interpretation even if the material providing response of former leading ones has merit, those elders/co-workers will defer to the senior blendeds as if they possess "feeling of the Body". So whatever the brother's opinion might be, and especially if it's contrary to groupthink, that opinion will stay between his ears.

The "feeling of the Body" touted by LSM leadership for years, really has nothing to do with either the Head nor the actual body of Christ. It is simply a self-serving agenda pushed on the saints by their pseudo-leaders and hirelings.

I have witnessed literally dozens of occasions when the real feeling of the actual members of Christ was in direct opposition to the latest directive from headquarters. LC leaders spend so little actual time with her members that they have not a clue what the members feel.

I have said this in other posts -- for decades the LC leaders "seeded" their members with suspicions about other leaders with whom they rival. For years I heard these suspicions sown into me by both Anaheim and Cleveland, along with all their local surrogates. I'd like to have a dollar for every hour I was forced to sit and listen to both sides pitch their complaints. And then they call it "fellowship."

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The "feeling of the Body" touted by LSM leadership for years, really has nothing to do with either the Head nor the actual body of Christ. It is simply a self-serving agenda pushed on the saints by their pseudo-leaders and hirelings.

I have witnessed literally dozens of occasions when the real feeling of the actual members of Christ was in direct opposition to the latest directive from headquarters. LC leaders spend so little actual time with her members that they have not a clue what the members feel.

Absolutely right Ohio. Leaders; local or extra-local generally spend more time with one another than with "small potatoes" that they have no clue what members feel.
Even if they did and saw the "feeling" was not coinciding with fellowship coming from Anaheim or Cleveland, leaders would dismiss the feeling of brothers and sisters as critical, negative, etc.
I could say "we" in the home meetings should spend more time praying for one another and less time taking turns reading from ministry publications. That would be construed as being critical and negative.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Any emissary who begins to presume for him/herself pride of place becomes separated from the light. And when the light turns to darkness, how great is the darkness!

Thus, the safety in the well-worn paths of old, and the peril in striking out anew. Anyone offering new and better teachings should be suspect. Especially when these new doctrines are essentially held as a contravention of our behavior. As if works were dead, and "eating Jesus" or somesuch were sufficient. I see this as teaching something novel and without scriptural basis, that being hearers (or eaters) of the word were enough. As if saying, "I am becoming God" or saying anything (reciting, declaring, chanting, pray-reading etc), would make it reality itself...

The "God's economy" metric promoted by Witness Lee was also new, and sufficiently novel to merit critical reception. Paul did mention paying attention to God's economy, in 1 Timothy 1:4. Jesus, however, had also promoted the stewardship or economy idea, and it wasn't in context of metabolically assimilating the word in order to be organically transformed and "sonized" into God's reproduction. The gospel context, and message, was instead about responsibility, faithfulness, and obedience; to do well with what one had been given. "To whom much is given, much is required" etc.

In this line, it might be profitable to consider the angel Gabriel, speaking to Mary in Luke 1:28-36. God had commanded Gabriel, as one who stands before the throne. And God's spoken word is indeed spirit; in sending forth Gabriel the ministering spirit who then faithfully repeated this word (of spirit and life) to Mary. But does anyone then say that Gabriel assimilated the word, and became transfused with the divine element, to be metabolically transformed and made the same as God in life and nature but not in the Godhead? No? Why not? God's spoken word is spirit and life, and the angels are also similarly created in God's image and likeness. They do similarly receive the implanted word, no? Instruction, command, and revelation of the divine will? Or do the angels "run on a different Spirit" than the one Holy Spirit? I seriously doubt that. They are enlivened by God's word, same as we are.

Gabriel's subsequent actions after receiving God's word, actions bespeaking faithfulness, responsibility and obedience, parallel Jesus' parables about stewardship (oikonomia), e.g. Luke 16:1-13, and many other of His gospel stories. But nothing about becoming God is suggested. Why not? Why use one (objective and outward) set of interpretive rules with one set of stewards, and another (subjective and inward) with the other stewards?

The novelty of the "New Testament Economy of God", similar to "man becoming God", is therefore suspect. It was probably mostly given forth as an opportunity to speak messages, sell books and pamphlets, and keep the faithful in the seats for a little bit longer. But as far as an unparalleled window into the "grand master plan" of God, probably not so much.