Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake
Your objections are about circumstantial matters, things temporal. Yet, the NT vision is not circumstantial or temporal. Ministers will come and go, ages will begin and end. Local churches will pass away.... for they are procedural. But the NT vision belongs to God, it is His desire, His purpose, His creation. It fulfills what He is after. It is an eternal matter. That is why Witness Lee detractors can carry on and on for years complaining about him, his son, and Blended brothers, and all the bad things that happened to them and others, ad nauseum, and yet never realizing that the thing that guides the members in the local churches by and large, is not a man, but a God-given vision. Some have said when Witness Lee died so did the NT vision..... what a concept! Did you defend the eternal integrity of the NT vision when that was stated or were you in the crowd that considers the best place for the NT vision is nailed in the coffin with Brother Lee? Where is your line in the sand on that matter? Do we stand on truth or do we permit profaning of our Lord's words by secularists to enjoin our narrative just because someone uses it as a point of attack on Brother Lee? Where is our line in the sand on that?
This is what I mean Brother Ohio. Ephraim is a cake un-turned. It is burnt on one side and uncooked on the other. Your argument about the NT vision was just that.... I asked you if you disagree with the description of the NT vision imparted to me and you immediately flip the cake over to the burnt side to burn it some more. I opened the door for you to agree or disagree with some or all of the NT vision I have received but the burnt side of the cake is preferable because heaven forbid if we find some points of agreement, some truth we can stand side by side on, lines we both agree to not cross... well, that would not fit the dominant narrative of this forum that if Witness Lee believed it must be bad for you and if you disagree with Witness Lee then any fallacious argument will do.
So, no, I am not equivocating, I am not being dishonest, and I am not delusional. those are all ad hominem attack tactics.
Drake
|
Brother
Drake,
To examine the facts of LC history are
not "
ad hominem attack tactics," as you suggest. If that was true, the entire Bible would not record the numerous failures of the men of God. Neither should any historian write of church history. You demand special exempt status for W. Lee, where he is entitled to critique all others, and no one can ever examine his failures, especially when the children of God were hurt.
What privileges you ascribe here for Witness Lee are only to be enjoyed by the Firstborn Son of God, our Creator, our Savior, and our Lord.
If man's sins were all "
circumstantial matters, things temporal," then why would the Bible speak of them? Why are there historians? In I Cor. 10, Paul says these things were "
written for our admonition." You complain that we are obsessed with temporal things, and we "
never realize that the thing that guides the members in the local churches by and large, is not a man, but a God-given vision." This is just LSM double-speak. Out of one side of your mouth you claim the vision is of God, the same God who ministers to all the body of Christ. Yet out of the other side you claim only W. Lee has brought this vision to us. Apparently you are unable to see the contradiction and hypocrisy here.
Sorry, but all the claims by WL, which I once believed, remind me of this classic video clip:
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyCCJ6B2WE