Is it the Message, or the Men?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Igzy

BTW, I wanted to add a thought for OBW. I think a major difference between Nee and Lee and other Christian teachers who may have emphasized many of the "deeper" things they did (as opposed, for example, to the typical fare of evangelical churches), is that Nee and Lee raised up many churches which they directed to teach and think like they did. Other teachers, Penn-Lewis, Andrew Murray, etc, were prolific, but did not start a movement of churches. Tozer and Sparks each led one church, but only Nee and Lee dispensed their teachings into many churches which in turn reflected their worldview. This is a rather unique situation with unique consequences. The other teachers did not really discriminate about who they ministered to, Nee and Lee did. Their interest was always in raising up a movement which remained pure to their vision, rather than simply casting their bread upon the water.

Because of this, their teaching had a much more focused impact. Though "inner life" teachings have to a degree meandered their way into mainstream Christianity, their concentration and impact is not as severe as Nee and Lee were on their dedicated audience. This adds to the overstated impression that Nee and Lee had something "unique" to say. But, actually, most things truly "unique" to the Recovery are associated with error.

I would say that this is a relatively sound way to put it. And my thoughts about the writers that I prefer to read (although I must admit that my appetite for reading is often diminished between too much eye strain looking at tax laws and returns on a computer all day and allergies) are of the kind that are often preachers at a single church and write. Swindol, Alcorn, Driscoll, Bell (Rob, not Michael), McKnight, Spencer, McLaren, Tickle, Fitch, and others. Some of the readers here probably have no idea who some of those are. I will admit at least two of those are very controversial, and I am very careful as I read them not to get sucked-in to something that could be error — in some ways as bad or worse than Lee. We'll leave it at that.

But while these people influence their readers, those readers generally remain within some group that provides a base and framework within which to assess what they read. It is only when, as you say, the readers become a collection of direct followers that there begin to be real problems (at least potentially) especially when other sources of spiritual diet are removed.