Witness Lee and AW Tozer

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Witness Lee makes the same mistake with the "Minister of the Age" doctrine. .. There is no black and white New Testament teaching to support this, only the assertion (which in my mind is very flimsy) that at one point Peter was the leading apostle (I am unable to see this, James clearly was, but I never see that Peter was) and then later Paul was (why, because Paul rebukes Peter? That is absurd, Peter was rebuked for being subservient to James, so the teaching is that Peter was supposed to be subservient to Paul instead?). .

1. Paul never said Peter (or anyone else) should be subject to him. Paul merely said he wouldn't be subject to the "super-apostles" who vied for primacy. Lee flipped that on its head and said that Paul was the uber-apostle. Absurd and unfounded claim. I daresay Paul would recoil from such nonsense. "We also are men, of like nature with you" (Acts 14:15)

2. And what of John the beloved disciple? Was he subservient to Paul, later to rise to primacy when Paul passed on? I daresay John would never subject to Paul, or any other, and find no basis for this kind of thought.

3. Any cursory reading of Christian history will show fatal flaws in the MOTA template. Was Wesley subject to Edwards, or both of them to Whitefield? No, the right hand of fellowship was sufficient. Nee had an oriental bias, and a clear disposition to be first - notice that he maneuvered the SCA away from his previously senior fellows like Leland Wang, after leaving Margaret Barber's tutelage. With this kind of disposition (i.e. Lee's "natural concepts") Nee read too hopefully into OT types, which had little if any bearing in the NT age; and in fact were arguably contravened by the clear NT word: "be subject to one another" and "whom would be great, be least of all" etc etc.

4. By definition, Jesus alone has the Ministry of the Age, and revelation of and faith in Jesus Christ forms the sole basis or ground of the 'ekklesia', in any form, and it is Jesus alone who is the One who walks before the throne, ministering among the seven golden lampstands. There is simply no other name for us. There is no other faith, no other Spirit, no other gospel. None.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

1. Paul never said Peter (or anyone else) should be subject to him. Paul merely said he wouldn't be subject to the "super-apostles" who vied for primacy. Lee flipped that on its head and said that Paul was the uber-apostle. Absurd and unfounded claim. I daresay Paul would recoil from such nonsense. "We also are men, of like nature with you" (Acts 14:15)

2. And what of John the beloved disciple? Was he subservient to Paul, later to rise to primacy when Paul passed on? I daresay John would never subject to Paul, or any other, and find no basis for this kind of thought.

3. Any cursory reading of Christian history will show fatal flaws in the MOTA template. Was Wesley subject to Edwards, or both of them to Whitefield? No, the right hand of fellowship was sufficient. Nee had an oriental bias, and a clear disposition to be first - notice that he maneuvered the SCA away from his previously senior fellows like Leland Wang, after leaving Margaret Barber's tutelage. With this kind of disposition (i.e. Lee's "natural concepts") Nee read too hopefully into OT types, which had little if any bearing in the NT age; and in fact were arguably contravened by the clear NT word: "be subject to one another" and "whom would be great, be least of all" etc etc.

4. By definition, Jesus alone has the Ministry of the Age, and revelation of and faith in Jesus Christ forms the sole basis or ground of the 'ekklesia', in any form, and it is Jesus alone who is the One who walks before the throne, ministering among the seven golden lampstands. There is simply no other name for us. There is no other faith, no other Spirit, no other gospel. None.

As much as LC folks love to hear it, MOTA "subservience" only "blossomed" in mid-19th century England under Darby. It took a steely Prussian like Muller, living by faith, strongly connected to scripture, and associated with the scholar and fellow-elder Craik, to withstand the continual onslaught from Darby and his band of cadres. What Muller endured "almost" rivaled that which Paul suffered at the hand of the Judaizers, save for those brutal persecutions.

M.E. Barber apparently resurrected "perfection by abuse" and, after a period of trial in the 1940's, Nee learned to follow Darby in the way of subjecting all others to himself. Obviously Lee watched carefully and continued the terrible pattern.