Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Miletus
Not scriptural? Wow!
|
Again, brother Paul, I think it is a shame that you are unable to understand your own writings. The verses you have cited are such a mixed-up mess of your own confusion! I surely believe all of these verses but you surely have some peculiar understandings of them. I hope brothers Nee and Lee were not so confused in all of their teachings, although I do believe that they were.
I'm only posting again to say three things.
I've now had a chance to look at the 1994 additional section in Authority and Submission and the only thing I came away impressed with is that brother Nee seems not to have ever even attempted to distinguish between obedience, submission and the Kingdom. I'm not well versed to teach on these distinctions today but I do think it is here. I know someone recently tried to distinguish obedience and submitting without much luck but I think there is a distinction to be made and I will attempt to do so when I have additional light. Basically, though, I would say that the difference is that to obey is to do as one is told whereas to submit is to willingly go along with, which implies knowledgable agreement rather than blind acceptance. And, of course, the matter of the Kingdom is something even in an entirely different realm than either of these. At the end of the day, this book, Authority and Submission, is merely an unfortunate collection of philosphical musings exploring the implications of theoretical power structures in the "universal Church" rather than a valid biblical statement on "deputy authority." Read it. Look for the verses. Other than applying Old Testament principles, you could not find such a thing in the Bible.
The second thing is to restate more clearly something that was only suggested in my prior posting. In fact, "universal Church" is itself nothing more than a concept of a system of authority. It is not that "apostleship" and "eldership" and deaconates and episcopies and bishoprics and councils and synods and papacies derive from the concept of the "universal Church" but that, indeed, they are the very substance of that notion. You cannot have a "universal Church" without apostleships and elderships and such and conversely you cannot have apostleships and elderships and such without having a "universal Church" in the first place.
Finally, to the extent that any assertions regarding this doctrine of "deputy authority" are claimed to be based upon other doctrines regarding the subjugation of the functioning of the sisters in the assembly, I will just flat out reject that. You may be right in noting that we are all the females as to the Lord but you are not being a female in promoting such a doctrine of subjugation.
There.
I'm done for now.