Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
I have no problem with viewing Nee apart from Lee....
|
If I understand this post you are saying that Nee wasn't a theologian. With both Nee and Lee I did not care for their topical messages, but I got help from both of them on their exegesis. Probably the biggest help was not in "learning" their teachings, but rather learning to focus on a Bible verse word for word. Coming from my background in Christianity I had never heard anyone do this before, all I had ever heard were sermons where the speaker comes up with his thesis and then supports this with Bible verses. Prior to meeting the LRC I had tried to read the Bible (in High school) and couldn't understand it. I felt I needed a crowbar to get into it. When I read my first WN book I felt I had the crowbar I needed. He explained about types and figures and gave examples of how God spoke in a plain word, and in types and figures. He gave examples of how he prophesied once saying that a certain king would be taken to Babylon in chains and then prophesied a second time saying this same king would never see Babylon. (This of course was fulfilled when his eyes were first gouged out, and then he was taken to Babylon in chains). But examples like this taught me not to jump to a conclusion that there was a contradiction in the word, instead I looked for them because they were like little jewels.
To me the goal was to be able to read the Bible for myself, not to learn someone's teaching. I know that brothers like EM specialized in being able to quote all things WL, I never had the slightest interest in that. I never wanted Life Studies or footnotes, I just wanted to be able to open up the Bible and read it. To be fair I have to thank WN as the first brother that truly helped me do that. I could care less if he wasn't a theologian, because I didn't get any help from theologians (this is my very personal experience and should not be extrapolated as some kind of aspersion on all theologians).