The introduction of leaven

[aron]

I am curious to know what others think about the introduction of leaven in the assemblies of believers post-resurrection. My own take is that they organized themselves, which soon led to believers in hierarchies, "offices" which were filled by sinecure, patronage, politics, bossy people dominating others, divisions (as alpha males & females couldn't be "under" others and left to start their own "tribes"), and assorted bureaucracies filled with lackies, hacks and hangers-on to the straps of power. In short, as I said, they organized.

It started out as "Believe in Jesus and love the person next to you." Soon it became that and a whole lot more. Rule books flourished. Decline set in speedily.

Question: what was the Nee/Lee take on the so-called "decline of the church"? I really never got a clear answer. Certainly the "one church = one city" issue was not an issue until the Reformation, as the RCC had the LSM model for a thousand years, right? So all the problems won't go away if we just become one city-church under one set of elders, right? Somehow the problems are deeper. But what are they?

I am not picking on James and Paul, who in my view accelerated the trend. I believe that these trends would have occurred no matter who created the reins of power, and who grabbed them. I just single them out because they are main personages in the NT and early "church" age.

I think there is a problem because the Lord mentioned the idea of leaven in one of his parables. Matthew 13 and Luke 13 both contain this parable. A woman put leaven into some flour and the whole thing got leavened eventually. I take this to be an indication of future corruption. What corruption? My answer is "organization". Besides the Lee/Nee teachings, what do others teach about the "decline of the church"? I am curious to know what the other alternatives are.

2 possible alternatives are: 1) the "fierce wolves" that will come in, not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29,30). I disagree with this idea. This, to me, are non-believers, tares, who lead many astray. People like Witness Lee don't fall into this category. These are the David Koresh/Jim Jones/Marshall Applewhite (the "Heaven's Gate suicide cult) types. These are the ones lambasted by both Jude (vv. 4, 10-14) and Peter in his second epistle (ch 2, vv 1-21). But they are not the real problem, the worst problem.

2) A return to the law. A mixture of OT requirements/commandments with the new commandments of the NT kingdom. Paul has big issues with this. See his epistles to the Romans, and Galatians, for instance. But I don't think this causes the church decline as much as organization does. The only real organized "return to the law" types I am aware of are the 7th day adventist types who want to "keep the Sabbath" (i.e. Saturday) as a holy day. But this is small compared to the problems of the organized "church" over the past 2,000 years. The only thing I can say positive about this idea (a return to the law-keeping) is that it does "leaven" many ministries, notably the LSM. Look at their neatly organized outlines in the trainings. Look for the words "We must", "We need to", "We should", "We have to" etc. It is ubiquitous. This is a ministry of neediness, not fulfillment.

But still, it is the "organization of the church" that allows error-filled teachings like the "ministry of need" of WL to take root, and flourish. Otherwise he'd be laughed out of town.

I know that I have a small audience for my ideas. They threaten "order in the church", and seem to slander, or at least disrespect Paul and James. I reply that neither accusation is necessarily true, certainly not by my hand. But space denies me the opportunity to deal with these at length. So I will merely say, "Who's got a better idea?" What caused the decline of the church? Please try to make your answer simple enough for a 10-year old, which is about my theological level.