Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake
Nell,
Words describe concepts and concepts form beliefs and beliefs solidify into doctrine and teachings. That is why her use of the word counterfeit is either relevant or not in her presentation. I think she meant exactly what she said about it. I believe Jane is thoughtful about her choice of words. And in describing Satans counterfeit she mischaracterized it. It is not my place to substitute a different word, Yet, she paints a world that is quintessential black and white, good and evil people, righteous and unrighteousness happenings, things that are right and wrong. So in describing Satan's attack she defaults to this same paradigm, that is , if God is loving and good, Satan is the polar opposite when in reality Satan is very adept at mimicking the attributes of God. Peter exhibited that and for our benefit the Lord recorded the incident. That is why Peter is relevant. His thought, opinion, and recommendation were the Satanic counterfeit and if that is not understood then Jane will have missed the real counterfeit and misidentified as counterfeit that which is not.
To my observation in these few samples of her new book, she seems to be searching for new definitions of scripture to validate the wrongs of the past related to authority and it seems she is building a case that it was counterfeit authority. Therefore I believe this book is very much connected with her past experiences. However, I will reserve a definitive point of view as I see how she develops this line of thinking and where she eventually takes it.
Drake
|
Drake makes some valid points here. No doubt Jane's life experiences will affect her views on scripture. Aren't we all the same? Lee was no different! When it comes to the abuse of spiritual authority, exclusive systems like the LCM are rife with examples. I have personally posted some of my own stories, but some were so painful, that they are better left unsaid.
If we look at the N.T., it is grossly lopsided when addressing spiritual authority. Most of the warnings are given to the leaders, not the followers. Paul became our excellent pattern, not by assuming the divine authority, but by serving in humility, due to his former life killing Christians. Lee and many LC leaders seemed to have missed this completely.
I agree with you that life in the LCM was not "quintessential black and white." There was too much overlap not to admit shades of gray. This is why I have constantly testified that LC leaders have betrayed our trust. Yes, many of these brothers ministered life and shepherded the saints, but some also "played God," crossing normal freedom boundaries into manipulation and control. This forum is filled with such stories. Because we received genuine spiritual fellowship from them, at least initially, we trusted them and we submitted to them, which eventually enabled them to take advantage of us and use us for their own advantage. We got betrayed.
By elevating himself to become some consummate N.T. MOTA, Witness Lee established abusive ministry patterns which other leaders followed. Not all leaders, but far too many. Usually the abusive ones were promoted first. Think about how abusive Phillip Lee was, and by all accounts, not even saved, yet promoted to running "the office." Thus the LCM became a system of abuses, a system which rejected normal Christian boundaries, a system which usurped the Headship of Christ.
With such a background, the church of God often needs a healthy counter-ministry, with the pendulum swinging the other direction, to bring us into balance. The apostle Paul also brought such balance in his ministry, in contrast to the Judaizers coming from headquarters, who attempted to bring the church under subjection, using the same techniques used by Nee and Lee, and the same "spiritual authority" doctrines based on Moses.