[OBW]

“The seven golden lampstands, symbols of the seven local churches in Asia, are all identical in essence, nature, shape, color, appearance, function, and expression. In all these aspects the seven lampstands are identical. This signifies that all the local churches should be the same in essence, nature, shape, color, appearance, function, and expression. The seven lampstands were identical to the point that if they were placed side-by-side before our eyes, we could not discern which is which.” (Witness Lee, The Intrinsic Problem in the Lord’s Recovery Today and Its Scriptural Remedy, LSM, 1990, p. 29)

One of the significant problems that I see throughout this article is that Lee made logical leaps that the underlying scriptures do not support. While Nigel does see this, I do not think he points it out as directly as he could, or even should. (I admit that he knows he is writing to a specific population that is at least somewhat predisposed to take Lee’s words as being on par with scripture. But while I realize that even this softer version of attacking those ideas may lead to the lessening, or even removing of that predisposition, at times I would like to see Nigel “tell it like it is.”)

One thing that Lee has said in the quoted segment above that jumps out to me is the assertion that the lampstands “are all identical in essence, nature, shape, color, appearance, function, and expression. In all these aspects the seven lampstands are identical.” But there is nothing in the text that defines the lampstands as identical. They are all called “golden.” But outside of that, there is no reference to their appearance, whether similar or dissimilar. Their attributes of size, shape, etc., are omitted. If there was relevance to the similarities or dissimilarities of these lampstands, they would have been given. Note that much detail was supplied for the four living creatures in Ezekiel. But except for being golden, none is provided here.

So to say that “[i]n all these aspects the seven lampstands are identical” is simply conjecture not supported by the scriptural evidence. In fact, the list of features that Lee has called “identical” is almost entirely a fabrication of fantasy. They are mostly not present in the scripture in any form. If we presume that being made of pure gold would cause them all to have the same color, then that one is conceded. Also, we can presume that their function is to bear a lamp or candles. But even their expression, outside of any light that shines from them, is not known since there is no reference to the shape and design and these might provide additional expression in their mere appearance without any light.

When we talk about expression, in whose eyes is the expression intended? Based upon Lee’s use of these verses to suggest that the LCs are to be identical. It seems obvious that the expression is to be viewed from man’s perspective since it is the visible things that are identified. But if that were the case, then it would be expected that the expression, nature, etc., of the actual seven churches these lampstands represent in chapters 2 and 3 should be seen as identical. But they are not. In fact, there is such a huge differentiation among them that some may suggest that there is little the same about them except for the fact that they stand as churches.

And in writing to each of these churches, there is not a single word suggesting that they should not only deal with their shortcomings (and “overcome”) but also look at the positives of all the others and mimic them in such a manner that they become “identical.” While these short letters appear to have been written as if to be sent separately to these seven churches, it is not clear that they were. But it is clear that they were collected here as the beginning of this prophetic book. But even if it was as part of this book that these seven churches first read the letters addressed specifically to them along with the letters addressed to the others, nothing in them says that they should begin to act in all positive ways just like the others. To say otherwise is to say something not supported by the actual scriptures.

When Lee says “The seven lampstands were identical to the point that if they were placed side-by-side before our eyes, we could not discern which is which” he has taken a leap far beyond the black and white.

If this were part of a discussion in the other forum, I would expect someone to immediately respond with something like “the black and white is just the letter of the law, and the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.” But if we look at 2 Corinthians 3:14-16, we see the problem of reading the Old Covenant, or the law, with the veil on the heart. This veil clouds the understanding of what is read. But the last verse states that when the heart is turned to the Lord, the veil is lifted. This lifting of the veil is not its own isolated thing that results in spiritual understanding directly from the Spirit. It is a clarity in understanding of the letter due to the addition of the Spirit. These verses do not suggest that there is light outside of the letter, but that the light actually in the letter is not understood without the Spirit.

This does not imbue the person who has turned to the Spirit with wisdom that contradicts the scripture (or letter). Instead, it makes the understanding and application meaningful and spiritual. It does not provide new teaching, but takes written words that are outside of us and makes them living words within us. This is the writing of the law on our hearts.

These two paragraphs may seem off-topic, but they are actually very much on topic. While not mentioned by Lee here, it is this kind of “lifting of the veil” or as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 1 concerning things being discerned spiritually that Lee uses to say that his otherwise uncorroborated claims are correct. There is nothing in scripture that suggests Lee is correct in his understanding of the “sameness” of the lampstands. But he essentially claims that his opinion, presumed to come from “his spirit,” is sufficient to say it is so and even decree that it stands as a requirement for any assembly desiring to be included in the association we call the Local Churches.

I would not say that Lee, or Nee before him, are intent upon creating bad theology with an intent to defraud Christians. But, at least in the case of Lee, other evidence suggests that even if his intent is honorable, his heart is not pure. Other discussions concerning his mixing of business with ministry and church, of slandering strong Christian men who attempted to expose evil within his enterprise, and even his slow move toward self aggrandizement provide clues to character flaws should have limited him to no more than a participant in some church.