Translation & More

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by testallthings

This contradicts his footnote (someone might say that there isn't enough space to explain everything in the footnote). I believe the footnotes should be considered as is “final word” on things shared in the LS.

Lastly, he suggests that we can do the same! “We also may learn to visit a brother by our spirit. While we remain at home, it is possible for our spirit to visit a brother.” I have never met a believer who claimed to have learned this practice! Did you, my dear readers? Did he (W.L.)?

It's hard to know for sure what WL really intended to say here, but any way you look at it, WL spoke a bunch of nonsense.

This statement in his LS message is what I find to be particularly concerning: "We also may learn to visit a brother by our spirit. While we remain at home, it is possible for our spirit to visit a brother. This is what Paul's spirit did regarding the situation at Corinth."

If there were such a possibility as what WL describes here, it would involve the paranormal. I doubt that WL really wanted to imply this, but that's what happens when he tries to interpret things too literally. There is a phrase in verse 3 that WL seemed to ignore - "as if being present". For me, "as if" implies that Paul did something (pronounced judgement) in the same way he would of had he been there physically.

The context of these verses is judgement. Paul knew about a situation that was reported, and he judged it accordingly. And it seems Paul's role in all this was only because he had a vested interest in Corinth and those in Corinth had failed to judge the immoral person. This brings me to my point. Since Paul had started the church there in Corinth, he cared about what was going on there. Part of the 'spirit' of Paul's ministry involved judgement when necessary. They failed in this regard, so Paul urged them to deliver the immoral one to Satan. Paul was the one who had taught the word of God to them. It would thus follow that they looked to him as an example and hopefully tried to follow his example.

This is what I see as the meaning of "when you and my spirit have been assembled". Paul urged them to take an action as if he was there. He already pronounced judgement, indicating that they should do the same.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

It's hard to know for sure what WL really intended to say here, but any way you look at it, WL spoke a bunch of nonsense.

This statement in his LS message is what I find to be particularly concerning: "We also may learn to visit a brother by our spirit. While we remain at home, it is possible for our spirit to visit a brother. This is what Paul's spirit did regarding the situation at Corinth."

If there were such a possibility as what WL describes here, it would involve the paranormal. I doubt that WL really wanted to imply this, but that's what happens when he tries to interpret things too literally.

The first sentence I agree with: WL spoke a bunch of nonsense. But I have a different reading, here. I see two things: first is that these people really believed this stuff. So to dismiss it as irrelevant is to dismiss God's word as irrelevant, and God's ministers as mistaken, or passé.

Secondly, why we dismiss is because of our theology. WL defended the Protestant theology, which was his launching pad. So if Protestant theology couldn't see something, neither could WL the post-Protestant Bible expositor.

So let's go back, shall we? Back before centuries of tradition and speculation marred the word, and before the Calvinists rejected centuries of tradition and went "sola scriptora" which meant sola theologica. If their theology couldn't handle the word then the word fell by the wayside.

If you look at the record in scripture it seems clear that the actors and writers of the drama we call the New Testament absolutely believed in this "spooky action from a distance", to borrow a phrase from our pal Einstein. Jesus could speak a word in one place, and a Roman Centurion's servant was healed in another place. Simultaneously! The word takes pains to point this out.

How did this happen? If you read the text, the Centurion himself supplies the explanation: "I also have servants working under me, and I tell them 'go' and they go..." No mention in either the Life-Study message or the footnotes who are the 'servants' working under Jesus. WL's theology doesn't handle it so it's ignored.

The actual mechanism of salvation in this instance, for Jesus to be in one place and someone to get healed in another, is ignored because it might rub into the centuries of fluff and nonsense that have grown up around these tales, so hey - let's just ignore the word! No need to do all the hard work of sorting the proverbial wheat from the chaff. That's what scholars do in those dreaded seminaries - but hey, we're here for life! Right?

Also look at John 1:51. WL couldn't handle the imagery, and simply referenced the "house of God" motif, and ignored what was happening right in front of him. Jacob's dream/vision of "angels ascending and descending" ascribed by Jesus, to Himself and His experience, got reduced to "much traffic" in the Life-Study of Genesis. Much traffic of what - diesel/electric submarines?

