Major Errors of Witness Lee’s Teaching

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

No you aren't. You said "do you know more than Wallace". Nothing scholarly about that, no reference to NT Greek. Simply Wallace said it, so there. Very noble of you.

Its your strawman because I never denied it was not written to all Christians in Corinth.

But these sects are condemned by Paul. He speaks of them in a negative way. He thinks of them all as one church.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Its your strawman because I never denied it was not written to all Christians in Corinth.

But these sects are condemned by Paul. He speaks of them in a negative way. He thinks of them all as one church.

How can it be a "straw man" if it is a cornerstone in WL's teaching concerning the ground of the church?

1. A major pillar of this doctrine is that every letter is addressed to "the church in _____"

2. A second major pillar is 1Cor 3.

This is not a "straw man" argument, it is the root of the tree.

WL teaches that the proper name for the church is "The church in ____" and that any other name is akin to a wife taking some other man's name for her own. That is ground of the church 101.

So let's look at this carefully. WL teaches that Corinth was the "typical" church. In this typical church Paul addresses his letter to "the church in Corinth" yet that included all the believers, even those who were meeting in groups claiming to be "of Peter" or "of Paul" or "of Apollos" or "of Christ". Paul rebukes them for this saying they are fleshly, and babes in Christ.

One way to understand this is that trying to have the best, most spiritual name is fleshly, walking according to envy, strife and the ways of men.

The other way is to build your own sect by coming up with a new name, "The church in blank".

But regardless you have to agree that the book of Corinthians was written to the church in Corinth, it signified a typical church, and there were many babes in Christ, fleshly ones who were not spiritual and who were hung up on the name of their meeting hall. Yet they were all included in Paul's reference to "the church in Corinth".

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

How can it be a "straw man" if it is a cornerstone in WL's teaching concerning the ground of the church?

1. A major pillar of this doctrine is that every letter is addressed to "the church in _____"

2. A second major pillar is 1Cor 3.

This is not a "straw man" argument, it is the root of the tree.

WL teaches that the proper name for the church is "The church in ____" and that any other name is akin to a wife taking some other man's name for her own. That is ground of the church 101.

So let's look at this carefully. WL teaches that Corinth was the "typical" church. In this typical church Paul addresses his letter to "the church in Corinth" yet that included all the believers, even those who were meeting in groups claiming to be "of Peter" or "of Paul" or "of Apollos" or "of Christ". Paul rebukes them for this saying they are fleshly, and babes in Christ.

One way to understand this is that trying to have the best, most spiritual name is fleshly, walking according to envy, strife and the ways of men.

The other way is to build your own sect by coming up with a new name, "The church in blank".

But regardless you have to agree that the book of Corinthians was written to the church in Corinth, it signified a typical church, and there were many babes in Christ, fleshly ones who were not spiritual and who were hung up on the name of their meeting hall. Yet they were all included in Paul's reference to "the church in Corinth".

The Recovery is not about naming the church with the proper name, but to have no name. Even to take the name of the locality can be divisive.

Why do we say "The local churches do not have a name. ". It is a straw man because we do not believe in properly naming the church as you are claiming. We believe in NOT naming the church. But to identify ourselves we refer to our locality. Obviously Paul no where rebukes anyone for saying "I am of Corinth", "I am of Ephesus".

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The Recovery is not about naming the church with the proper name, but to have no name. Even to take the name of the locality can be divisive.

Why do we say "The local churches do not have a name. ". It is a straw man because we do not believe in properly naming the church as you are claiming. We believe in NOT naming the church. But to identify ourselves we refer to our locality. Obviously Paul no where rebukes anyone for saying "I am of Corinth", "I am of Ephesus".

My how things have changed!

How can the so-called Recovery be about having no name, when they filed lawsuits in several cities over the rights to a church name???

Evangelical, your teachings have a serious disconnect with reality.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

My how things have changed!

How can the so-called Recovery be about having no name, when they filed lawsuits in several cities over the rights to a church name???

Evangelical, your teachings have a serious disconnect with reality.

This doesnt sound like the Recovery I am in.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

This doesnt sound like the Recovery I am in.

You insist you have no name, and yet you keep talking about "the Recovery."

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

You insist you have no name, and yet you keep talking about "the Recovery."

It's not a name. It's like saying "we're in the age of Grace".

[aron]

We believe in NOT naming the church. But to identify ourselves we refer to our locality. Obviously Paul no where rebukes anyone for saying "I am of Corinth", "I am of Ephesus".

Regarding not naming the church - that seems to be the lever, or engine, to pry believers from the flock, whence they are subject to the private eschatology, theology, and ecclesiology of one person, represented by a host of names. Christians on Campus, Continuing Steadfastly, emanna, The Lord's Move to Europe, Affirmation and Critique, Defense and Confirmation, Rhema Inc, and of course the mother ship Living Stream Ministry.

And if you think, "Oh well that's the ministry not the church", in 1997 when the mother ship directed all the localities to have a web presence, each (identical) web site said, "Lovers of Jesus affiliated with the ministries of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee". No difference from saying, "I am of Nee and Lee". And the Chinese don't have any such compunctions - they shout, "Nee, Lee, Chu!" over & again. Just so there's no mistaking who is "of" who.