View Full Version : Leaders of the Lord's Recovery
Indiana
11-05-2014, 02:23 PM
They cannot be helped or moved. I fear they may be whitewashed tombs full of dead men's bones.
But I wish they could have been with me last night at a Messianic Jewish men's group, sitting around a table seeking the Lord and scriptural truth - with the rabbi present. The question was asked, What area of your life do you think there should be less of I and more of Christ"? And, What is the baptism of the Holy Spirit? And Have you been filled with the Holy Spirit?
1st Letter to Seattle: "The positive aspects of the church I have never denied, as those who know me understand. But I am not one-dimensional, just considering the positive side - “Once a church becomes spiritual, many problems will have to be considered. If a church is not spiritual, it is peaceful and without problems. The more spiritual you are, the more problems you have to solve” (W. Nee, Church Affairs, p. 48, 151). If I address a problem, whether with a brother or concerning the churches, it is with deep sincerity and with one objective in mind – reconciliation of the members unto restoration in the Body. This has been my endeavor, whether personally with Joel Kennon or corporately, as with Dan Towle.
awareness
11-05-2014, 02:44 PM
Dear brother Indiana: Why do you waste your time with these people?
But Indiana seems not to be able to partake of the riches of Christ without it being in a local church meeting.
Seems to me they are speaking against the Holy Spirit, but what do I know.
Indiana
11-05-2014, 03:56 PM
Dear saints, elders, Oct 1, 2014
As I shared a few days ago, I was recently cut off from fellowship in the church in Spokane after a very promising beginning. Word came to them that I had websites that needed to be brought down and issues with an elder that needed to be resolved. I cooperated to bring down the sites but never heard from Seattle brothers to discuss the issues they have with me. I then contacted a Seattle brother responsible for the report given and was told they would not meet with me. I asked the brother by phone if he would meet with me himself to pray, and he seemed surprised, but was also unwilling. I asked a Spokane brother the same, but he was unwilling also. Spokane had totally shut the door of fellowship to me based on this report they heard, but are not willing to discuss it with me until I get through with Seattle who also will not discuss the report with me. There is no way, therefore, for me to be heard by these two churches.
I am obliged, therefore, to respond to them publicly. As high as brothers have risen to apprehend the mysteries of God, they are that low in their apprehension of me and the truths I speak.
To elders and saints: 2006
I want to share my very positive testimony of being in the local churches for 30+ years, but before doing so, I will address briefly the unexpected interruption there has been to my fellowship in the churches over the last five years.
Many saints are unaware of what my situation is, or maybe they have heard something alarming without hearing the whole story, but I want all the saints to know this much: I am for the building up of the Body of Christ through the local churches and the rich ministry we been receiving in the Lord’s recovery for many years. I have never changed in this regard.
Certain elders, however, had the perception that I changed, and they acted accordingly to remove me from the fellowship. This was due to their lack of understanding and investigation. The change they perceived I had made was related to, ironically, my addressing matters concerning reconciliation, oneness, and the building up of the Body of Christ, but were viewed by these elders instead as acts of division and violations of God’s government. This was a great surprise to me. The elders’ denouncements of me resulted from
1. My attempts at opening my heart to Joel Kennon for our being reconciled.
2. My attempts at helping a couple in OKC be reconciled to one another.
3. My attempts at building a bridge of communication to former members throughout the recovery, encouraging reconciliation.
4. My attempts at directly contacting former and current leaders to encourage reconciliation among them. Three of the former leaders had been “quarantined” by the churches.
In my heart I had nothing of divisive intention, but held the high view that we in the churches have all been infused with for carrying out God’s economy. Each of these four types of attempts of addressing broken relationships required diligence to acquire the proper knowledge base for dealings that could result in oneness being recovered through a ministry of Christ. This is what I wanted to generate; yet, I found no commensurate effort on the elders’ part to gain such a knowledge base. Therefore, the knowledge base for each of these matters was profoundly different for me than it was for the elders. This created a huge difference in understanding, conviction, and burden before the Lord.
In 1996, ten years ago this January, I had first begun to run into trouble due to serious communication problems with the elders in Seattle. This began a relationship problem with them, especially with Joel Kennon. To this day, I still would encourage him to come before the Lord with me to clear up these serious matters that have affected our relationship and the oneness in the Body. He has shown no interest to address my concerns about him in a genuine and specific way, while fellow elders have shown no interest in helping him. Their total bias toward this highly respected brother has prevailed in the matter.
1. If there can be no genuine fellowship among the elders to seek the Lord and the facts on the matter with Joel, I ask them, then, to dismiss this so-called “problem with Joel” as one of their reasons for keeping me out of fellowship.
2. I ask the elders also to dismiss the Oklahoma City matter, unless they want to spend adequate time to understand what I was involved with for three years in care for a couple, a church, and even the recovery. As Francis Ball agreed, “This matter in OKC will have far-reaching effects in the recovery if it is not dealt with”, a brother allowed to put away his wife, without just cause, and seeing another sister, even attending the Lord ’s Table together.
