Pray-Reading

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Instead, I would say that as you find the easiest words to pray back to God you will find others as well. So although you initially may feel that only 5% of the Bible was designed to be prayed, that percent will grow as you pray.

And sung. And declared. And spoken in the congregation. And mulled over. And copied in notebooks.

Etc etc ad infinitum. Yes, also "eaten". Thy words were found and I did eat them.

How that prayer and declaration and singing is to be conducted is perhaps left up to the participant, and not headquarters. Other than that, you and I and OBW and Ray Graver are all pretty much in agreement. We are believers who think it's important to engage God in His word. You know, conduct a transaction with God, which ostensibly equips us to conduct divine transactions to needy vessels in a fallen world.

"I will not let you go unless you bless me" -- Genesis 32

"I held Him and would not let go" Song of Solomon chapter 3

Our manner of holding the Lord in His word should be free to the inspiration of the participant. Lee was free to cut up his steak into little pieces and chew on it; I likewise am free to engage God's word as I see fit.

OBW's objection was that Graver was using the writings and experiences of others as a cover for LC practices, which were quite narrowly dictated to the rank-and-file.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by aron

OBW's objection was that Graver was using the writings and experiences of others as a cover for LC practices, which were quite narrowly dictated to the rank-and-file.

My objection was that he has not substantiated that allegation. I read the booklet back around 1980 or at the latest in the winter of 1981 before the Irving Hall was started. I do not recall it being a "cover". The most I would characterize it as being a polemic in defense of the Biblical and spiritual legitimacy of the practice of "praying the word back to God".

I do not recall that booklet really getting into a prescribed method in which to do this. Now if OBW wants to put his money where his mouth is, cough up the $7, buy the book, and quote the offensive parts to us. If he can prove his case, and I'll let you be the judge of that, then I'll buy the book off of him.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I do not recall that booklet ["Lord, Thou Saidst"] really getting into a prescribed method in which to do this.

True. But as RayLiotta pointed out, that is not the way it is on the street. The publication puts a public face on it. Then, within the actual LRC fellowship, what they call "the church life", you are clearly given the method in which to "pray-read". And if you go into the meetings and deviate from collective practice, you will be marked. You are no longer "one".

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by aron

True. But as RayLiotta pointed out, that is not the way it is on the street. The publication puts a public face on it. Then, within the actual LRC fellowship, what they call "the church life", you are clearly given the method in which to "pray-read". And if you go into the meetings and deviate from collective practice, you will be marked. You are no longer "one".

How do you ascribe so much to this book? It is a booklet, RG is not called the author or editor but the "compiler" because it is a compilation. To my recollection the vast majority of the quotes were either from the Bible or Christian leaders outside of the LRC. I don't know if he quoted WL at all.

Second, I have travelled to many localities. I have visited every locality in Texas, a few in the Far East, as well as many in California, Florida, Atlanta, NY, Boston, etc. In my experience (which is very limited since 1995) pray reading was practiced differently in different locales. Some emphasized it, some didn't emphasize it as much.

In Taipei it seemed to be quite different from the US.

Things may have changed, perhaps the influence of the LSM and BBs has truly permeated the entire LRC (is the proper term mingled, don't know) But if that is the case why are you ascribing that to RG's booklet published 15 years prior to 96?

I was there when he was researching it, when he wrote it, I read a rough draft of it before publication. His burden was to prove that praying the word was not some kind of far eastern chanting practice brought over from China but was scripturally sound. As I said it was designed as a Polemic to defend the scriptural basis for praying the word back to God. RG is not a theologian, so he didn't add his own 2 cents, instead he compiled a lot of quotes, put them into a good order, and left it at that. To my knowledge he didn't get into the LRC practice other than to put it into the same sphere as praying the word back to God.

Why is he being attacked and vilified for this?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

How do you ascribe so much to this book? It is a booklet, RG is not called the author or editor but the "compiler" because it is a compilation. To my recollection the vast majority of the quotes were either from the Bible or Christian leaders outside of the LRC. I don't know if he quoted WL at all.

In the section of end "Notes," titled "The Word as Nourishment," there is one quote by WL.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

My objection was that he has not substantiated that allegation. I read the booklet back around 1980 or at the latest in the winter of 1981 before the Irving Hall was started. I do not recall it being a "cover". The most I would characterize it as being a polemic in defense of the Biblical and spiritual legitimacy of the practice of "praying the word back to God".

I do not recall that booklet really getting into a prescribed method in which to do this. Now if OBW wants to put his money where his mouth is, cough up the $7, buy the book, and quote the offensive parts to us. If he can prove his case, and I'll let you be the judge of that, then I'll buy the book off of him.

Brother ZNP, my suggestion is to post what is on your heart, and not try to win arguments. Some folks just love to challenge everything. It is just a trap. The way out, at least for me, is to write unto the Lord for the unseen reader. Let the other poster disagree, and then let the reader decide.