LSM’s Ignorance of the Synoptic Problem - Tomes

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It does nothing.

What about the Father's Only Begotten Son?

My question is this: Why do you so readily believe all the crackpots in this world for the last 2000 years, ...

What I readily believe is that there are an abundance of crackpots, and there has been since Christianity began.

And I don't know what faith you are talking about, that I should be fighting a fight for. Faith in what, specifically?

But back to Dr. Tomes. What Tomes reveals the most to me is that Lee wasn't getting his ministry from God, but from scholars and theologians from the past.

This may be why Lee's economy of God turned out to be artificial. Or something that had the appearance of a move of God but without God behind it, or doing it. Why? because Lee contrived it. God wasn't needed ... just a bunch of Bible verses, to make it sound like God. Lee was a ruse, or he was delusional. Whichever, God wasn't doing what Lee said He was doing.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by awareness

But back to Dr. Tomes. What Tomes reveals the most to me is that Lee wasn't getting his ministry from God, but from scholars and theologians from the past.

This may be why Lee's economy of God turned out to be artificial. Or something that had the appearance of a move of God but without God behind it, or doing it. Why? because Lee contrived it. God wasn't needed ... just a bunch of Bible verses, to make it sound like God. Lee was a ruse, or he was delusional. Whichever, God wasn't doing what Lee said He was doing.

What I think that Dr. Tomes has done best (in this writing and others) is to show how narrow and selective Lee was with the references that he used. In all the Life-Study messages that I read, I could probably count on one hand the variety of references that he cited. In other words, he used the same set of references over and over.

In many cases, I think Lee's narrowness led to his absurd conclusions like the subject of whole Bible being "God's Economy". Sure it all sounds good to LC members, but Tomes has demonstrated how fragile Lee's theology really is. That's not to say Tomes is right or everyone should agree with his view. If nothing else, it just shows that there is more than one side to all these issues that are discussed. That is something that the LC negelects and even attempts to stop, that is, discussing or "exploring" a topic. Maybe that is why I appreciate Dr. Tomes writings.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Freedom

What I think that Dr. Tomes has done best (in this writing and others) is to show how narrow and selective Lee was with the references that he used. In all the Life-Study messages that I read, I could probably count on one hand the variety of references that he cited. In other words, he used the same set of references over and over.

In many cases, I think Lee's narrowness led to his absurd conclusions like the subject of whole Bible being "God's Economy". Sure it all sounds good to LC members, but Tomes has demonstrated how fragile Lee's theology really is. That's not to say Tomes is right or everyone should agree with his view. If nothing else, it just shows that there is more than one side to all these issues that are discussed. That is something that the LC negelects and even attempts to stop, that is, discussing or "exploring" a topic. Maybe that is why I appreciate Dr. Tomes writings.

I would agree with this. Even if this particular issue is not so important, it is yet one more example of the shallowness of the resources that were the underpinning for Lee's "rich ministry."

I guess if you dismiss most of the scholars and commentators, you can simplify the Bible down to whatever you want it to be.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

I guess if you dismiss most of the scholars and commentators, you can simplify the Bible down to whatever you want it to be.

Or, "What's left, when you're always right?"

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

If nothing else, it just shows that there is more than one side to all these issues that are discussed. That is something that the LC negelects and even attempts to stop, that is, discussing or "exploring" a topic. Maybe that is why I appreciate Dr. Tomes writings.

Prior to "fellowship@coworkers.net" issue I had never heard of Nigel Tomes. Over time I have come to appreciate what he has to say even though my preference would be to focus on practices that issue in division.

I believe from the pro-LSM perspective, brothers tend to rely on the basis Witness Lee was not in error. Maintaining that position has proven to be sinking sand.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Prior to "fellowship@coworkers.net" issue I had never heard of Nigel Tomes. Over time I have come to appreciate what he has to say even though my preference would be to focus on practices that issue in division.

I believe from the pro-LSM perspective, brothers tend to rely on the basis Witness Lee was not in error. Maintaining that position has proven to be sinking sand.

Some of the members of this forum tend to get a little bristled when I speak of how the Recovery once enjoyed God's blessing, but Nigel Tomes is an illustration of this. There was a time when he was a tenured (or almost) Professor of Economics. I believe his PhD was fron the Univ of Chicago. He was called by the Lord to give that career up to serve by faith in the Recovery. He would say the Lord directed him to pay such a price. He willingly served under the direction of Lee and Chu. Obviously by his writings, Tomes was nobody's fool or lackey.

Today we can read dozens of articles by Tomes which correct LC teachings in the light of scripture and contemporary Christian scholarship. Over the years since Tomes was called by God, the teachings and practices of LC leadership have drifted further and further from the truth. The quarantine of Titus Chu only served to bring these errors out of hiding and into the forefront.