Blending

[Trapped]

I was thinking about the word "blended" as used by Lee in the recovery version in 1 Cor. 12:24 the other day. ("...But God has blended the body together....")

Does anyone know anything about the Greek word behind it and if there is a solid reason for why Lee chose to use "blended" (besides misapplying it in the churches)? On biblehub.com, it presents a long list of translated versions of that verse, and besides a simple "put", the two most common translations for "blended" are "composed" and "tempered", both of which make way more sense to me since the surrounding verses in that passage are a comparison to a physical body. (How can an individual physical body be "blended"?!)

By contrast, when you "temper" something, you "mix it with some balancing quality or substance so as to avoid anything extreme". This fits in much better with the context of the surrounding verses which talk about comely members having no need, and less honorable, uncomely members being given more abundant honor.....this is the "tempering" (rather than a "blending") so that the lacking uncomely members are made less extreme and are brought in balance with the comely members.

Obviously the LC's fly the blending banner pretty high, "it's good to get blended with you brothers", "we are going to blend with another locality next week", "blend all our differences away", "blend all our peculiarities away", etc.... but to use the word in that way is much, much different than what is described in 1 Cor. 12:23-25, which is much more about the care and lovingkindness toward uncomely members than anything about just gathering together with people you don't normally see, or about removing individual differences.

On the other hand, is there the genuine thought of "blending" elsewhere in the Bible when talking about the many grains becoming one loaf? Or 1 Cor. 5:7a "...that you may be a new lump", Lee uses that verse to say that the grains have to be ground into fine flour (i.e. broken, i.e. blended) before we can become a loaf, etc.... Is the thought of "blending" here legit, or is the metaphor just taken too far?

I want to throw out any misapplication of the word (as I think occurred in 1 Cor. 12:24), but don't want to throw it out where it may be legitimate.

[awareness]

Blended with what? That is the question.

[JJ]

I don’t know about the meaning of the Greek word translated as blending in the verse cited to start this thread. But the sentence it is used in says that God has done it. So why do we think we should be trying so hard to “blend”? That’s another silly thing Lee had us working hard at that God had already done for us. When I let go of that teaching I was really freed to enjoy what God had already done to “blend” me into His body. Praise Him!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by JJ

I don’t know about the meaning of the Greek word translated as blending in the verse cited to start this thread.

It's used only twice in the NT. Again in Hebrews 4:2, where it's translated "united" "mixed" & "coupled."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I was thinking about the word "blended" as used by Lee in the recovery version in 1 Cor. 12:24 the other day. ("...But God has blended the body together....")

Does anyone know anything about the Greek word behind it and if there is a solid reason for why Lee chose to use "blended" (besides misapplying it in the churches)?

The application and understanding of this word has to be viewed in context with what was happening at LSM both publicly and behind the scenes.

First, let's get into Paul's use of the word. His thought here was "many members, but one body." There is no mention of "many churches, but one body," or the prevailing thought -- "many churches but one ministry." Ugh!

The context of this word in the epistle to Corinth addressed the attitude of members towards one another, specifically the attitudes towards those members who are not comely, whom we don't like, who may be a pain in the neck, who may be vastly different with diverse gifts and shortcomings, etc. How does Paul address this problem? He tells us that we need these members, that God has also placed them in the body, that "God has tempered the body together giving more honor to those that lack," and that the members should love one another. Chapter 13 provides excellent descriptions of love, starting out, "Love is patient, love is kind ..."

Vine's defines this Greek word "sunkerannumi" to mix or blend together, of the combining of the members of the human body into an organic structure, as illustrative of the members of a local church in I Cor 12.24. Strong's defines as "commingle, i.e. to combine or assimilate -- mix with, temper together." This very positive work of God in His body should affect all of us in our attitudes toward one another.

