afazio - Spiritual Authority

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by aron

Psalm 12:6 (NIV) And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver purified in a crucible, like gold refined seven times.

Since this is the case I don't agree with the claim that the Bible is "chock full" of errors.

[ZNPaaneah]

This thread seems to have gone off track, becoming a debate over whether or not WL's teaching that certain books lacked the divine revelation is a valid teaching.

I think if we can all agree that WL did not have the authority to determine which books were and were not part of the divine revelation then we can all move forward with the thread.

Drake feels that some of these books were given to us as examples of the kind of errors that can be made. He believes that every scripture is God breathed but that does not preclude recording human ideas and opinions. Certainly we all have to agree that the book of Job records human ideas and opinions, and we have to agree that this is a view held widely, perhaps even by a majority of believers.

As long as we all agree that WL didn't have the authority to declare this book is God's word and that book isn't, how does any further debate apply to this thread?

Aron has gone into Psalms extensively already on another thread. I have gone into Job and James, and 77150 did a nice job on Proverbs.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This thread seems to have gone off track, becoming a debate over whether or not WL's teaching that certain books lacked the divine revelation is a valid teaching.

I think if we can all agree that WL did not have the authority to determine which books were and were not part of the divine revelation then we can all move forward with the thread.

Drake feels that some of these books were given to us as examples of the kind of errors that can be made. He believes that every scripture is God breathed but that does not preclude recording human ideas and opinions. Certainly we all have to agree that the book of Job records human ideas and opinions, and we have to agree that this is a view held widely, perhaps even by a majority of believers.

As long as we all agree that WL didn't have the authority to declare this book is God's word and that book isn't, how does any further debate apply to this thread?.

The issue was WN "recovering the Jerusalem Principle"; i.e. imposing external control on local assemblies. James and the Jerusalem church came to mind for some. Some came to Antioch, Peter drew back, afraid, etc.

My point was merely, Be careful how broad a brush you paint with, because in Acts you see many "law-abiding Jesus-following Jews" besides James. Some of them rather close to home, if you know what I mean. The issue was not legalism versus "Gods economy" but rather imposition of one's mores and values on others. And I'm stressing that it goes both ways - it's at the core of Jesus' teachings. "Do unto others". . .

And related, it's worth noting those whose "authority" extends to making broad-based, disparaging assessments of the writers and speakers of scripture.. We're not talking marginal issues here on one or two obscure verses. We're talking wholesale dismissal, which is completely against apostolic precedent.

If you don't get scriptures, maybe it's not defective; maybe your understanding is defective. And maybe in the rush to protect "Antioch" from Jerusalem's incursions, we created the opposite. We just shifted earthly centres.

And that's relevant to the experience of Chinese believers and the Christian West. Two wrongs don't make a right. Denominationalism, though real, doesn't excuse the Little Flock and what it became.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Since this is the case I don't agree with the claim that the Bible is "chock full" of errors.

Who said that?


Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

Who said that?


Drake

You said that.

Originally Posted by Drake

The Bible is chocked full of people expressing wrong ideas, misguided thinking, human issues, mistakes, failure, sin, sins, evil, calling out deceptions and erroneous teachings.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

You said that.

What I said was:

"The Bible is chocked full of people expressing wrong ideas, misguided thinking, human issues, mistakes, failure, sin, sins, evil, calling out deceptions and erroneous teachings."

and that is not the same as...

"The Bible is chocked full of errors."

.. nor do I believe that the Bible is deficient. Both you wrongly ascribed to me. I believe neither.

Of course, if I did believe those then that would make your conversation much easier....but since I don't you'll have to form an argument around what I actually said. It's better that anyway, don't you agree?

Thx
Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

What I said was:

"The Bible is chocked full of people expressing wrong ideas, misguided thinking, human issues, mistakes, failure, sin, sins, evil, calling out deceptions and erroneous teachings."

and that is not the same as...

"The Bible is chocked full of errors."

.. nor do I believe that the Bible is deficient. Both you wrongly ascribed to me. I believe neither.

Of course, if I did believe those then that would make your conversation much easier....but since I don't you'll have to form an argument around what I actually said. It's better that anyway, don't you agree?

Thx
Drake

Okay, now we're finding common ground. The Bible is not deficient; it just contains deficient writings. Not the same thing. Okay, good.

By the same token, I can say that the published work of Witness Lee isn't erroneous per se, but rather that it contains many errors. So let's narrow it down, shall we?

One of the chief errors of WL was to miss Christ. Instead, he either saw "the NT believer enjoying grace" or he saw the OT writer vainly trying to please God. Yet the clear NT record, in gospel, Acts of apostles, and epistle, is to see Jesus (Heb 2.8).

It was a kind of freudian slip, to ascribe error to those who expose oneself. (In this I'm often guilty as well, I know).

The other erroneous concept that we see in the ministries of WN and WL is the "it's ok if I do it, but don't you dare" idea. One can preach decentralization one day, and centralize things the next. "Freedom" one day, "restrictions" the next. Depends on the mood of the moment. The MOTA can do this because he's the MOTA, with special needs.

Another erroneous teaching is that God is, after all, a respecter of persons. The MOTA never makes mistakes. The church might crumble, if so.

Which brings us full circle - if the Bible is full of people saying dumb things, can we say the same thing for the ministry? And if not, why is it exempt from the same measure it holds on scripture? After all, ''as ye measure, so shall ye be measured" is the word.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Drake

Who said that?


Drake

Aron ascribed this to you, but you have cleared that misunderstanding up.