Love vs. Purity

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

When you see RG, RK, BP, DYL, TC and other leaders separating themselves from each other you realize that they had no love for one another; or conversely that they loved their doctrines, teachings, and organizations more than the actual human being next to them (i.e. their 'neighbor').

aron addressed a topic which comes up from time to time. Actually this phenomena has troubled the body of Christ since day one. For lack of a better description, I will just label it "Love vs. Purity."

Nearly every new denomination has begun because certain men of God desired to restore the church to its virgin "purity." Up here in greater "Ahia" we have the largest Amish community in the world -- just one more sect which has, in its core, the desire for a more "pure" Christian testimony. Whether Lutherans, Brethren, LC'ers, or whoever, all wanted a "purity" of churchlife which apparently did not exist in the greater body of Christ, and so they started something new. I'm not saying this is inherently wrong, because it often was initiated by the Spirit of God, rather I am just making an historical observation.

My question is just how "pure" is pure. In other words, when should the leaders exercise love, tolerance, and forbearance, and when should the leaders decide to "cut off" that which is impure. Is the church united by what is positive of God, or is it united by what is judged by God? John Darby went so far as to say that the oneness of the church assembly was based on the common judgment of evil. His initial tract among the Brethren by this name perhaps best summarizes all exclusive systems.

Who determines what is evil? That is the difficult question which each and every church or group of churches must confront. As these denominations amass their own list of taboos (in their mind unforgiveable sins), they become more exclusive and disconnected. It is my personal observation that rotten struggles for power and control within these sects are often disguised as a judgement of evil under the smokescreen of "purity." One might even say that the crucifixion of our Savior was based on some misguided sence of Mosaic "purity," and hence the high priest prophesied, "it is expedient for this Man to die for our nation."

Present day examples abound here. Titus Chu and the Great Lakes LC's were quarantined for using worldly means like guitars and drums to attract young people. Not using ministry materials from LSM warranted justifiable lawsuits in numerous cities. In the name of Recovery "purity," leaders at LSM were willing to violate any number of scriptures. Their intolerance and distorted obsession with "purity" for the "Lord's testimony" enables them to vindicate any means necessary.

In the end many children of God are hurt when leaders play "purity" games. Why are LC leaders constantly obsessed with "good material?" Why would the BB's amputate the arms (Brazil) and legs (GLA) to save their "body?" Why would all their remaining members be convinced that such action is a good thing? Why would members have no feeling when the saint next to them is suddenly missing after decades of being together?

What happened to love? You know the simple summary commands from the Lord to love God and love your neighbor? Like that old Turner classic, "What's love got to do with it," members of exclusive systems like the Recovery lose sight of what matters most. How is it that they can be convinced that "natural" love is evil like the honey of old, and spoils their offerings? As a result of this obsession, many get hurt. This forum is filled with sad stories like these. Many others get discouraged and disillusioned with their Christian walk, and decide to give it up.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

aron addressed a topic which comes up from time to time. Actually this phenomena has troubled the body of Christ since day one. For lack of a better description, I will just label it "Love vs. Purity."


What happened to love? You know the simple summary commands from the Lord to love God and love your neighbor?

WOW!!
I posted a comment on God's LOVE about an hour ago?? It was a response addressed to Awareness in the other thread.

I have been rediscovering God's Love in the last 2 weeks. I shared what I have been experiencing and it is GONE!!

I do not know if it did not go through or if it was deleted which I doubt.

Then I see a new thread pop up! Love vs Purity! WOW!

Will have to start a new with my post then! I can't believe it did not go through.

Oh well...I re wrote my post in the deleted religous whatever thead.. and this is an excerpt of what I wrote:

Recently I have been going back to square ONE. Reading up on God's Love. GOD LOVES ME. HE REALLY REALLY LOVES ME AND He LOVES US ALL!! The Precious Blood of Jesus was shed to make us clean. We do not need to clean ourselves. His Blood does that FOR US! ALL WE NEED TO DO is LOVE our GOD with all our hearts, and our souls and our spirits.

