Quote:
Originally Posted by kisstheson
The case of “handing over” started off as a genuine concern by WN. He felt that when the vast majority of the brothers and sisters had received salvation in Christ, they did not have the realization that from that point on, they belonged fully to the Lord. In practical terms, they did not realize that they should be fully given to the needs of the gospel. Because of this, WN felt that a “make-up lesson” (his words) was needed. Hence, this matter of “handing over” all of one’s possessions to the church. One problem with this was that, like anything outward, a distinction started to exist between those who had “handed over” and those who had not. An even worse problem showed up in WN’s speaking in the book Church Affairs where WN stated that “handing over” was needed before one could serve God and he also stated that the ones who had “handed over” should be “cautious” about those who had not “handed over”. A kind of human pressure was introduced into something that should have remained a spontaneous move of the Spirit. This seemed to become the root of all the subsequent cases in the LC where leadership insisted upon a oneness with the latest “flow”.
|
kisstheson, this matter of "handing over" could initially be started by the spirit, but at some point "man's hand" leaves fingerprints on handing over. Through the process, handing over becomes a matter of peer pressure than about being led by the spirit. In hadning over, the discrepancy between being led in spirit and submitting to peer pressure is inherently dangerous.
One factor in the topic of handing over is the matter of liberty. When one is spiritually led, there is liberty. When one is submitting to peer pressure, there is no liberty.
Terry