Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassidy
That is what I liked, and still do, about [Witness Lee and Watchman Nee] and their teaching. The security of our eternal salvation once we believe and receive, but a loss of the kingdom reward, not the loss of eternal salvation, if we are unfaithful in our christian walk. The assurance and the warning.
|
This subject, incidentally, points out another weakness in the Protestant Reformation, which I wanted to address in discussion on Erasmus vs Luther. The main promulgators of the Protestant Reformation, I feel, were so horrified by the abuses of "works" (see, for example, the indulgences issue) that they over-reacted: "It is naught of works/'Tis all of grace". They downplayed the issue of "My reward is according to your works" until it was nearly non-existent in the consciousnesses of the Protestant faithful.
Thus, I posit, arose the Anabaptists. I spent some time with a group of them, post-LC, and was really impressed with their living. The children were a glaring contrast to LC children. Instead of fussy and agitated, they were calm and obedient. At the time I was still pretty strong for LSM teachings, even though I'd gone "back to christianity". But I realized that to introduce these young Anabaptist children to the LC young people would be like introducing them to the plague. So it was part of my journey: the realization that teachings, terminology and doctrine don't equal the kingdom. I somewhat heard about the kingdom in the local churches of Nee and Lee, but I saw more clearly it in the intentional communities of the anabaptists, and elsewhere.