We have become so judgmental and I am the chiefest of them! I got caught up in being more 'mature'. Well that happens but if we are 'mature' and don't have God's Love, what good am I to GOD? Thankfully, I have had God's LOVE in me all along. I could not be who I am today without His Precious Love.

If interested, you can read the rest of my post in the other thread.

Blessings!
Carol

[aron]

This topic is certainly a tough one. We can see the lack of love in others easily. But do my "posts" convey any love? Or merely self-righteous indignation? Not so easy.

All I can really do is point to Jesus the Nazarene. In a culture obsessed with purity, some of it cultural/ritual, but a lot of it quite pressing, actually (think of what happened if you touched a leper, or someone with a running sore) here was this guy who was a "friend of sinners and harlots".

Think of the scene which the weeping woman washed his feet. The scribes thought, "If this guy knew who was really touching him..." There must be 25 stories like this in the gospel. Jesus again and again violated the norms of "purity".

And yet on the other hand, the unclean spirits, who could function quite well amongst the religious hypocrites, cried out in fear when Jesus appeared. "Ah! What do we have to do with you, Jesus, Nazarene?!" So here was clearly the arrival and display of a different level of purity.

So what can I say, really? I am a failure like a rest. I fail at both my attempts at purity, and at love. All I can say in my own defense is that I have not tried to institutionalize my failures, and impose them as the norm. Some other folks I am not sure if they can say that.

[aron]

Carol,

I read your comment that recently you have been going back to square one. I can relate. I wish I could learn to abide there. "But you have left your first love..."

What can I say?

"But give thanks to the LORD for He is good. For His mercy endureth forever."

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by aron

Carol,

I read your comment that recently you have been going back to square one. I can relate. I wish I could learn to abide there. "But you have left your first love..."

What can I say?

"But give thanks to the LORD for He is good. For His mercy endureth forever."

I PRAY I never lost my first LOVE!! I don't believe I did as not a day goes by that I don't say "I Love You Abba Father, I Love You Lord Jesus. I Love You Holy Spirit!"

It had been a long time since I looked at scriptures regarding His Love for us.

I am SURE the HOLY SPIRIT would hit me over the head had I drifted away from the Love for our LORD! Believe me. He speaks to me a lot! I know His Silence too. Not fun. Not good when He is not pleased with me.

This is not complicated at all. Love does not care about purity. As a matter of fact love grows stronger in the midst of impurity. Christ came to show us how to love, not how to purify. After all the bible tells us that God is Love. It does not say God is Purity. Not sure what is complicated or confusing about that!

[aron]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

It had been a long time since I looked at scriptures regarding His Love for us.

The Bible confronts us with true love. I am not sure how much we can return God's love, as much as receive it and in our absorbing, faintly reflect it back at its source.

And likewise with one another: it is not so much that we love one another as we recognize, at least dimly, the great love God has for us all. How can we not respect those whom God loves? Even if we cannot love, we can at least acknowledge and respect His love, which has been freely poured out for all in Christ Jesus.

I am not sure what doctrine, teaching, work, organizational hierarchy, theology or "truth" can over-ride that. It is not called "the greatest commandment" for nothing.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nearly every new denomination has begun because certain men of God desired to restore the church to its virgin "purity."... all wanted a "purity" of churchlife which apparently did not exist in the greater body of Christ, and so they started something new.

Brother, now you are starting to think, which makes you useless for the 'building up'. (Sorry, a little tongue-in-cheek humor there)

Originally Posted by Ohio

when should the leaders exercise love, tolerance, and forbearance, and when should the leaders decide to "cut off" that which is impure. ...Who determines what is evil? That is the difficult question which each and every church or group of churches must confront. As these denominations amass their own list of taboos (in their mind unforgivable sins), they become more exclusive and disconnected.

