Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped
Welcome to the forum, experienced lurker!
While I take much issue with the local church and everything in me wants to ask you lots of pointed, trapping questions, I'll just go for something more genuine:
What is your diagnosis of the local churches that follow the teachings and practices of Witness Lee? How do you view them? You are a longer term member, you know the top leadership, you know what they say about Christianity, you know having your own ministry is "verboten" in the group, and yet you say you defend what they castigate......so what is your personal view of the local church?
1. Only they have the ministry of the age and only they are the genuine expression of the church?
2. They see more than other Christians do but there is some value outside the group too?
3. They are generally correct but just made a few innocent mistakes?
4. They have good and bad and you would not overly encourage or overly discourage people to or away from it?
5. Lots of problems with their teachings but at least the basics are there?
6. System of error packed with leaven and unbiblical teachings, but the social connections keeps people?
7. Cult that twists scripture to cover sin and abuse, leaving a trail of wounds in their wake?
Or something not listed?
And whatever you answer.....why do you think that?
Trapped
|
My own ministry isn't particularly verboten, I've talked to my father about it. The principle is to avoid conflict and promote "oneness" of doctrine, at least formally in the church. My ministry only defends things like the trinity, God's existence, and the resurrection which is not in conflict with LSM. I have had many interactions with DCP, and there's no conflict with my apologetics and the teachings of LSM. Ed Marks was encouraged by it, when I told him about it.
To answer your suggestion, it lies somewhere between 1-4. I believe the local churches have a nuanced and sometimes guilty history. But this is true of most churches, I don't find that to be a persuasive critique (ipso facto), but rather a serious practical issue. I believe most of the truths interpreted by Witness Lee are plausible. We are stuck in our minds, so we have to interpret everything. We are all on the same ground epistemically, and I find the teachings to be plausibly grounded. We hold to the central faith formally, so we aren't in the despair of damnable heresy as some would suggest.