What is God's Economy?

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Ohio,

That's as logical as saying if we gather together every week to read the bible we are in bible-ism. Or if we gather together for the Lord's table we are in Lord's-table-ism.

That is not a spiritual fact, you don't say too many spiritual facts I have noticed.

The spiritual fact is what Koinonia said:

As a believer, you are in Christ and in the church.

We gather together not to read Lee's messages but to grow in Christ and do the things Christ told us to (remember Him in the Lord's table).

We do not say "I follow Lee" and we do not (or should not) even say "I follow Christ", for that would be divisive.

We are of Christ because we as believers are positionally in Christ and have been baptized in Christ's name.

That would all be very nice, if it were true. I have heard many LC members, including top coworkers, boldly declare that they follow Lee. On more than one occasion, I have heard Ron Kangas boldly and defiantly declare, "I am not ashamed to say that I follow a man."

During the Summer Training of 2015, I heard RK decry certain Christians for referring to themselves as "Lutherans" and "Wesleyans," and then say, "What a shame if we were to call ourselves 'Lee-ites.'"

However, I immediately recognized the absolute ridiculousness of this statement considering that most Lutherans and Wesleyans know nothing about Luther and Wesley; yet, very, very many in the LCs are 'Lee-ites'--whatever they call themselves.

In the same way, you focus obsessively on what people call themselves, yet seem to ignore the heart and the spiritual reality.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

That would all be very nice, if it were true. I have heard many LC members, including top coworkers, boldly declare that they follow Lee. On more than one occasion, I have heard Ron Kangas boldly and defiantly declare, "I am not ashamed to say that I follow a man."

During the Summer Training of 2015, I heard RK decry certain Christians for referring to themselves as "Lutherans" and "Wesleyans," and then say, "What a shame if we were to call ourselves 'Lee-ites.'"

However, I immediately recognized the absolute ridiculousness of this statement considering that most Lutherans and Wesleyans know nothing about Luther and Wesley; yet, very, very many in the LCs are 'Lee-ites'--whatever they call themselves.

In the same way, you focus obsessively on what people call themselves, yet seem to ignore the heart and the spiritual reality.

The scripture focuses on what people call themselves and names. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians, in 1 Corinthians 1:12 and 3:4 the emphasis was on what they said. Paul was not instructing them not to follow himself, or Peter, or Christ. He was telling them not to say they follow them.

In 1 Corinthians 1:13 Paul says "were you baptised in the name of Paul"?

To the person who says they are Lutheran he would say "were you baptized in the name of Luther"?

The context is divisions, and names and what we call ourselves in relation to that.

RK's context in following a man, I presume are in relation to following the
ministry of the man.

When we read and follow Paul's letter to the Corinthians. Does that mean we are following Paul? Well yes in a sense. Suppose someone reads and follows Matthew, are they following Matthew? Yes in a sense. There is no problem unless one says "I am a Paul-ite" and the other " I am a Matthew-ite".

So no problem if 50, 70 or 100% of a church follows Lee's ministry, unless they call themselves a Lee-ite then it's a problem.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The scripture focuses on what people call themselves and names. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians, in 1 Corinthians 1:12 and 3:4 the emphasis was on what they said. Paul was not instructing them not to follow himself, or Peter, or Christ. He was telling them not to say they follow them.

In 1 Corinthians 1:13 Paul says "were you baptised in the name of Paul"?

To the person who says they are Lutheran he would say "were you baptized in the name of Luther"?

The context is divisions, and names and what we call ourselves in relation to that.

RK's context in following a man, I presume are in relation to following the
ministry of the man.

When we read and follow Paul's letter to the Corinthians. Does that mean we are following Paul? Well yes in a sense. Suppose someone reads and follows Matthew, are they following Matthew? Yes in a sense. There is no problem unless one says "I am a Paul-ite" and the other " I am a Matthew-ite".