Back to my initial comment. W. Lee used this word "blending," not to encourage love, acceptance, and longsuffering among the members in the body of Christ, but to exact human methods to negate differences and opinions among the members. By removing our liberties in the Spirit, Lee attempted to facilitate his own brand of "oneness" with himself as the head, calling that blending. His own son Philip, as "Office Manager" at LSM, used heavy-handed techniques to beat elders and workers around the globe into subjection, calling that blending. Lee also eliminated the ministries of the gifted members in all the churches, demanding only his material to be taught in all the churches, calling that blending.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The context of this word in the epistle to Corinth addressed the attitude of members towards one another, specifically the attitudes towards those members who are not comely, whom we don't like, who may be a pain in the neck, who may be vastly different with diverse gifts and shortcomings, etc. How does Paul address this problem? He tells us that we need these members, that God has also placed them in the body, that "God has tempered or "blended" the body together giving more honor to those that lack," and that the members should love one another. Chapter 13 provides excellent descriptions of love, starting out, "Love is patient, love is kind ..."

Compare God's work of "blending" in the body of Christ with W. Lee's goals of "blending" for the recovery:

• God intended via blending the more abundant honor be given to those members that lack, those members which are less comely
• Lee intended via blending that all honor be given to the ministry of Lee at LSM

What a contrast! What a distortion of truth! What a failure here by Lee.

[Nell]

The origin of the use of the term might be interesting. Of course, the word "blended" was not used until after Witness Lee's death in 1997 when the big question was "who's in charge"? The answer seemed to be something like "a group of responsible brothers will 'coordinate' leadership." I thought (right or wrong) that being "Scriptural" was secondary. They needed somebody to be in charge, an heir to the throne. The MOTA was dead. There was no "oracle/speaking". What to do?

No problem. Everything he said had been recorded and mostly reduced to print. Of course, this isn't the same as fresh, up-to-date speaking. Fresh, up-to-date is over. We've heard it all.

Think about the problem they faced. For decades they had touted the "up to date speaking from the throne". WLee had "the annointing". Now what? What happens to the "up to date speaking"? Where was "the annointing"? These are two claims that couldn't be passed down to anyone. You either had the "up to date..." or you didn't. You either had "the annointing" (from the throne) or you didn't. When the "Minister of the Age" died, would it not be logical to assume that the "age" was over?

They had to come up with a successor and there was no MOTA.v2

Enter "the blended brothers".

Nell

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Nell

Enter "the blended brothers".

Nell

What are the chances that the blendeds fall on their sword and pursue the Lord and His Spirit rather than Witness Lee?

The LSM movement is fruitless and dying - the answer on how to move forward should be obvious. Can we pray that the hearts of these guys can be moved in such a way that the the gospel of Christ can be praised and lived out rather than the words and wishes of a dead man?

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

What are the chances that the blendeds fall on their sword and pursue the Lord and His Spirit rather than Witness Lee?

The LSM movement is fruitless and dying - the answer on how to move forward should be obvious. Can we pray that the hearts of these guys can be moved in such a way that the the gospel of Christ can be praised and lived out rather than the words and wishes of a dead man?

A resounding YESS!!! Even though I am far removed from the LC/LSM.. I have a soft spot for the brethren I was once connected to. They helped me grow in the Lord and in His Word. Helped me to lean on the Holy Spirit in my spirit.
That was back in the day.. in the mid 70s.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by countmeworthy

A resounding YESS!!! Even though I am far removed from the LC/LSM.. I have a soft spot for the brethren I was once connected to. They helped me grow in the Lord and in His Word. Helped me to lean on the Holy Spirit in my spirit.
That was back in the day.. in the mid 70s.

And I learned about the Tripartite Man :

Check this out at Wiki. Nee and Lee are in a long list of supporters of the tripartite man :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_(theology)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

The origin of the use of the term might be interesting. Of course, the word "blended" was not used until after Witness Lee's death in 1997 when the big question was "who's in charge"?

Really?

I heard about blending and blended brothers much earlier while Lee was still alive.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Really?

I heard about blending and blended brothers much earlier while Lee was still alive.

I don’t recall an “official” leadership group until after he was gone, and they wouldn’t be specific about who was a member of the group. That could be just me.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

I don’t recall an “official” leadership group until after he was gone, and they wouldn’t be specific about who was a member of the group. That could be just me.

The official leadership group needed public declarations from Lee himself while he was yet alive, else they were all vain.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

I don’t recall an “official” leadership group until after he was gone, and they wouldn’t be specific about who was a member of the group. That could be just me.

