Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
With Nee and even Lee, I think they placed too much faith in what the Brethren had supposedly "recovered". Nee saw the Brethren as the prerequisite step or group to his ministry. He was building on what they "saw". When you take a step back and realize that Nee held onto some of the negative teachings of the Exclusive Brethren, all the sudden some serious issues arise. The quote about judging of sin is an example of that. Yes, certain sin should be judged within the Church, but that shouldn't translate into the practice of judging supposed sin as the LC so frequently does.
|
Seems to me primarily with Lee, there was more of an emphasis on Darby (an exclusive brethren) than any of the open brethren brothers from the 19th century.
As I have said before many who come into the recovery bring their baggage from previous fellowships. For Nee and Lee, that baggage was the exclusive (aka Plymouth) Brethren.
Judging supposed sin indicates judging without having the facts. A brother may be removed from fellowship for his preference to read from the Bible and not the ministry publications. Brothers like Mario Sandoval and Steve Isitt are put out not because they're trying to stir up division, but because of offending elders in Ontario and Seattle unwilling to repent and reconcile with them. It's confronting "the brothers" that's considered worthy of "judging sin" in the context of Titus 3:10
Reject a factious man after a first and second warning,
Question, who is being factious?