[OBW]

I'm going to make one last comment for the day. Be sure to read it all before you (whoever) comment. Don't accuse me of something that I don't say, especially where I make it clear what I am and/or am not saying.

I believe that there are requirements on those who teach us. Those requirements are not so great that the very existence of human frailty would reject anyone actually of the human race. But they are still very real. Just like the qualifications for elder and deacon, there are qualifications for anyone who is teaching. And depending on what kind of teaching, the level of qualifications increases. (But that is irrelevant for this post.)

(I note that Lee and his successors constantly demean virtually all teachers outside of the LRC. They are all "clergy" which is "bad." But if anyone says anything about any of them, especially Lee (even after his death), they are subject to excommunication. So the playing field for determining qualifications for leadership is far from level. The only leaders of the church are declared to be in the LRC. All those others are leaders of harlots.)

But let's look at what scripture provides on the subject.

Unfortunately, the qualifications to be a teacher are not gathered together as nicely as Paul did for elders and deacons. So we have to find different passages and piece them together.

Stop those who are teaching "differently." Who are teaching endless genealogies and other things that just increase arguments and strive. (And I would argue that soliloquies about what it means to be "the one" bringing "the ministry" is a kind of genealogy that leads to identification of a "MOTA," and "oracle," or even an "acting god.")

Reject those that cause divisions. Those that denigrate your brothers and sisters in Christ as demonic, satanic, and even the Whore of Babylon.

Note those that keep putting the law on you. Who require circumcision, a standing order for LSM books, and a proper respect for "our brother, Witness Lee."

It may not always be our place to decide whether teachings are good or bad (stubble or precious stones). But when we see it, we shouldn't just sit there and take it.

But there is no place in scripture that suggests that we are to simply accept every Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes along with a claim of revelation. It almost seems as if the thrust of those defending the ministry of Lee are determined that because they like some of the things he said, the evidence that he was not what he claimed to be should be overlooked. And further, anyone who disagrees is going against scripture to do so.

And for every one who is taking one of these positions — any variant — I suggest that you should be stuck with Lee, Benny Hinn, Jim Baaker, Herbert W. Armstrong, Joseph Smith, Thomas Campbell, William Miller, Harold Campings, Jimmy Swaggert, Brian McLaren, etc.

We are not charged to slander any of these men. Or to misrepresent the things they taught or said. But we are, at a minimum, not refrained from determining whether the teachings of any of these men, or of any others you want to include in the mix, are sound.

And if you read Paul's comments on the subject, there is not only the watchfulness concerning proper teachings, but of open, unrepentant character flaws that evidence a person not right before God in a manner sufficient to allow them as a teacher. Of those unrepentant persons, I find Lee to be among them. And I also find significant flaw in his teachings. I cannot say which is the cause of the other. But they do seem to go hand-in-hand.

But some are determined that if he ever said a true thing, then he is to be left to fleece the flock. He can no longer do that. (I am not thankful for his death, just noting that due to it, there is nothing new going on there.) But others continue to push is faulty teachings. And they do it in a more dictatorial manner than even Lee did. Yet it is an outgrowth of Lee's teachings. It is the logical progression of teachings that make position and doctrine trump obedience and righteousness. That suggest that a "spiritual authority" should not submit to any accusation. Interesting that this is essentially Nee's teaching. At least he didn't hide behind it. That was what Lee did. Then his successors drove a truck through it.