Hanegraaff Sings Praises To The LC/Recovery With A Lengthy Explanation

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I am trying to ask this one question: Is the "man becomes God" teaching of WL the biggest theological issue others see with him?

Am I not communicating this question properly? Can perhaps someone else help answer this, or rephrase this question in a way that is understood?

I'm not sure if this directly answers your question, but I went to the wikipedia "local church controversies" page to see what are listed as the theological issues and if there is any ranking. The first thing that became apparent is that obviously DCP has poured their (excuse me, the saints') hard-earned dollars into writing the whole thing. It's so blatantly written from LSM/DCP's false perspective. It's obviously they tried to back down from their standard arrogance and polemic style of writing, but they can't escape it and it's still very present with subtle language attempting to bias any reader. Anyway, my point in saying this is just that wikipedia shows deification as one of the main issues (I don't know if anyone can say it's THE main though.....not sure who would make that decision).

The site Unto referred you to, open-letter.org, could reasonably be assumed to be an attempt at an answer to the question. A large group of representative evangelicals got together and agreed to take issue with four main teachings.....one of them being "man becomes God"......so it seems the answer is "there isn't one main theological issue, but a handful".

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I'm not sure if this directly answers your question, but I went to the wikipedia "local church controversies" page to see what are listed as the theological issues and if there is any ranking. The first thing that became apparent is that obviously DCP has poured their (excuse me, the saints') hard-earned dollars into writing the whole thing. It's so blatantly written from LSM/DCP's false perspective. It's obviously they tried to back down from their standard arrogance and polemic style of writing, but they can't escape it and it's still very present with subtle language attempting to bias any reader. Anyway, my point in saying this is just that wikipedia shows deification as one of the main issues (I don't know if anyone can say it's THE main though.....not sure who would make that decision).

The site Unto referred you to, open-letter.org, could reasonably be assumed to be an attempt at an answer to the question. A large group of representative evangelicals got together and agreed to take issue with four main teachings.....one of them being "man becomes God"......so it seems the answer is "there isn't one main theological issue, but a handful".

Okay - thank you! That starts to an answer to my question. According to the signers on open-letter.org, the "man becomes God" teaching is one of four main theological problems others see with WL. That's basically all I was asking for.

So which of the four things listed there do people on this forum think is perhaps the biggest issue if you had to pick one? (personally, I think the "man becoming God" thing is probably the biggest issue, but the others could certainly be argued for too)

[Nell]

It should be noted that the “man becomes God” teaching did not surface until the mid-90’s. I would have never become involved with a group that taught such a shockingly obvious, cringeworthy, heresy, especially if that was my first exposure to “the church”.

Lee was always coming out with something “new”. It was his way to attract American young people who always wanted the latest and greatest. He boasted about having the “up to date speaking of God.” Last year’s “new way” became the “old way” and the next “new way” was ushered in with a bang! And you had better keep up, if you knew what was good for you.

On a visit to the Irving Texas branch of the LSM, one of the workers told me “we are baby gods!” I was visibly shaken at that “news”. Conversation over...get me out of here!!

Nell

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Trapped

The site Unto referred you to, open-letter.org, could reasonably be assumed to be an attempt at an answer to the question. A large group of representative evangelicals got together and agreed to take issue with four main teachings.....one of them being "man becomes God"......so it seems the answer is "there isn't one main theological issue, but a handful".

See, now that wasn't so hard after all!
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

See, now that wasn't so hard after all!
-

Effective communication is a funny thing - we always seem to think we are doing it so well. (like my wife sometimes says, "Just saying the same thing louder doesn't make it more understandable!" )

I was thinking a little about the "man becomes God" teaching. It is not a defensible position as that is never said in the Bible. I certainly see some amazing and exceedingly lofty things the Bible says regarding our true identity - which we usually do not realize fully, and perhaps won't fully until that day. However, nowhere I see does it flatly say we become God!

To recap, the four errors stated in that open letter are:
1. Nature of God - Modalism
2. Man becoming God
3. Denouncing of Christianity
4. Suing other Christians
(the first two are more theological in nature, while the last two seem more like a practice)

So what is the biggest theological error in all y-alls minds (you can tell we know southerners)?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I was thinking a little about the "man becomes God" teaching. It is not a defensible position as that is never said in the Bible. I certainly see some amazing and exceedingly lofty things the Bible says regarding our true identity - which we usually do not realize fully, and perhaps won't fully until that day. However, nowhere I see does it flatly say we become God!

SonsToGlory, this is exactly the view I ascribe to post-LC. Now I am not ultra-super-strict about this, rejecting each and every word (e.g. incarnation) which is not in the scriptures. I just reject extra-biblical ideas and teachings as truth.

Using WL's extreme pattern of interpretive inference, he could make the Bible say almost anything. And his followers believed him. The Blendeds even used Levitical instructions concerning leprosy to justify the destruction of Midwest LC's, i.e. their "replaster this house" nonsense because "leprous" young people used electric guitars to worship God.

What I mean by interpretive inference is the following, "if this then that, and if that then the following, and with the following we conclude that man becomes God." I bought into this line of reasoning for 30 years. This is exactly how we were convinced that every one of Lee's errors was honest-to-God truth. Chief example is WL's "one church one city" dogma.

But beloved Brethren what does the Bible say? Never stop asking that question!

The Apostles, including John, Peter, and Paul, had ample opportunity to say this, but they did not. There is a reason for this.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Apostles, including John, Peter, and Paul, had ample opportunity to say this, but they did not. There is a reason for this.

That speaks to my point well, and I have thought the same thing. The Apostles seem to go right up to the point of calling man God, but then don't. Why? There certainly must be a reason!

As we've said, our new ID in Christ is exceedingly lofty and I doubt we've realized a small fraction of what He's done in making us sons of God and sharing in His glory, but we should be careful lest we start adding things in there that are not stated clearly.

Let me say that I also don't agree with the two LC practices listed on the open-letter.org website: suing other Christians and denigrating them. These things ought not to be in the LC. The other theological problem they list (Modalism), I'm kinda "meh" about, as I've expressed on here several times. So UntoHim, for the record I agree with 3 of the 4 things against the LC listed on open-letter.org. (does that make me at least 3/4 of a forum member? )

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

That speaks to my point well, and I have thought the same thing. The Apostles seem to go right up to the point of calling man God, but then don't. Why? There certainly must be a reason!

Of course there is a reason! Here is a few more:

• Is not this teaching reminiscent of the Serpent's temptation in the Garden?
• Take a look at the arrogant pride swelling up in those who espouse this teaching.
• Why do other errant cults like the Mormons teach that they become gods?
• Where is the good fruit of those in the LC proclaiming they are gods? Do "gods" really need to sue their brothers and sisters?

[Sons to Glory!]

I like your reasoning. Something also that came to me was how the disciples were rebuked by Jesus for thinking they should call down fire on the Samaritans (who worshipped differently). This seems akin to the LC denigrating and suing other Christians . . .

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

See, now that wasn't so hard after all!
-

Yo Unto, for us emogi-challenged geriatrics, can you transcribe that string of faces into English? :P