Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo S
When studying LC doctrine, what I see is a lot of equivocation... Using equivocation can also give the illusion of multilayered complexity. With a lack of commitment in doctrine, you can literally make things mean whatever you want them to mean depending on the situation or agenda.
|
Actually you're onto something here. One of WL's most ardent supporters 40 years ago said of him, "He doesn't tell you what he wants. You have to read between the lines". That brother is today one of the uber-blendeds.
There is always the standard 'orthodox' line put out as a kind of fall-back position, and as a bait to the naive. That was how I got caught. We were singing the familiar Protestant hymns of my youth and I thought, "Oh, these guys can't be bad".
Eventually, if you stuck around, someone like RG or MP would come around and tell you what it really all meant. Just in case you hadn't figured it out yet. All the orthodox posturing was so much smoke-screen.