Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
Lastly, I do note that Clement in his writings on 1 John 1:5 ("God is light") says that "Light moreover signifies, either the precepts of the Law, or faith, or doctrine." And later Clement connects the idea of "walking in the light" to 1 John 2:3's "we keep his commandments". I don't think that in 2013 we should simply wave away the psalmist's declaration that he would keep the commands of God. In his notes on the Psalms WL repeatedly said, "Nobody can keep God's commands"; if so, then why is this phrase being repeated in the NT, in the "age of grace"? And what does it mean "to walk before God in the light of life"?
|
While I have made many dives into various errors of both Lee and Nee, it is this one example that stands as one of the most insidious errors (in my opinion).
Lee liked to complain about all the things that he (and supposedly we) knew that the rest of Christianity generally did not know. (And we have a great thread on that topic.) But so much of the time, the emphasis of his teachings is just like in aron's example, effectively excising much of the meat of the teachings of Jesus, and even of Lee's favorite, Paul. Lee liked to declare that only the LRC had the "full gospel." But I would suggest that, to the contrary, Lee gutted the gospel and left the group with only a partial gospel. One that celebrates spirituality and demeans obedience. That makes unrighteous into righteous by acts of outward spirituality, yet the leaves the unrighteousness intact and unrepented with no intention of ever taking action on it.
Matthew 5, Lee's so-called Kingdom's Constitution, condemns him when it states:
Quote:
|
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven . . .
|
Lee liked to claim that Jesus' work on the cross is that accomplishment. But I note that everything being accomplished is linked to the disappearance of heaven and earth. While I do not disagree with the notion that Satan was defeated on the cross, it is probably better to understand that as a declaration that the event that set it in motion was prior to the final act.
This is a common view of history. We do not simply state that the defeat of Germany was the act of ordering a cease-fire and the signing of a treaty. It is understood as one or more sequences of events that turned the tide of the war. In my example, there may be many specifics that led to that result. Some would point to the entrance of America in the the war. Some to specific Allied victories. Others to tactical blunders on the part of the German command. But at a point, there began a march toward defeat. Oh, there were surely times when it seemed that they were on the upswing. But the end was essentially certain.
In the same way, the death and resurrection of Jesus set in motion the end of Satan. But, in time, the defeat is not complete until he is cast away eternally. So the accomplishment is not fulfilled until then.
So the law and the demand for righteousness remains. Jesus demanded of us righteousness and justice. He demanded love for our fellow man that equaled our love for ourselves.
So, as the Psalmists say in so many ways, we need to meditate on the righteous commandments of the law. Dwell on them day and night. Abide by them.
Even in the era of grace.