Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
Suppose I'm talking to someone in a restaurant. I say that I have 4 pet rock pigeons. Then I say, "They all have the same substance - bones, flesh and feathers - and they all have exactly the same shape, form, and purpose." My companion will look at me funny. I'm spouting nonsense. Of course all this is true, but it's essentially meaningless. It adds no informational value. I didn't say, "I have three pigeons and a ukelele."
Then I add, "They have no individual distinctiveness." My companion will probably get up and walk away.
But in the LC its not gibberish. It's code for, "Get with the program." In the LC they don't walk away, because they've been conditioned, or trained, to sit through this stuff. No different than a Chinese man dressed up as Santa Claus. Someone's cultural fluff has become your pseudo-reality.
|
I understand what you are saying here. If you have seven of the same items, and you state that they are all gold, all lamps, and all shine light, anyone listening will understand they all look the same. But you verge into crazytown if you take it further and say "they have no individual distinctiveness." It's like, okay, what do you want me to do with that information?
Yes, all the lampstands are constituted with the divine nature, are all in the shape of a lamp, and all shine forth light. This is true. But the line is crossed when the significance applied to that fact is that they have no individual distinctiveness. It is a hyper-analysis of the Biblical text.
When I quoted Nee in my previous post, he states, "In life and communion, the churches are one like a body, but in their
earthly responsibility and appearance, the churches are administrated separately as seven lampstands. When we read chapters two and three, we see how the seven churches at that time were
different in their works, circumstances, failures, rewards, punishments, and responsibilities. To deny this fact is to create confusion." Nee does not state that these differences are negative, just that they are differences.
In the footnote Lee takes it further (too far) and says
, "...not having any individual distinctiveness. The differences among the seven churches recorded in chs. 2 and 3 are all of a negative nature, not a positive one. Negatively, in their failures, the churches are different and separate from one another; but positively, in their nature, shape, and purpose, they are absolutely identical and are connected to one another."
Nee says they are different in works, circumstances, failures, rewards, punishments, and responsibilities. Not all these are negative, some are neutral (works, circumstances, responsibilities). Lee pushes it and calls these differences between the churches negative and a failure, thus elevating his concept of "no individual distinctiveness" where it should not be taken and where it is simply not stated.