?

Log in

No account? Create an account
RSQUBF LiveJournal Community
the original poor message 
23rd-Oct-2005 11:06 pm
I think I have found the origianl poor message by Sam lee. It was based on John Chapter 4. I have serious doubt about the quality of his doctoral degree in literature.

These days, many people never talk about others' sin problem,
because they are afraid they would violate others' human rights. But
Jesus endured the pain of exposing her inner sin problem so that he
might, by any means, help her solve her sin problem. This seems to be
too harsh--and as if Jesus loved her no more. But in truth, it is
divine love: It is spiritual love which makes her solve her sin
problem. Her enemies were not her town's people. They were her sins in
her. Sin poisoned her. Sin tormented her day and night with no rest.
Finally, sin cut her love-relationship with God and men.

"Go, call your husband!" Humanly speaking, this was interference
with her private life. However, Jesus did not mind violating her human
rights to talk about her sin problem
in order to heal her sin-sick
soul.
Comments 
24th-Oct-2005 04:49 am (UTC)
How can one conclud that Jesus violated the Samaritan woman's human right by just reading through the passage? Is there any hint in the passage that Jesus is violating her human right? None! Even with today's standard of human rights, there is no sign of Jesus violating her human rights? Instead Jesus seems to have very private counseling with her regarding her personal problem. Compare his private counseling to Ubf's favorite "there is one young lady who has marriage problem..." announced during public worship service? This could be violating a personal privacy but what Jesus did to the Samaritan woman is not.

As the Bible says, Jesus is sinless not only based on spiritual standard but also on human standard. He even paid tax to the Ceasar. So how could we imagine Jesus violating any human rights? No, that is impossible.

What Sam lee is preaching amounts to relative morality. That is the idea that it is ok to violate anyone's human right to help the person spiritually. No. The Bible teaches us that you should never violate anyone's human rights and at the same time you have to help him spiritually. If sam lee's relitive morality is applied in real life, then it is ok to bomb an abortion clinic so no one can have abortion. It is ok to beat up a person who does not attend sunday worship service. It is ok to force divorce to bring a husband back to a church. Anything can be done in the name of God if it is allowed to violate human rights to serve God. Jesus never taught his disciples to do this. This is what Nazis did. It is absolutely THE FALSE TEACHING that Jesus didn't mind violating anyone's human rights to help anyone. If Jesus ever violated anyone's human rights, then humanly speaking Jesus is a sinner since Jesus was a perfect human being as he is God himself. Then the Gospel is not a good news anymore and we have no salvation. Isn't this in Theology 100? I think many ubf messengers are influenced by sam lee's relative moral position. That is why many news media is trying to investigate ubf practices. I think that is why Caleb Chung was always on the opposite side of sam lee's questionable position

How could anyone who has doctoral degree in literature interpert a pssage like John 4 in such a terrible way? He is not interpreting the passage as it is. Instead he is interpreting the Bible passage with his own personal philogosphy which seems to be clearly based on relative moralism. This is so terrible. No wonder he needed such emphasis on one-to-on Bible study and strict "divine" discipleship training. No wonder it was ok for him to force someone to work 25 miles on bare foot. It was ok for him to violate anyone's human rights because he believed that Jesus also violated the Samaritan woman's human rights to help her. Did he really attend any publicly approved seminary?
24th-Oct-2005 05:21 am (UTC) - Another classic
From http://rsqubf.fortunecity.net/discuss/archive/3855.html, this is Sam Lee on Luke 13:10-13:

Once Jesus healed a crippled woman who was bent over for 18 years (Lk 13:10-13). To a woman, a marriage dream is predetermined. Therefore, all women, including cripples, live in a marriage fantasy. She, too, must have had a marriage dream. But because her back was bent over, she was very fatalistic about her marriage. Jesus participated in her sorrowful marriage problem and healed her back on the Sabbath day.

Yikes.

I'm pretty sure the "Litt.D." in "Dr. Samuel Lee, Ph.D., Litt.D." came from that honorary doctorate he got (*ahem* bought *ahem*) from a Korean University.
24th-Oct-2005 03:41 pm (UTC)
I very well remember a message I heard many years ago about Jesus, the fulfillment of the law, having "the highest standard of morality".
In fact, there is no person, not even Confucius or Buddha, with a morality as high as that of Jesus.

UBF seems to presuppose: "Morals are something stupid. As a Christian, we must learn to not care for morals, and here we have proof that even Jesus didn't care about morals..."

Fact is, in the said passage we once again see how perfect Jesus' morals are, because He knew that this woman would be an "easy lay", but He didn't take advantage of Her but rather helped her re-establish a virtuous life and see the error in her past. This is not "violating human rights" but "restoring human dignity", and to be honest, UBF doesn't restore anyone's dignity, but they drag it down in the dirt in the name of "humility training".

In Christ,
Mike
24th-Oct-2005 05:59 pm (UTC)
In ubf, you are a born again christian when you are ready to violate someone else's human rights "by faith". But if you try to defend anyone's human dignity, you are an unspiritual "humanistic" cultural christian. The ubf leaders seem to have difficulty in understanding loving God "absolutely". They seem to think that it is ok to violate human rights temporarily for the greater cause of serving God absolutely. But if any human rights are violated to serve God absolutely, the absoluteness in serving God has been already defeated by the violation of human rights. Loving God absolutely should not be translated into justifying the violation of human rights. The Bible teaches us that loving God absolutely requires respecting any human rights absolutely because God has the power to help us do both. So if the ubf leaders think that they must violate human rights "by faith" for the greater cause of helping their sheep spiritually, they in fact have no faith.
25th-Oct-2005 06:11 am (UTC) - The UBF Bible
In UBF, the entire Bible is "condensed" down to:
1) Without God's calling, you're going to hell.
2) God calls you to be a great spiritual leader.
3) A leader can do everything "for the glory of God".
4) Obey your leaders since they serve God.

Many UBF messages are so blatantly devoid of the precious love, grace and care which draws people to God in order to justify their little pyramid marketing scheme, sometimes twisting the very meaning of the previously mentioned words to "prove" their perspective that it's sickening.
The charta of human rights isn't the result of some great philosopher's genius, in fact, if you consider the basic paragraphs, they're all biblical rules. As such, violating them is equal to violating the Holy Word, i.e. God's Will.
UBF leaders can not see this since they can not see what the Bible really says, they care only what they *want* the Bible to say.

So sad.
In Christ,
Mike
This page was loaded Nov 20th 2017, 3:18 pm GMT.