Looking back at my experience, it seemed as if "purity" was kind of positional: if you did whatever the local church leadership dictated, that was pure. If not, you were called "evil", "rebellious" and were cut off. "Pure" was whatever the leaders deemed it to be.

And purity from them was a moving target. Sports and television were once worldly and impure; now they are purified because current leadership says so. Drums and electrical instruments are either pure or impure depending on leadership's judgment. And so forth.

I would argue that the whole system is built on fear. That elder who physically struck you, Ohio, was merely channeling the fear which had been imposed on him. You were supposed to 'shepherd' someone under you, and to do the same. This abusive shepherding is presented as a kind of soul-purifying, cross-imposing duty of flock leadership. I remember one quote of WL in the "Elders Training" book, where he basically channeled the spirit of Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12 and said that he was not here to help, or to release the elders, but rather to lay heavy burdens upon them. "Thus you shall say to this people who spoke to you, saying, 'Your father made our yoke heavy, now you make it lighter for us!' But you shall speak to them, 'My little finger is thicker than my father's loins! 'Whereas my father loaded you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke; my father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions.'"…

This is a hierarchical, fear- and power-based system masquerading as spiritual -- in my dictionary the very definition of "Babylonian". Funny how we ended up looking so much like the RCC that we had despised and fled from.

In the local churches, as long as we remained dutiful to leadership, this was our standing, our "purity" before God. This was our "positional sanctification", the basis of our faith and expectation. And the only room in this conversation for love is if today's purity expectations are met. As long as you obey current dictates of leadership you feel the love (i.e., approval); if not, watch how quickly it disappears. And occasionally even this ''love'' will be arbitrarily withdrawn, just to show you your place.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

"Pure" was whatever the leaders deemed it to be...And purity from them was a moving target. Sports and television were once worldly and impure; now they are purified because current leadership says so. Drums and electrical instruments are either pure or impure depending on leadership's judgment...

It reminds me of Paul's quote: "All things are pure to the pure". I think he was writing about foods (to the religious Jews a big issue), but he was making a larger point. Like with Jesus before, "It is not what is without, but what is within that matters".

But in the Lord's Recovery, with its unique "ground" and thus unique leadership, the so-called apostle of the age, aka God's present oracle, becomes the working standard of purity. Whatever Witness Lee deemed to be pure was pure, because Witness Lee was pure. No, he was not dispositionally pure; he was a sinner like us. But because God raised him up as the 'acting God' on Earth he was held to be positionally pure. "Even when he's wrong he's right", as the LRC saying went.

So obedience to WL was our own de facto standing of purity. WL was our covering; subservience to this ordained 'acting God' was our mark of purity. As mentioned before, I find this is all too similar to the ideas presented in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13. An externally-derived and externally-enforced "unity" as the approved mark of the "in group" is clearly presented in those chapters as a worldly analog, a counterfeit, of true spiritual reality.

[Ohio]

I just lost a lengthy post I was working on. Arrrgh!

Sure wish we had that "auto-save" feature that the other forum has.

[UntoHim]

Ohio,

Sorry about that. Just a word to the wise for everybody - If you are planing to make a long post you may want to think about opening up a MS Word document...most of the newer versions of Word save everything as you go along. Then it's just a simple matter of copying and pasting your post into the forum.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Ohio,

Sorry about that. Just a word to the wise for everybody - If you are planing to make a long post you may want to think about opening up a MS Word document...most of the newer versions of Word save everything as you go along. Then it's just a simple matter of copying and pasting your post into the forum.

It was my fault. I had some other tabs open ... usually a dictionary and Bible browser and an email site ... and decided to close them all and wind up my post ... and deleted the LCD tab by mistake. Unfortunately the "undo close tab" feature on Firefox does not include anything I have typed.