Now, back to Paul. What happened? I don't know. I haven't done enough looking and/or thinking even to guess. Maybe allegorical, as Freedom suggests. Even today, "I am with you in spirit" is a kind of catch-all benediction people give each other in parting; even non-believers do this, to signify oneness of purpose and feeling.

But Witness Lee was a true child of Calvin, in the "sola scriptora" idea. He had scripture and he had his opinion, and if his opinion was ignorant then scripture suffered the consequences. You'd likely either get some willfully obtuse remark like testallthings quoted, or simply silence, as if the word of scripture wasn't even there.

"It has no meaning to me, therefore it has no meaning, therefore it doesn't exist." What a simple and easy way to get through life! And you can even apply this to scripture! Who knew? As they say, ignorance is bliss.

[testallthings]

Originally Posted by aron

Secondly, why we dismiss is because of our theology. WL defended the Protestant theology, which was his launching pad. So if Protestant theology couldn't see something, neither could WL the post-Protestant Bible expositor.

W.L. defended the Protestant theology? This would make W.L. turn in his grave!
W.L. couldn't see something the Protestant theology itself couldn't see? This would make W.L. jump out of his grave!
(we all know how he despised Protestantism, and how he boasted that he saw more than those who went before him)

[aron]

Originally Posted by testallthings

W.L. defended the Protestant theology? This would make W.L. turn in his grave!
W.L. couldn't see something the Protestant theology itself couldn't see? This would make W.L. jump out of his grave!
(we all know how he despised Protestantism, and how he boasted that he saw more than those who went before him)

In the "recovery" narrative, Martin Luther loomed large as a champion. W.L. built on that "recovery of justification by faith" in his progressive revelation idea.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by testallthings

W.L. defended the Protestant theology?
W.L. couldn't see something the Protestant theology itself couldn't see?

Originally Posted by aron

In the "recovery" narrative, Martin Luther loomed large as a champion. W.L. built on that "recovery of justification by faith" in his progressive revelation idea.

According to Lee's Protestant remnant theology, Martin Luther was the Grand-Daddy of all MOTA's. He was the Zerubbabel of the OT, returning to Jerusalem and rebuilding the foundation of the temple of God on the "proper ground." Protestantism was his foundation, but Lee's role was to correct and consummate any flaws which previous MOTA's might still have had.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Ohio

According to Lee's Protestant remnant theology, Martin Luther was the Grand-Daddy of all MOTA's. He was the Zerubbabel of the OT, returning to Jerusalem and rebuilding the foundation of the temple of God on the "proper ground." Protestantism was his foundation, but Lee's role was to correct and consummate any flaws which previous MOTA's might still have had.

I see the problem with MOTA and remnant theology being that there is only one MOTA at a time. While Martin Luther took a big step in recovering the church to the pure word of God, he was hardly alone, but rather part of the Spirit's response through a group of reformers bold enough to risk their lives by standing with truth versus the church's teaching of the day. This has been the case ever since.

The Ministry of the Age is the ministry of God's word and Spirit, rather than law (or licentiousness and self exaltation). No single man has ever "cornered that market". And, anyone who thinks he or a very small group of men has needs to learn more of Bible and church history. The Lord has a way of preserving a remnant of thousands of faithful saints in a manner that is hidden to God's prophets, until He chooses to reveal them (to His glory!).

[HERn]

Originally Posted by JJ

I see the problem with MOTA and remnant theology being that there is only one MOTA at a time. While Martin Luther took a big step in recovering the church to the pure word of God, he was hardly alone, but rather part of the Spirit's response through a group of reformers bold enough to risk their lives by standing with truth versus the church's teaching of the day. This has been the case ever since.

The Ministry of the Age is the ministry of God's word and Spirit, rather than law (or licentiousness and self exaltation). No single man has ever "cornered that market". And, anyone who thinks he or a very small group of men has needs to learn more of Bible and church history. The Lord has a way of preserving a remnant of thousands of faithful saints in a manner that is hidden to God's prophets, until He chooses to reveal them (to His glory!).

A sister from the GLA showed me the book "The Pilgram Church" by Broadbent that shows that God has always had a faithful church, and it's not the one that declares its own beauty and faithfulness to the Lord.