So no problem if 50, 70 or 100% of a church follows Lee's ministry, unless they call themselves a Lee-ite then it's a problem.

Until they run around in circles carrying a sandwich sign-board proclaiming ""I am of Lee, I am of Lee, I am of Lee, ..." Until then, by your definition, they are not of Lee.

Can you really be that naive?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Until they run around in circles carrying a sandwich sign-board proclaiming ""I am of Lee, I am of Lee, I am of Lee, ..." Until then, by your definition, they are not of Lee.

Can you really be that naive?

Well the context of Paul's words in "I follow Paul, I follow Christ etc", was on what people said and how they identified themselves. I note that he did not tell them to stop following those people.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Well the context of Paul's words in "I follow Paul, I follow Christ etc", was on what people said and how they identified themselves. I note that he did not tell them to stop following those people.

You make it sound like they have a few Witness Lee books in their library but otherwise you would have no idea that they were following Lee.

No one on this forum has taken issue with you for having a Witness Lee book.

No, the issue is that if you accept Witness Lee's teaching it includes the doctrine that all other Christians are wrong in their walk. How does one "follow" Witness Lee without judging all other Christians as being "off the mark of God's economy"?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

You make it sound like they have a few Witness Lee books in their library but otherwise you would have no idea that they were following Lee.

No one on this forum has taken issue with you for having a Witness Lee book.

No, the issue is that if you accept Witness Lee's teaching it includes the doctrine that all other Christians are wrong in their walk. How does one "follow" Witness Lee without judging all other Christians as being "off the mark of God's economy"?

They are off the mark, I have the bible and experience to tell me that (don't need Lee to know that).

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

They are off the mark, I have the bible and experience to tell me that (don't need Lee to know that).

That is a pretty crazy statement. Does your conscience not bother you about holding such an arrogant thought?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

They are off the mark, I have the bible and experience to tell me that (don't need Lee to know that).

But you don't have the Bible. Every time we have asked anyone to show how "God's economy" makes anyone wrong, or verses mean different things, they always say it does but cannot utter a single verse to establish that it actually does.

It would be interesting for someone to try. In my 11 years on these forums, I have only heard crickets chirping. It is always going to come soon and never does.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

That would all be very nice, if it were true. I have heard many LC members, including top coworkers, boldly declare that they follow Lee. On more than one occasion, I have heard Ron Kangas boldly and defiantly declare, "I am not ashamed to say that I follow a man."

What a shame because Ron Kangas should and does know better.

"Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.” Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one would say you were baptized in my name. "
1 Corinthians 1:12-15

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

What a shame because Ron Kangas should and does know better.

"Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.” Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one would say you were baptized in my name. "
1 Corinthians 1:12-15

In his warped thinking, RK can follow Lee, teach Lee, live as WWLD, and allow Lee's books and instructions to supersede the Bible, but as long as he never says those four dreaded words, "I am of Lee," then he is not violating scripture.

Talk about finely parsed legalistic views of scripture! Reminds me of my childhood with the nuns at my Catholic school trying to convince us that all the statues around us were NOT graven "images."

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Ohio

In his warped thinking, RK can follow Lee, teach Lee, live as WWLD, and allow Lee's books and instructions to supersede the Bible, but as long as he never says those four dreaded words, "I am of Lee," then he is not violating scripture.

Talk about finely parsed legalistic views of scripture! Reminds me of my childhood with the nuns at my Catholic school trying to convince us that all the statues around us were NOT graven "images."

This is my conclusion--that most LC members and leaders focus on very outward things like words used and names, etc., but overlook the heart, the attitude, and the spiritual reality.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

This is my conclusion--that most LC members and leaders focus on very outward things like words used and names, etc., but overlook the heart, the attitude, and the spiritual reality.

That's exactly what legalism, pride, and self-righteousness do.

