Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
My use of the phrase "purge out the leaven" has nothing to do with the O.T. practice of the Israelites. My understanding is based on I Cor. 5.6-13, Gal 5.7-9, and Matt. 16.11-12. Here Jesus instructs His disciples to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" referring to their teachings. These teachings had to be removed or purged from the disciples. After the Lord gave them this warning, He took them to Philippi, and asked them, "who do men say that I am? Obviously the leaven of the Pharisees hindered them from knowing who Christ really was.
In Corinth, the church there was "glorying" in evil things. Their thinking and teachings about moral matters was leavened, so Paul warned them to purge out these teachings of malice and wickedness. Paul even went further to instruct the church to separate themselves from those who practice such evil. To the Galatians, Paul reminded them of how well they were running after Christ, but were leavened by the teachings of the Judaizers. They had not been persuaded by Him who had called them, but by leavened teachings which affected the whole lump.
Both Jesus and Paul struggled to expose the teachings, practices, ways, patterns, thoughts, principles, methods, etc. which collectively could be considered as "leaven." These much be purged, so that what remains can be a new lump of fine flour, representing Christ and His pure word. One brother has wisely said, "we got lots of extras" in the LC's. These extras are the leaven which require purging. The Lord never said to throw the "lump" out with the leaven.
|
Well, I think regardless of OT or NT, if you use the term "leaven" to refer to teachings you are using an analogy. The metaphor is still the same metaphor. The reason for purging could be that it is old, or that it is evil, or that it is malicious, but whatever the reason, the practice of purging would still be the same.
The quote that I was commenting on said you wanted to figure out "which of WL's teachings were leavened and purge them". My understanding of this analogy is that all teachings are leavened. The leaven isn't the factor that determines it is evil, or malicious, or old. Teachings act similar to leaven by causing the whole lump to be leavened (just like WN teaching that you have one church in one city affected the entire LRC). So Jesus's words were "the bread of life" and the Body of Christ is likened to a loaf of bread "we being many are one lump". WN's teachings spread like leaven and have leavened the whole Body of Christ. The fact that they act like leaven doesn't make them evil, or old, or malicious. So why is the Lord's Body likened to unleavened bread? The NT age was a time to purge out the old teachings, not because they were bad, or evil, but because they were old. Prior to the incarnation and crucifixion of Christ they might have been fine, but after the crucifixion it was time to start anew.
Second, what is truly the most damaging teaching of the LRC or of LSM? My feeling is that they forbid the saints from purging out the old teaching. Say for example that as a result of the Life study messages there were 100 saints that stood up and began to minister. John So, JI, etc. No one stopped them, no one defamed them, no one excommunicated them, no one required that they filter everything through the LSM office. If that were the case any other negative teaching of WL would be irrelevant. It would have been corrected by the Body of Christ, he would have been balanced by others, he would have been rebuked, chastened, etc. The truth would have prevailed and PL would have been properly dealt with. So instead of canonizing his teachings they should have been used for a springboard for many others to go forth and speak. WL often said that he was standing on the shoulders of giants. So why all of a sudden did they forbid anyone else from standing on their shoulders?
Third, I would contend that because they didn't purge out the old leaven but instead took the erroneous concept that WL ministry was the end all and be all, it was the effort to make that so that brought in the malicious and evil teachings. Is the MOTA a spark plug that ignites everyone else or is he a lone burning coal that everyone has to huddle around to stay warm. The second view, to me, is pitiful and pathetic, but that is the one the LSM took, the BB's carry, and the LRC pushes. My point is not to accept the teaching of the MOTA but to point out how pathetic their view is of this MOTA. The Apostle Paul lit a fire that has spread around the world, like leaven, so that there are more than a billion saints worldwide. In contrast the only thing the LSM will raise up with their MOTA teaching is parrots. The LRC is not for everyone, it is only for those willing to parrot WL.
Why did this happen? Because he teaches that leaven signifies sin. If instead you understand that just like gathering manna every day, the labor in the word also must be done daily. You can't live off of yesterday's manna and you can't live off of yesterday's teacher. On the other hand if you understand that you have to regularly purge out your old teaching and start anew, then we would have taken a different path. If you understand that teachings are like bread, then it is easy to understand you can't save 20 or 30 year old bread and feed a church with it. You have to make bread fresh every day, at least every week.