Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Well, this works as a cold-eyed analysis from outside. But it doesn't work as an explanation of how they really think. I mean, do you really believe the LCers, even the leadership, sit around and say, "Well, we know our doctrines are crap, see? So let's keep the focus on Nee and Lee as ministers of the age so the members don't analyze our crappy doctrines too closely."
Really?
You may be explaining how things work, but you still are not explaining fundamental motivations.
|
You may not think they consider this. But if you are among the theological leaders of the group and you can't start from zero — no magic overlay to use to redefine what it all means, etc. — and you want to get to some of those teachings, you need to have an authority that you can point to that makes it real. The whole Spiritual Authority teaching is circular. You need someone to walk cavalierly through the Bible and devise a hierarchy that is far beyond anything intended by the passages being used (abused?) so that you can have a teaching that allows someone to walk cavalierly through the Bible devising teachings (including the hierarchy) that no one else can come up with.
If it is just about "God's purpose is more than Heaven," you don't need Nee or Lee. That is a rather commonly-held teaching that is right there in plain sight.
If it is just about "Christ lives in me," you don't need Nee or Lee.
If you need Babylon to become Christianity so that the LRC can return to "Jerusalem" and be the remnant, then you need someone to stroll cavalierly through the Bible disregarding many things actually written, along with the obvious metaphorical error of aligning Babylon with being God's people. Of course, Nee and Lee aren't the first ones to use that erroneous metaphor. There are a handful of small, marginal sects (now and back through the years) that have created "remnant" theologies. And they all need to misread the Bible.
I don't think the current brass has the guts to stand up and simply declare that whatever they are saying is true on its own.
But that does not mean that I think they are just frauds that don't believe what they are saying. I've seen the look in BP's eyes as he speaks (many years ago). He is a believer. He buys it. You can talk about RK's theological training. But I think he buys it. But they both realize that if there is not truth in a hierarchy of man under God in which someone rises to the level of speaking new things for God that don't completely square-up with the existing scripture, then they are thin ice. They do not see the way for them to simply say that these things are so.
They need Nee to have been that pinnacle person years ago. (And since Nee has been heavily respected by much of Christianity, his word might carry at least a little weight with some.) They need someone with a history that puts them in line to speak new things that have not been heard before. If Nee makes the cut, then Lee might just be the rational next-in-line. That keeps "God's economy" on track, along with several other newer things. (I can't remember, but is the "Jesus became the Spirit" thing originally Lee's . . . or Nee's . . . or someone else's?).
But if you do not like that reason. Then the motivation can only be that they really do think that he is/was the MOTA, God's deputy authority, the Oracle of God, the one who writes new scripture (effectively, though never spoken out loud as such).
They really are the personality cult that awareness has been so fond of pointing out . . . . And it might be true.