Originally Posted by aron
Evangelical,
Defending your assertions of Christless humankind, you cite custom and convention. So much for the idea of recovery. Then you say Lee did "no worse" than Matthew Henry and the 19th-century Bible studies he cribbed from. So much for the vision of the age.
The text of Deuteronomy 17 speaks of the king of Israel's relation to God via the binding tie of scripture, and Psalms 1and 2, perhaps not coincidentally, show us the righteous man and his relation to God's law, and then that righteous Man being installed as King of Israel and as God's Son. So the impetus is repeated NT use of [OT] scripture - the use of Psalm 2, for example, is well known. This isn't unconventional but follows apostolic precedent. The epistle to the Hebrews extensively cites [OT] text and says that Christ learned obedience, though He was the Son. Lee declined this open invitation to "see Jesus" in the [OT] text, but I'd rather not. (And Hebrews 5:7,8 doesn't focus on the cross but rather on the "days of his life.")
So an example of "untethered scripture" is exposition of Psalm 2 divorced from that of Psalm 1, Deuteronomy etc. I recall reading Psalm 34 Life-Study. . . Lee wrote, "Natural, natural, natural. . . " then came to the verse "not one of His bones will be broken" and said, "Voila!! A revelation of Christ!!". Then we went back to "natural, natural, natural. . ." It was borderline schizophrenic. What makes us think Jesus and the writers of the NT read scripture that way?
Lee with his "scripture was written by people with fallen concepts" teaching was the one who broke with apostolic precedent.
As far as learning from a non-Christian historian, if early Church Fathers were indeed tainted by anti-semitism then I should find independent corroboration from Christian sources. And any peril of having itching ears is more than balanced by that of the mark of the beast: the One Pub Bull says, with eerie similarity, that no one can buy or sell in the local churches without the imprimateur of LSM. What lies behind such controlling despotism is merely fear: "If I could just get everyone else to do exactly what I say, then I can be happy." The beast is afraid because the beast is mortal, and numbered.
In and of itself LSM/lc exposition isn't that bad. I've seen much worse, and done worse. But Witness Lee's claim to be the end-all of contemporary Christian ministry is farcical and delusional. That's why I started this thread, to see if there are viable alternatives to his megalomania. It's a sort of challenge. Drake and Evangelical say, No. Well, okay, then. Let's see.
|