Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
I just can not accept Lee's interpretation of I Cor 1.12 any longer. Here are my reasons ...
- Paul never once elaborated that "I am of Christ" was negative in any way
- The entire intro (1.1-10) to this matter of division pointed them to God calling them into the fellowship of His Son
- Paul immediately chided them for uplifting his own name, asking the Corinthians who was crucified for them? Into whose name were they baptized? (1.13)
- Paul then went on a long discourse about Christ as God's wisdom (1.18-2.16)
- Paul came right back to this point (3.4) "whenever one says I am of Paul ... Apollos, are you not men?" Here "I am of Christ" is not included.
- Lee's interpretation of these scripture are entirely self-serving. Paul diminished himself, exalting Christ, and only Christ. Lee, however, exalted himself as MOTA. Paul recommended other ministers to the saints in Corinth, Lee recommended no one.
- Paul said, "all are yours." (3.23) Lee and his minions made it clear that "we are all his."
- Paul concludes, "we are Christ's." In other words, "we are of Christ." Amen!
|
I may not be expressing myself clearly; if not, I apologize for that. In the main, I agree with you. I'm not agreeing with Lee's point about the believers cutting themselves off from the apostles. I am saying that Lee's idea that making a distinction that "You say you're of Paul; well, I'm of
Christ," can be similarly sectarian. Even Paul lists that among his other "I am of"s.
In any event, whether you or I agree with that or not, I'm simply saying that LC people do exactly the same thing that Lee condemns in his interpretation of "I am of Christ" when they "we are just the church (and you're not)."