Since I'm not much of an original thinker, I try to find inspiration from others ... in this case aron's comments about "moving targets." The other problem I have is a bad memory, so I don't remember all what I wrote.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Ohio,

Sorry about that. Just a word to the wise for everybody - If you are planing to make a long post you may want to think about opening up a MS Word document...most of the newer versions of Word save everything as you go along. Then it's just a simple matter of copying and pasting your post into the forum.

I wish that was true. Ever since Office 2007, I can't get it to stop copying in a bunch of formatting stuff as meaningless gibberish. I now just copy my posts out to spell check then work back and forth to check them. It is a fristrating process. Before O2007, I always did my posts in Word.

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I just lost a lengthy post I was working on. Arrrgh!

Sure wish we had that "auto-save" feature that the other forum has.

Please re-post if you have the time. I'd like to read more of your views on this topic.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I just lost a lengthy post I was working on. Arrrgh!

Sure wish we had that "auto-save" feature that the other forum has.

Tushae! That happened to me yesterday as you know! Sorry for the chuckle... I think the saying "misery loves company' is true. That is why I chuckled.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

Tushae! That happened to me yesterday as you know! Sorry for the chuckle... I think the saying "misery loves company' is true. That is why I chuckled.

Tushae??? Excuse your French!

But you must mean "Touche'"

And that's why I open numerous tabs while I post to make each of my posts as "perfect" as possible -- and that's what caused my problem in the first place -- and it has happened other times too!

And yes, in my misery, I do enjoy company! Thanks.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I just lost a lengthy post I was working on. Arrrgh!

Methinks prolly we're the ones that have lost. Arrrgh!

[bearbear]

Whenever I get depressed about doctrinal debates between Christians I like to watch videos of underground churches which are persecuted.

A video of underground churches in China:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxX2_D11qBw

Here's a testimony of Christian persecution in North Korea, believers are so desperate that they meet in secret in pit toilets in the prison camp:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXDz...S5i8QI&index=2

In such an environment of persecution denominational differences simply have no room to form. Out of desperation the church is driven to love Jesus with all their heart, soul and mind in unity and to live and hang on every word that comes from the Creator of the universe.

If any of you are touched by these testimonies, here are two good Christian organizations I know of that support persecuted Christians around the world:

open doors USA - http://www.opendoorsusa.org/
voice of the martyrs - https://www.persecution.com/

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Brother, now you are starting to think, which makes you useless for the 'building up'.

Looking back at my experience, it seemed as if "purity" was kind of positional: if you did whatever the local church leadership dictated, that was pure.

And purity from them was a moving target.

When I started this thread, my hypothesis was that the Spirit of God did move in history, especially during times of religious corruption and hypocrisy, to initiate something afresh based on the desire for "purity," but how that eventually deteriorated into a misguided pathway for the leaders to walk. I had in mind Luther, Darby, and Lee, because I am more familiar with them.

Luther, who supposedly started the "recovery," thus becoming the first so-called MOTA, became keenly aware of the corruption in the priesthood around him. Being intensely sincere for the "purity" of religion, he went so far as to visit the Vatican in Rome, thinking that surely the "purity" he so longed for would be found among those closest to the "Holy See." Needless to say, the shock he encountered was rudely awakening. Thus his goal was to reform the mother church to her original state.

Fast forward his life, and we find brother Martin so entrenched in this same goal, that "love" for the brethren has been severely compromised. He and the Swiss leader Zwingli agreed on 14-1/2 of 15 critical items, yet he refused to offer the Swiss brothers the right arm of fellowship. His disdain for the Jews and the Anabaptists also reflects this point succinctly -- if your original goal is purity of the church, and you continue this path rigidly, you will end up loving none but your own.

John Darby also began with the lofty ideals of all brothers, without hierarchy, as a holy priesthood to God, yet, in his very core of thought, as evidenced by his first tract, he felt the unity of the believers was based on the common judgment of evil -- "if we all agree what is evil, then we will be one." Though he had an intense desire to serve the Lord in new found "purity," he imposed his will upon all the assemblies, and they were forced to judge all things as he did. Exclusivism at its very core is a judgment of evil based on the views of the leader.