Both Nee and Lee criticized the Exclusive Brethren for being "overly objective" in their teaching emphasis. Actually they were not. They made the experience of Christ into a science, much the same as Lee did during the Perfecting Training, i.e. "just flip the switch," and turn on the Spirit. Remember that? Mechanized spirituality in the name of subjective experience of Christ.

What really damaged the Exclusives, the Little Flock, and the Recovery was the Deputy Authority, whose endless teachings superseded scripture, and whose authority robbed the Lord of His.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Both Nee and Lee criticized the Exclusive Brethren for being "overly objective" in their teaching emphasis. Actually they were not. They made the experience of Christ into a science, much the same as Lee did during the Perfecting Training, i.e. "just flip the switch," and turn on the Spirit. Remember that? Mechanized spirituality in the name of subjective experience of Christ.

What really damaged the Exclusives, the Little Flock, and the Recovery was the Deputy Authority, whose endless teachings superseded scripture, and whose authority robbed the Lord of His.

Criticism "for being "overly objective" in their teaching emphasis? LC practices can be criticized for being "overly subjective". Too much weight is given to feeling and no consideration given towards facts and substance.
Decision making especially among the blendeds tends to be defined as "what would brother Lee want". All objectivity and reason has been discarded.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

That's exactly what legalism, pride, and self-righteousness do.

Both Nee and Lee criticized the Exclusive Brethren for being "overly objective" in their teaching emphasis. Actually they were not. They made the experience of Christ into a science, much the same as Lee did during the Perfecting Training, i.e. "just flip the switch," and turn on the Spirit. Remember that? Mechanized spirituality in the name of subjective experience of Christ.

What really damaged the Exclusives, the Little Flock, and the Recovery was the Deputy Authority, whose endless teachings superseded scripture, and whose authority robbed the Lord of His.

In the LS of Exodus, Lee used the phrase "the science of drinking" (Msg 43). If everything can be diluted to some sort of 'science' or "flipping the switch" as Lee so loved to claim, then there would be no excuse for anyone to not be completely on board with the whole paradigm of "God's economy" that the LC teaches.

I used to wonder why all these promises made in Lee's ministry never worked in the way claimed. I thought I was deficient. It's not until I looked around that I realized these thigns didn't work for anyone else either.

So I think what our friend Evangelical has labeled as "religious observation" isn't so bad after all. Millions upon millions of Christians are out there living a fulfilling life glorify God. So many in the LC are stuck in a rut of wondering what they're doing wrong.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Many Christians believe that salvation just means going to heaven when they die. The rest of their life, purpose for existence, and their environment is unrelated to that fact, including going to church, which is just a routine exercise of religious observation. This is the kind of person who does not live according to God's plan, because they don't see that salvation is the very purpose of their existence.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I used to wonder why all these promises made in Lee's ministry never worked in the way claimed. I thought I was deficient. It's not until I looked around that I realized these things didn't work for anyone else either.

So I think what our friend Evangelical has labeled as "religious observation" isn't so bad after all. Millions upon millions of Christians are out there living a fulfilling life glorify God. So many in the LC are stuck in a rut of wondering what they're doing wrong.

How very true! Decades of broken promises, false hopes, disappointments, and I and we always blamed myself and ourselves.

Yet, the standard answer to the endless query was: "What were you expecting, did you want something other than Christ?"

No, that's exactly what I wanted. Christ!

Interestingly, about the time I was leaving the Recovery, I heard someone say, that if your church "was not under the Lord's blessing, then perhaps it is under a curse."

Little extreme, but got me thinking. Eventually I concluded that our leaders had only reaped what they sowed. Decades of covered up unrighteousness and smear campaigns against the likes of our beloved brother John Ingalls can't be hidden from heavenly eyes.

How well James spoke to our condition ...

But the tongue no man can tame; it is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

With it we bless our Lord and Father; and with it we curse men, who are made in God's likeness.

Out of the same [ministry] mouth comes forth blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not so to be.