A Word of Love

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Actually in most places they do. When they got some really big congregations in really large cities, they had to grant themselves exceptions to their own oh-so-fundamental teachings.

But all I was asking is, you seemed to be drawing a big distinction between Nee's attempt at "working it out practically", and Lee's attempt at "working it out practically". I don't think it was mostly just theoretical with Nee, if that's what you were getting at...but maybe I misunderstood...

There is the teaching based on Bible verses and there is the practice. My original comment was about what I believed concerning the teaching from WN. I don't think the LRC practice is scriptural because it is sectarian. That doesn't mean the LRC experiment is a waste, rather they have shown us the pitfalls. As for WN I don't believe he would have tolerated his teaching to become the cornerstone of a sect.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

There is the teaching based on Bible verses and there is the practice. My original comment was about what I believed concerning the teaching from WN. I don't think the LRC practice is scriptural because it is sectarian. That doesn't mean the LRC experiment is a waste, rather they have shown us the pitfalls. As for WN I don't believe he would have tolerated his teaching to become the cornerstone of a sect.

Probably Nee's motives were a lot purer than Lee's. Probably Nee never would have put up with the MOTA/Apostle of the Age/"Oracle" (!!)/etc/etc teachings that are such a huge part of the sectarian attitude in today's LRC.

But to say that the churches-in-what-what in mainland China, in the 1930's and 40's, were not already their own little sect -- albeit a "milder", more reasonable sect -- I guess this is where I'm skeptical.