Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry
Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's.
|
First, this is not a response to Terry. He just quoted the line from somewhere else.
The fact that Lee called it a rebellion is the first evidence of Lee's "wrong" concerning John I. That he refused to take the counsel to deal with his wayward son, most specifically by removing him from forced contact with any LRC member for any reason through his position with the LSM made Witness Lee an accomplice to Philip Lee's sins. He aided and abetted. And he knew of the problem from the late 70s. This was not some unheard of claim by one disgruntled LSM employee.
And the 16 points that BP and others called an attack on Lee and the "ministry" was no such thing. It simply clarified that the church was the church and the ministry was the ministry and that the ministry was for the church (as even Lee had so often taught) not the church for the ministry.
I would say that "Brother Lee" was not only wrong about something that happened concerning John I, but he was wrong about virtually every point. That little book FOTPR essentially lies about every material point.
And saying "Brother Lee" does not mean I question his position as a Christian brother, but that I see the use of the term with respect to Lee as a title with much similarity to what Jesus meant when he said to call no man "father." There is almost a reverence to his position that is grated on in their minds when I do not include the "brother." Their use reminds me of the way the people of Rock Ridge (think Blazing Saddles) would stop and look longingly to the distance and sang whenever Randolph Scott was mentioned.