Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest 1
In the same way, if you had 25 different bible expositions on your shelf I see nothing wrong with one of them being WL. But, if you believe that only one is the “oracle” that to me is the fundamental error of WL. Bad Lee is not that he taught that the Body of Christ is Christ. Bad Lee is that he taught that all other Christian teachers were devoid of any value. We had a bookstore in our hall. We were actively coerced into buying WL’s writings while at the same time being berated if we showed an interest in other teachers. That to me is “Bad Lee”.
|
This comment reminded me of a discussion I had with Philip Comfort years ago in Columbus in 1980. He was known as a "pure wordist" among those in greater Ohio. At the time, he loved the ministry of WL, yet viewed it as only one of many ministries and commentaries which can render help to us believers. At one point, he named several books in the Bible, and then identified which commentator he felt was best, e.g.
"if you really want to know Galatians, you have to study Martin Luther." He was well read, yet Phil Comfort always stressed the Bible first. In another conversation, he said that he had probably spent over one hundred hours prayerfully considering the opening words of First John, "
That which was from the beginning ..."
In the early days, someone like Dr. Philip Comfort could fit and thrive in the Recovery. He was definitely well loved by the saints. He had a ministry freshness which was unique. Eventually, however, his Bible-only, Jesus-only purity was publicly challenged by TC in Cleveland as being "
without reality, impractical, and unbalanced." All the "Bad Lee" training in TC eventually had to "deal" with this young idealist ...
and so he did. TC had a way of turning all the other leaders against his "victims."