Quote:
Originally Posted by SeekingWisdom
I read through quite a lot of the material testifying against LSM and the LC. I invested a lot of time reading through testimonies, open letters, and even some recordings. I occasionally check for new threads on this website. All of it was for the sake of drawing a picture of what LSM and LC was, and what it has become.
|
An internet forum may function as an echo chamber in which consensus views get amplified and contrary observations don't get as much traction. To gain a comprehensive picture requires a fair amount of independent searching, which may in turn lead the searcher to find themselves in the minority, or on the outside. Why? Because the echo chamber doesn't want them, either.
But that's an occupational hazard, one perhaps worth the challenge, as different voices need to speak out. Each one has a distinct view, none are entirely useless, nor are any all-encompassing.
Somewhat related, I heard of Shoichi Yokoi, who surrendered to U.S. military in 1972, after hiding in a cave on Guam island for 28 years, waiting for Imperial Japanese Forces to come and rescue him in the glorious victory he'd been promised, and that he and so many gave all to see.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoichi_Yokoi
When you invest so much, and expect so much, you may reject evidence to the contrary, even when it piles up that your hopes are vain. Now, some may say this about me, that I believe God raised Jesus Christ from the dead. They'll say, "There's no God", or "Even if God exists why would this Jesus be the Way". Yet I stubbornly persist in my faith.
So even while I commend LC members for their faith, and partly agree, I ask them to consider to what extent their group doesn't accord with the NT or maintain coherence in its own testimony. Where would Mary McDonough be today in the LC? Women can't teach right? Yet her book is offered on LSM websites and her teaching "God's Plan of Redemption" is referred as instrumental to WN and WL's subsequent work. Not to mention Jessie Penn-Lewis, Madame Guyon, Dora Yu, Peace Wang - where would they find room to function in the LC of 2021? Yet they're lauded today as lionesses of the Lord's recovery. Not to mention Ruth Lee, Margaret Barber, Elizabeth Fischbacher (WN's amanuensis who traveled with him to Keswick and transcribed him). Do any notice the obvious contradiction?
How could Paul ask Timothy to make sure to teach a version of God's economy that includes intensification, if John hadn't yet penned his Apocalypse on Patmos?
Why did the pillars in Jerusalem ask Paul to remember the poor, to which he said he was eager, and not, "I don't care for that - I'm only here for God's economy"? What if their request in Galatians 2:10 was part of God's economy? You know, all Jesus' teachings: "Give and it shall be given to you, pressed down, shaken, running over" and "Store up for yourselves treasure in heaven where moths can't eat and rust can't corrupt and thieves can't steal" and "give to those who can't repay you and you'll be repaid in the resurrection"? What if Paul's writings on this theme in 1 Corinthians, Romans, 2 Corinthians (2 chapters!) are on this very subject of God's economy?
How could WL be minister of the age if he didn't control his adult children from abusing the church members? How can you violate Paul's word to Titus (1:6) on local church elders and be a para-church apostle?
Why did "the age turn" when WL passed? Suddenly no more revelation, no more "fresh bread", just curating the deceased MOTA's revelations? The age of spiritual giants ended when WL passed? What Bible verses, if any, were referenced for that bold claim?
Watchman Nee read some 3,000 spiritual classics, so-called. Clearly these were from many sources, not all were MOTAs. Why can't we also read many authors and create our own synthesis? If there's a ministry of the age for each successive generation, why did WN obviously draw on other, non-MOTA sources? Clearly WN violated the "One Publication" principle if he drew on a library of 3,000 books in his spiritual development.
Why was David supposedly wrong to wish his enemies harm in Psalm 3, and yet wishing others harm in Psalm 68 was a type of Christ's victory over Satan? The
RecV footnotes are not consistent. Has anyone else noticed this?
I asked some of these questions a while back and an otherwise eloquent LC attendee replied curtly, "Why don't you examine yourself" and "maybe that's how it is". Well, I'm not being promoted as God's oracle, and maybe that's NOT how it is. At some point, the accumulated mass of evidence becomes compelling, that the LC isn't actually what it's presented as. It's neither consistent in its own self-testimony, nor with Scripture, nor with the long record of Christian witness over the centuries.