Quote:
Originally Posted by googlelight
How do I make sense of this? Did the Lord use Nee and/or Lee in the early stages, and then they became disobedient? This is confusing. I sometimes wonder if it is Descartes evil spirit that is fooling me.
|
You cover a lot of specifics. And there will never be a significant Christian teacher — fully legitimate, marginal, or out-and-out sharlatan — that does not teach some true things.
But the evidence suggests that Nee was pretty set on his own abilities and claiming special place with God by his mid-20s. And there is both strong an suggestive evidence of sexual issues from not long after that.
Then after being set aside for several years due to moral/sexual issues, he returns with a new book that makes himself unable to be set aside by any person or persons again.
So his pedigree is pretty spotty, no matter how you look at it.
As for Lee, we know less about him prior to Taiwan other than him being the one who basically set the way for Nee to return with his
Authority and Submission messages. And some vague reference to Lee by some other coworkers when he doesn't come to one of Nee's conferences.
But then he manages to saddle the churches in Taiwan with his business debts, and then after being somewhat cast aside there, returns (like Nee) to clean house and take control again. Then he comes to the US with a failed business of selling suits in Vancouver, BC, and starts up in the LA area, followed by various businesses, most significantly Daystar, that took his followers' money and moved it to his family's bank accounts.
Whatever was worthy about the so-called local churches would seem to be something unrelated to its leaders. Neither should have been granted access to the opportunity to teach. And since the reason for the group to exist is peculiar doctrines "found" and taught by Nee and Lee, it makes the whole thing seriously suspect.