Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
That will be tough to establish since the statement from which I started was that Lee saw it all and did nothing. Your implication is that Lee had no basis for doing anything, so he didn't. But it would appear that there might be a reason that was not related to the correctness or incorrectness of taking action, but simply culture. That has everything to do with Lee. And it provides a reason that he might not have done what the BBs ultimately did.
And as Igzy has pointed out, Lee said much about many things and many people that we only know about because there have been some that were in the elders' meetings and have since repeated those things. That includes positions on many things about doctrine, theology, and people that were inconsistent with his public ministry.
It makes the inquiry about being "faithful to the entire ministry of WL" rather difficult. If you are an elder or co-worker, what is the "ministry of Lee"? Is it only what the people heard or read? Or does it include what they heard in those private meetings? So what are they being faithful to? The erratic contradictions of the whole man, or just the stuff that managed to get put in print by the LSM?
|
There was no implication, there was merely the fact. Lee didn't do anything yet the allegation of using fleshly means for the gospel was already being bandied about. Therefore, if you are WL's disciple you must show me what changed to prompt this response. You cannot argue that "WL didn't like to take this action" tell that to Max, tell that to Jane, etc. WL was well able to "excommunicate" TC but didn't. Regardless of whether it was discussed or not, the fact is he chose not to do anything.