[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Actually 1 Cor 5:11 is not even central to this thread, much less to most of the threads on this forum.

As I understand it this thread is about contacting a 3rd party outside of the LRC to mediate between RG, BP and JI. This is based on the assumption that mediation is a prescribed path by the NT. I am challenging that assumption and asking, based on this verse, if this is really the prescribed path. You can safely argue that "reconciliation" is the prescribed goal, but 1Cor 5:11 did lead to reconciliation.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

The personal sins of Phillip Lee are actually a miniscule part of what should concern people about the teachings, practices and history of the Local Church. These teachings and practices are based upon the person and work of Witness Lee, and the problems that arose from the misconduct of his son(s) were merely a symptom of a vast and comprehensive sickness that has prevailed upon the entire movement since Lee took control. (Maybe even before, but that is for older people to decide)

My question is that had the admonition in 1Cor5:11 been followed would it really have become a vast and comprehensive disease? A corollary of this would be a second question why. For example, after the Daystar debacle it would have been quite reasonable for the saints to listen to those from the far east and conclude that WL and his sons were covetousness. But they didn't, why? Is the lure of being "special", "God's unique move on earth" enough to cause someone to ignore the NT admonitions, and if so, shouldn't "how WL deceived the LRC" be a major focus when looking at WL's teachings? I would think so, and therefore 1Cor 5:11 is critical to prove that WL did deceive.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

A cursory review of John Ingalls’ book tells us that his concerns were not really based upon the sins of Phillip Lee, but rather that “the nature of the Lord’s recovery has changed”. Surely this involved much more than the antics of a silly and foolish man who held no official position of spiritual authority. The causes for the turmoil of the late 1980s ran much deeper and wider than Phillip Lee. The very fact that such a person could have any influence in one single local church, much less an entire movement, speaks volumes about the real character, intentions and motives of the prime mover of the Local Church.

Yes, I agree. I would say that the nature of the LRC changed when saints decided it was OK to overlook fornication, covetousness, idolatry and extortion. I would also say the nature of the LRC changed when saints stopped being guided by the admonitions of the Apostle's in the NT. Therefore, 1Cor 5:11 becomes critical to demonstrating that the nature had changed.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Nevertheless, the sins and shortcomings of any man should not be the focus of any thread within this forum. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. That includes all the members of our little community….of the members of this forum, of the Body of all believers and even of every man who has ever lived, save for the One who’s glorious and powerful resurrection we will celebrate in a number of hours. My earnest hope and prayer is that this forum can be a place where the final and ultimate focus is upon the Person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. Oh Father may it be so.

I think this idea, that we should not be focused on the sins and shortcomings of any man, is based on the Lord's word in the NT that we should "not judge lest we be judged, for with what judgement you judge you shall be judged". But that admonition does not apply to every man. The Lord allows us to judge ourselves because: "judge not yourself for with what judgement you judge yourself you shall be judged" just doesn't have the same edge to it.