Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake
How did Brother Lee treat the OT? He opened it up thoroughly. As ZNP observed verse by verse. But you mean Psalms... well, I took your advice and thumbed through the RcV and on almost every page in the book of Psalms there are footnotes.
Now, granted these footnotes in Psalms are not extensive as you would find Brother Lee wrote in Ephesians, Hebrews, Matthew, Revelation, Romans, because frankly, there is much more concerning the dispensation we now live in those NT books than in the Psalms.
|
The gospels presented Jesus as the Messiah foretold by the ancient inspired writers. The Acts and epistles further this: Jesus is the promised Seed of David, who brought in a new age of human living under God’s care and providence. Now, “we do not yet see all things subject to him” (Heb 2:8; cf Psa 8 & 1 Cor 15), but nonetheless all attention focused on Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promise to man.
So footnotes and/or teachings on the Christian Bible should focus first of all on the person of Jesus in the gospels as the fulfillment of God's expressed will; second on scriptures which the gospels cite (Psalms/Isaiah etc); third on the epistles as they're showing how the gospels and the prophetic word were harmonized in one person. Everything else in the Bible makes sense only as it points to and is derived from the great fact of "Jesus as Lord": the obedient Son of Man, crucified, resurrected and glorified. Our vision, our consciousness and living should be consumed by this. ~Luke 24:44 "He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." We never graduate from this: we only go deeper and deeper. He went through it- we go through it.
But in the
RecV gospel of Matthew it's half footnotes and half text; Mark/Luke/John are less - 1/3 to 1/4 footnotes. The book of Isaiah is maybe 1/4 footnotes and the Psalms are maybe 1/8 footnotes; the rest text. Then if you look at the epistles, such as 2 Corinthians or Ephesians, you have anywhere from 2/3 to 3/4 of the page as footnotes. So clearly the focus is there.
In these lengthy epistolary footnotes there's a focus on abstract, impersonal concepts, such as "the dispensation we now live in" alluded to in the quote above; or the "NT believer enjoying grace"; or "mingled"; or "service" . . the actual person of Jesus is less important; who he was and what he did. And it’s even worse with the prophetic word: there, abstract concepts are levers used to denigrate swaths of scripture as “fallen human concepts”. Certainly not the verse-by-verse unveiling claimed by
Drake. And, it cannot be over-emphasized, this is NOT what the NT writers and speakers did in regard to scripture. They never suggested this kind of treatment!
Now, the LSM apologist has a weak dodge here – “OK, smarty – why don’t
you write some footnotes? Let’s see you do better” But we're not purporting to be God’s present oracle here; rather, showing why this particular claimant seems faulty. To whom much is given – ahem,
‘ministry of the age’ - much is required.
Then go from teaching to practice, to what's actually done in the LC, and there's even less connection with the Jesus of the gospels. For example, instead of a ministry of reconciliation, per 2 Corinthians, there are strong signs of a guanxi network. Run afoul of network hierarchy and there's no going back – no reconciliation. That's what we can see in the history of the LC. John Ingalls, John So, Bill Mallon, Max Rappaport, Titus Chu, Dong Yu Lan. . . a string of breaks and no mending. All were top lieutenants who ran afoul of the network culture. None came back. The culture won't allow it.
Or, where are the "good works" that Jesus did (Matt 4:23; 9:35; cf Acts 10:38)? "Oh, we're not a social service agency", says the LSM. What about Paul's focus on helping the poor (Gal 2:20)? "Well, we have a different emphasis". Indeed; and this different emphasis is also seen in the footnotes, or lack thereof.
I don't see the Bible being "opened up thoroughly" as
Drake said; rather, a fallen human mind, building abstract sand-castles, and when the wind blows, any proverbial "rebellion" or "storm" or "turmoil", the edifice collapses: no reconciliation, tolerance, or forbearance. Just a holding onto abstractions - "God's economy" - but no love. How to be reconciled in such an environment? Only through abject servility; only by being subsumed to ministry ideals can one be reconciled with it. Even the Bible text itself is secondary to these ideals, not vice versa.