You are correct about the identities of the official "Blended" membership club. We in the Midwest tried to find out who was in the club, and more specifically, if Titus Chu was a chartered member or not. Apparently he was not.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The application and understanding of this word has to be viewed in context with what was happening at LSM both publicly and behind the scenes.

First, let's get into Paul's use of the word. His thought here was "many members, but one body." There is no mention of "many churches, but one body," or the prevailing thought -- "many churches but one ministry." Ugh!

The context of this word in the epistle to Corinth addressed the attitude of members towards one another, specifically the attitudes towards those members who are not comely, whom we don't like, who may be a pain in the neck, who may be vastly different with diverse gifts and shortcomings, etc. How does Paul address this problem? He tells us that we need these members, that God has also placed them in the body, that "God has tempered the body together giving more honor to those that lack," and that the members should love one another. Chapter 13 provides excellent descriptions of love, starting out, "Love is patient, love is kind ..."

Vine's defines this Greek word "sunkerannumi" to mix or blend together, of the combining of the members of the human body into an organic structure, as illustrative of the members of a local church in I Cor 12.24. Strong's defines as "commingle, i.e. to combine or assimilate -- mix with, temper together." This very positive work of God in His body should affect all of us in our attitudes toward one another.

Back to my initial comment. W. Lee used this word "blending," not to encourage love, acceptance, and longsuffering among the members in the body of Christ, but to exact human methods to negate differences and opinions among the members. By removing our liberties in the Spirit, Lee attempted to facilitate his own brand of "oneness" with himself as the head, calling that blending. His own son Philip, as "Office Manager" at LSM, used heavy-handed techniques to beat elders and workers around the globe into subjection, calling that blending. Lee also eliminated the ministries of the gifted members in all the churches, demanding only his material to be taught in all the churches, calling that blending.

Good observations, Ohio. It has been said before (correctly) on this site that some willingness on Lee’s part to be blended more with his coworkers who saw and tried to help him see and deal with his own shortcomings would have been helpful to him and the rest of Christ’s body.

My disappointment in seeing so many loveless divisions among TLR leaders is one of the factors in my leaving TLR (and posting what I saw on these boards).

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Trapped

By contrast, when you "temper" something, you "mix it with some balancing quality or substance so as to avoid anything extreme". This fits in much better with the context of the surrounding verses which talk about comely members having no need, and less honorable, uncomely members being given more abundant honor.....this is the "tempering" (rather than a "blending") so that the lacking uncomely members are made less extreme and are brought in balance with the comely members.

Thanks Trapped. This is a much more biblically coherent interpretation/understanding of this vital and crucial biblical concept then the one put forth by Witness Lee or the Blended Brothers. Lee very rarely used context, or I should say, proper and comprehensive context, when it came to a teaching that touched upon the relationship between church leadership and those who they were leading (aka the flock). In this case, Lee had a huge conflict of interest - if he interpreted these passages in their proper context, he would had to admit that he himself was in desperate need of tempering and balance by the other members of the Body. Witness Lee could never accept, much, much less fully embrace this notion because he would have had to admit that his person and work - his absolute authority and infallible ministry - were indeed in desperate need of tempering and balance.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Trapped

By contrast, when you "temper" something, you "mix it with some balancing quality or substance so as to avoid anything extreme". This fits in much better with the context of the surrounding verses which talk about comely members having no need, and less honorable, uncomely members being given more abundant honor.....this is the "tempering" (rather than a "blending") so that the lacking uncomely members are made less extreme and are brought in balance with the comely members.

Could not we also say that "the comely members are made less extreme and are brought in balance with the uncomely members?"

Far too often, especially as with the LCM, it is the "comely" gifted members that need real tempering. It is they who have become the source of problems and divisions, causing the children of God to follow them and not the Lord. (Acts 20.30) This was all too evident with W. Lee. He even solicited rivalries among his lieutenants -- think how much trouble that caused the body of Christ?

The Apostle Paul, however, was keenly aware of these dangers, and thus became a great pattern for the church and healthy ministers. Did he not receive a thorn in the flesh to prevent him from being puffed up? (2 C 12.7) He only used his authority for building up. (2 C 10.8)