Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo S
So the interpretation here is that Christ is rebuking Peter's human reasoning . .
My question is if human reason is the "adversary to Christ" then what do you use to make your arguments?
|
This was a ploy to get us afraid to think. When Peter made a mistake, he was using "human reasoning", or as Lee often put it, "natural thinking" or "fallen human concepts". Yet with Lee (and Nee) we were supposed to take it as "God's oracle". Lee was free to question anyone, including the writers of the scripture (Peter, James, Jude, various OT prophets). But God forbid anyone should question Lee!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo S
Coincidentally Buddhism and other New Age philosophies teach that in order to acheive enlightenment, one needs to "empty the mind". This isn't Christian doctrine.
|
I think there is an "altered state" that comes in when you "empty" thus. It's not entirely foreign to the Christian experience; however in the hands of Lee et al it's main function seems to have been to make you brain-dead and keep you that way.
I've repeatedly raised the example of the questionable assertions made in RecV footnotes, which ostensibly were run verbally past thousands of attendees at various meetings and conferences. In one place the psalmist is dipping his feet in his enemy's blood - this is "Christ defeating Satan". In other places, such violent and/or adversarial sentiments are strongly criticized as not Christian. In the OT, yet! But Samuel hacked Agag to bits and that was okay...?
Or, in one place (e.g., Psalm 16) the psalmist says that he's pleased God and God will protect him/save him/reward him. Lee says this is Jesus Christ. Elsewhere (e.g., Psalm 15, Psalm 17-19) the same sentiments are panned as "natural" and "vain concepts" and so forth.
My question is, did not one person dare to think for themselves, here? To challenge what was being put in front of them? To question any of this? No, all the hundreds of testimonies after these messages were about how wonderful they were, bringing "Christ" to us. As far as I know, nobody ever challenged Lee publicly on any of his thousands of public messages, even when they had such contradictory assertions, or departed from apostolic precedent.
Everything was designed to keep one in a state of non-thought. Only Lee could think. Just be "positive". Be "one". Even when the messages make no sense.