Is the "One Trumpet" doctrine aligned with the fellowship of the apostles

[ZNPaaneah]

Wow! Can you provide evidence that this doctrine was associated with the lawsuits? Also do they actually liken WL to the "commander in chief"? What a heresy. He is making himself out to be another Christ. That would be a perfect example of the false prophet denying the master who bought us.

Witness Lee creates a bogus doctrine to justify silencing all dissenters so that Witness Lee can ignore the fellowship of the Apostles to sue other Christians and make the saps in the LRC pay for it. Some are not so stupid, like TC, but due to blackmail (which ultimately was carried out in his excommunication for violating the one trumpet doctrine) they fold under pressure.

OK, so that is what it appears to be. Perhaps Evangelical or Drake will take up the call to clear up any misunderstandings.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow! Can you provide evidence that this doctrine was associated with the lawsuits? Also do they actually liken WL to the "commander in chief"? What a heresy. He is making himself out to be another Christ. That would be a perfect example of the false prophet denying the master who bought us.

Here is what I found:

On the one hand, we are an army, and with the army there should be a commander in chief. In the New Testament you cannot find the term “commander in chief.” We can realize this matter, though, by inference from Paul's mentioning of the uncertain sound of the trumpet for the battle (1 Cor. 14:8). Surely the battle implies an army, and in an army there is the need of a general to command the army, to direct the army to fight.. (Elders' Training, Book 07: One Accord for the Lord's Move, Chapter 7, Section 2)


You could certainly understand that brothers like RG and BP would take this and run with WL is the C-in-C.

The following quote is quite disturbing. He is responding to some that have been calling him "C-in-C" and instead of rebuking or rejecting it he implies that they don't understand what is involved in following him. This is as clear as it gets that he has set himself up as the leader for everyone to follow and that he expects a very big commitment from them.

You may say that you follow Brother Lee, that you are one with this ministry. This sounds very good, but I am a little concerned that you may not know what it means to be one with the ministry. You may want to take me as your commander in chief and follow me, but I do not want to have many followers who know nothing about God's New Testament economy. (Elders' Training, Book 07: One Accord for the Lord's Move, Chapter 7, Section 4)


Here he talks about Jesus as the "invisible captain" and Joshua as the visible one, saying that the children of Israel needed a captain. It would be perfectly reasonable (and heretical) for someone to read this and conclude that the church needs Jesus as the "invisible" captain and Witness Lee as the visible one.

The fourth item of intrinsic significance concerns the Captain of Jehovah's army. The children of Israel were ready. They had been circumcised, they had enjoyed the Passover, and they had enjoyed the produce of the good land. However, they still needed a Captain. Then Joshua saw a vision in which Christ was unveiled as the Captain of Jehovah's army. Joshua was the visible commander, but Christ was the invisible One. Before the children of Israel attacked the Canaanites, they were fully prepared and qualified with Christ, the embodiment of God, as their Captain. When they attacked Jericho, they did this under the commanding of the Captain typified by the ark. The ark, a type of Christ, who was their Commander-in-chief, took the lead to attack the enemies. (Life-Study of Joshua, Judges & Ruth, Chapter 5, Section 1)


Here he uses the analogy of a "commander-in-chief" to himself and the way in which he prepares messages for the church.

Our use of reference books can be compared to a commander-in-chief who consults his advisers for their opinions in order to develop a strategy. Sometimes these opinions give us good ideas. If we do not read or consult reference books, we limit ourselves. The reference books that we consult can be helpful in improving our understanding. (The Perfecting of the Saints and the Building Up of the House of God, Chapter 5, Section 4)

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Here is what I found:

On the one hand, we are an army, and with the army there should be a commander in chief. In the New Testament you cannot find the term “commander in chief.” We can realize this matter, though, by inference from Paul's mentioning of the uncertain sound of the trumpet for the battle (1 Cor. 14:8). Surely the battle implies an army, and in an army there is the need of a general to command the army, to direct the army to fight.. (Elders' Training, Book 07: One Accord for the Lord's Move, Chapter 7, Section 2)

1Cor 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain voice, who shall prepare himself for war?

As best I can tell this is the New Testament basis for the elders and leaders of the LSM to issue a ban on all Christian publications other than their publishing arm. The violation of this rule was used to support the excommunication of Titus Chu.

Now the context of this is the speaking of tongues in a church meeting. It seems to me that Paul is concerned with "distinct sound", "understanding what is said".

Verse 9 continues and explains this saying "So also ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air."

So there is no inference at all that this implies only one speaker, but rather that when you speak you must speak in a clear language that everyone can understand. How do you spin a doctrine of only one publisher out of this?

As for "commander in chief" it seems that is based on Joshua in the OT being the captain of the Lord's army. Since Joshua was a type of Christ it would be appropriate to refer to Jesus as "commander in chief" however, I think "Lord" would be much clearer and more Biblical.

Witness Lee clearly stated that there were some in the elders training who referred to Witness Lee as the commander in chief. That should have been rebuked and repudiated.

[ZNPaaneah]

I take it the lack of response is evidence of how indefensible this doctrine is.

I was reading a little history and about 1/3 of a company of 35 men was the fief and drummers.

In an army you can imagine how many buglers or trumpeters there are.

Granted, the music played would be at the bequest of the commanding officer, and if everyone was under the same "commander in chief" there would be an authority over this. But Jesus is the commander in chief. For Witness Lee, the Blendeds and LSM to usurp that position is to deny the Lord who bought us.