History tells us that the "lynching" of Benjamen Newton, the leader of the Plymouth assembly, and George Muller, the leader of the Bristol assembly and founder of the orphanages, was based on a struggle for power and control by John Darby. Both Newton and Muller were both rivals that had to be eliminated, but the smokescreen of Brethren "purity," clouded the minds of Darby and his followers. Once Darby decided to judge these "evils," men like George Wigram wrote scathing tracts to destroy their reputations and warn all the other assemblies. What began as a move of the Spirit to return to church "purity" and simplicity of worship concluded as a narrow, mean-spirited, "loveless" society of brothers, with a succession of MOTAs on top.

Does any of this sound familiar?

.

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Luther, who supposedly started the recovery and thus became the first so-called MOTA...

Ohio, Martin Luther was a sinner saved by grace, no better or worse than the rest of us. PLEASE STOP REPEATING LEE'S STORY OF LUTHER "STARTING THE RECOVERY". Luther NEVER said or even insinuated this and NEVER called himself a MOTA. In fact, he called himself a snow-covered piece of sh*t (real German translation). The MOTA thing was entirely Lee's fabricated mythology. If I am wrong, quote Luther. Don't quote Lee on Luther and attribute the quote to him. It's dishonest and unfair and misleading to those still stuck in the "recovery mindset", by giving credence to Lee's lies.

Sorry for yelling brother.

Ray

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Ohio, Martin Luther was a sinner saved by grace, no better or worse than the rest of us. PLEASE STOP REPEATING LEE'S STORY OF LUTHER "STARTING THE RECOVERY". Luther NEVER said or even insinuated this and NEVER called himself a MOTA. In fact, he called himself a snow-covered piece of sh*t (real German translation). The MOTA thing was entirely Lee's fabricated mythology. If I am wrong, quote Luther. Don't quote Lee on Luther and attribute the quote to him. It's dishonest and unfair and misleading to those still stuck in the "recovery mindset", by giving credence to Lee's lies.

Sorry for yelling brother.

Ray

Sorry NFNL, but I said "supposedly," and I AM communicating with former LC members who speak my slang. And I think the MOTA thing started with Nee. I am not giving credence to anyone's lies.

and .... IT'S MY THREAD AND I CAN WRITE WHAT I WANT TO.

Sorry for yelling bro.

[james73]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When I started this thread, my hypothesis was that the Spirit of God did move in history, especially during times of religious corruption and hypocrisy, to initiate something afresh based on the desire for "purity," but how that eventually deteriorated into a misguided pathway for the leaders to walk. I had in mind Luther, Darby, and Lee, because I am more familiar with them.

Just putting it out there, but what about Jesus? Everything you say there points to Jesus: Spirit of God, religious corruption and hypocrisy, something afresh, purity, eventually deteriorating into a misguided pathway. JC quite nicely proves your hypothesis correct, in some respects.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by james73

Just putting it out there, but what about Jesus? Everything you say there points to Jesus: Spirit of God, religious corruption and hypocrisy, something afresh, purity, eventually deteriorating into a misguided pathway. JC quite nicely proves your hypothesis correct, in some respects.

What do you mean "what about Jesus?" I'm not understanding your comments.

[james73]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What do you mean "what about Jesus?" I'm not understanding your comments.

I meant, does Jesus not fit your hypothesis very well too? You wrote:

When I started this thread, my hypothesis was that the Spirit of God did move in history, especially during times of religious corruption and hypocrisy, to initiate something afresh based on the desire for "purity," but how that eventually deteriorated into a misguided pathway for the leaders to walk. I had in mind Luther, Darby, and Lee, because I am more familiar with them.

When I read what you wrote there, I had in mind Jesus, not Luther, Darby or Lee. That's what I meant by "what about Jesus?". Jesus seemed to fit what you wrote perfectly.