Quote:
Originally Posted by least
(2) If the Lord's Recovery is, as our brother Witness Lee claims, nothing more than a burden based on an interpretation of Watchman Nee and himself, then is this recovery maybe nothing more than another institutional denomination, something this recovery of the Lord vehemently sought to depart from in the first place?
|
If the Lord's Recovery is a burden based on an interpretation, what happens when I come along with another interpretation, like the
ekklesia was so local that it was a meeting? There was not 'non-gathered' ekklesia? It could be dispersed? There could be ekklesia in homes, boats, on mountaintops, several or even hundreds simultaneously occurring in one single large metropolitan city? What happens if I or anyone else for that matter has a revelation from God's word?
But it wasn't the Revelation of Nee. So it doesn't count. All of which shows that indeed the Lord's Recovery is based on one man's interpretation. One man's interpretation, another man's marketing of that interpretation, and a corporation claiming sovereignty over the marketing of that interpretation.