Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
When I was young, recruited off the college campus, during the New Way era push for good building materials, I was just what they wanted: vulnerable, impressionable, and uncertain. Witness Lee was anything but uncertain. So I borrowed his certainty. He would show us a verse or two or three, and say, "This shows us that..." or "This indicates that..."
It was not until years later, after immersion in this world of reflexive non-thought, that there are other Bible verses, indicating other possible narratives, should one reflect, and consider. And when I showed these "other" verses to the LSM-affiliated brethren, a curious thing would happen.
If it was a public meeting, there would be silence. I had brought out the "wrong" verse, that couldn't be used in the Lee narrative. Or, I'd be told that I was confused. Or, in a private conversation I might be told that I was being stubborn, argumentative. But in all cases there was a refusal to consider the scripture that I had offered. If it couldn't be made to fit the Lee narrative, it couldn't exist. What kind of a Bible is that?
I would remind our readers that to assemble in Meeting Hall 3 of the Church in Taichung and read Week 8 of HWFMR is also a work, based on faith. You believe the WL narrative and it alters your behaviours. Pray-reading is an action, with a hoped-for result.
But the NT is about Jesus, in fact both Testaments look to him. He said, "These things were written of me"
|
Well as far as the subject of Lee's ministry, I believe absolutely that it's focused on Jesus. It introduces you to your human spirit, which is the practical way to contact Jesus in real time. I am very grateful for Lee for that. I never would have known that or heard that from anywhere else. Who else talks about the human spirit? And in such a concise and to the point way? I know there have been books on it for sure. But who else links it to calling on the name of the Lord? I know Andrew Murray wrote some good books on the spirit of Jesus. Some very spiritual works from him, but I never heard anyone explain how to "turn the light on" to our spirit by calling on the name of the Lord. Only Lee did that
But you bring up some other good points insofar that BECAUSE his ministry was so unique it caused a very homogenous type of behavior amongst the body, which you talk about in saying that your attempts to shine light on different verses were shot down. Which is a valid point. That lends to the LC acting cultish for sure. And it also goes against Lee's own words when he talks about accepting all believers who may think or practice different than we do. But I believe he draws a hard line when it comes to the ground of the church and certain fundamental doctrines similar to that. Which one could argue is necessary. But the point is that maybe because he was so right and they were so used to being lied to by the world or mislead by flimsy denominational doctrine that once they got on some solid ground of Lee's teachings they voraciously fought against anything else. But then on the other hand I am pretty sure Lee had conferences teaching them to reject and repudiate anything but God's economy. So you're right there's a lot of inconsistencies. Maybe we could call them paradoxes that need the grace of God and the love of Jesus humanity? Idk, maybe some of those members should have said "amen" to your prophesying, but because it had a different tone they felt afraid of it. Which, seems culty
I've definitely seen and experienced a lot of homogenous behavior like that when it comes to sharing. I've even seen elders ask certain ones to sit down if their prophesying is too long or doesn't have the flavor of the spirit in it. There's probably a lot to critique there. I believe they love to hear the God's economy phrases and words and something that doesn't seem along that flavor elicits crickets. But I personally used to LOOOVE the prophesying in a certain locality. And I loved when it seemed very natural in tone and voice. In fact I usually could tell when it was a performance. And maybe over the years it became more perfunctory because of the super emphasis on training. And I think ones who go to the training become very homogenous in their thinking, talking, and behavior and they lose their uniqueness. I think that's personally very boring. And probably defeats the purpose to a great deal. Like they just kind of get indoctrinated into set patterns and behaviors that are supposed to build up their character and pursuit of the Lord but actually just kind of conform them to the image of whatever mannequin ideal is the norm for what a "brother" and "sister" in the church
should look and act like. Which I think kills the uniqueness of each member. If when we come together and "each one has" (1 Corinthians 14:36) but it's kind of just all the same stuff rehashed and reheated in different "pots and containers" then how can it be enjoyable? I've found myself just really going through the motions so much in this way, and I'm sure a lot of the reason young people particularly get disenfranchised is related to this
However with all of that said, I think what makes the recovery unique is the enjoyment of the spirit. So while although all of these things I just said may be true and diminishing to the uniqueness with regards to functioning, we can't also throw out or overlook the spirit, which I do think is there, and I don't think it's really anywhere else. At least for certain not in the same degree. And this comes out of meeting on the correct ground. Which is why the meetings, although maybe boring and droll in function, are unique in regards to the enjoyment of the spirit. Which is one of the main reasons why I probably could never meet anywhere else