Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
Ohio,
I understand you points. And I do not disagree when it comes to Nee. He did not try to weasel. And he was not trying to alter. Just clarify.
But the way he did it does throw the discussion off the actual command. If you are worried about your preferences, or whether it hurts someone (and the truth always hurts the evildoer), or whether there are emotions behind it, then you are ignoring the simple fact of are you or are you not bearing false witness.
|
After reading his quote again, I still think WN attempted to take the matter of lying a step further, beyond just the plain words. I have come across this countless times -- people change their tone when repeating their version of the story, in order to justify themselves. I have done it myself. This "change in tone" WN would call lying, and rightly so. Technically the person was "honest," by repeating the words said, but actually they were being dishonest by changing the tone and mood of the words said. WN here was just addressing these matters.
I see no possible justification for WL to use WN's teaching here. I know
ZNP brought up some good points along this line, in his post #37, concluding ...
Quote:
|
If you introduce enough confusion no one will be interested in untangling the ball of string, hence the response recently by elders that this is in our "distant past" and the desire to just forget the whole thing. Liars understand this and make every effort to create a tangled ball of string out of their lies. If you are going to untangle it you have to simplify and I don't think WN is helpful at doing that.
|
Actually, it was the teachings of WL himself that attempted to silence any and all critics. He spoke much during this time about having opinions, the danger of opinions producing Laodicea, and the like. He confronted the naysayers about blowing "cold winds" of doubt. I am sure
ZNP remembers that. I have no memory of WN's teaching on Proverbs 6.19 being used.