3. Concerning a booklet I wrote and further writings I’ve done, I ask the elders to consider the points I have made, the strong documentation I have used, and the reality of our history that I and many others believe needs to be solemnly addressed.
4. There was great concern shown over my contacting John Ingalls because he had been “quarantined” by the churches, beginning in California in 1990. After ten years, I felt it should be okay to contact John Ingalls. Such a concern about him wanes in the light of his testimony.
My writings were my attempt to bring us into fellowship concerning the points I made. From the beginning, I had a spirit of fellowship on the matters. However, since my concepts were different and considered “dangerous”, I was not accepted as a brother in the fellowship any longer.
The early petitions for me to gather in a big group to be examined by 15 elders was not an inviting prospect for me since on six occasions I had very unpleasant encounters with elders one on one, and one on two. I sensed no spirit of fellowship with them. They were bent on discipline, not learning. But I was learning something about them and would be resorting to communication by letter, if there was to be contact.
I had agreed to meet on a Thursday evening with Joel and Sherman Robertson. Joel lined that meeting up with me on the Sunday before, but did not follow through with the meeting. He hadn’t yet set the time and did not bother to inform me that we were not going to meet. (This had happened before with Joel at a very serious juncture, when he (and Jim Bundy) did not follow through to meet with me to begin a reconciling fellowship, Sept 2000). I simply did not hear from him again in both instances. I tried to contact him twice in the first instance and left messages. This show of disrespect from him has been a constant, forcing my respect for him to plummet.
Three months after our proposed Thursday meeting, I called Sherman Robertson after hearing that he thought I would have nothing to say if we met, and he said he would get several brothers together to meet with me. I expected a “one-sided fellowship” with no true openness to my sharing, yet I prepared thoroughly to share extensively on every point of their concern. Because I didn’t hear from him in ten days, I felt to cancel any such meeting for any time soon. The wait was too long with that kind of pressure on me, and my health, income and home life were being effected. On the 11th day, he contacted me, not yet reading my email, and had the meeting scheduled for a week later. I stood with my decision not to meet. He told others, including Atsuo and Les Cites that I had “quit”, not explaining to them why. I then explained it to Les and Atsuo.
Any other questions, such as why I went on the internet, I would hope could be brought into fellowship and not superficially handled as has been the case with concerns about me. In Brother Lee’s book on Character he said that – and I say this as possibly a last word I will say to those who have been judging me the last years –
The book of proverbs says that a foolish person is a shallow person. The observation of a shallow person is not accurate. His understanding of the church, people, matters, and things is superficial. Being deep is closely related to being thorough and serious. A shallow person always makes superficial observations, whereas a deep person always searches and digs when he looks at things. While others labor to obtain light in studying the Bible, a shallow person is satisfied with merely a literal understanding. In listening to people, a deep person does not easily believe others and listens beyond superficial remarks. However, a shallow person readily believes others’ words, and his relaying of information is often inconsistent and incomplete. As a result, gossip is created. Those who serve the Lord must be deep in truth, in experience, and in leading others. A shallow person cannot serve the Lord, because he will make God’s work shallow. Those who like to represent others are shallow people. One who is deep is neither complicated nor shallow. Such a person is three-dimensional, always investigating and researching (p.22).
It is my desire to come into a more full fellowship in the church, and be able to come to meetings and be accepted by all the saints. I don’t want to do any more addressing of our past, publicly. But, unless the brothers do realize that they have been utterly shallow and careless regarding me and my handling of heartfelt matters, what can I do? You remain in your unconcerned and inactive state about the matters I have raised and about me also. And, I remain with the things I have investigated and researched so thoroughly.
My ordeal over the elders’ reaction to my writings began in January 2001 with Dan Towle; it is now reaching the five-year mark. There should be a consummation at this time. The ordeal with Joel Kennon is reaching the ten-year mark. What shall I do with the matters I have fully tried to convey and bring into fellowship? I will look to the Lord for the answer, and I also hope for brothers, fellow members of the Body, to respond in a spirit of fellowship to this current fellowship that I offer. If there is no interest to seriously regard the truth of our church history, that is one thing; and to continue holding a one-sided view that lacks full scope on issues regarding Joel is another. Spreading untrue perceptions of me in the church is still another matter and is most egregious and damaging - to the church and to me.
End 2006
There was no response to the 2006 letter; I, then, began to post writings on the Berean forum that year and continued later on the local church discussions forum.
Steve Isitt
Sept-Oct 1, 2014
Steve Isitt's on-going situation with LSM is an indicator of the following:
Quarantines by LSM, contrary to all published information, were never intended to be temporary. Every one of his attempts at reconciliation have fallen on deaf ears.
The LC's are not autonomous. All published literature to this effect are just lip-service to the truth. Elders from all LC's must submit to agents from headquarters.
The Recovery clearly is a denomination with a definite headquarters. Their talk of "one body" simply is a smokescreen to hide this fact.
Leadership in the Recovery are definitely not answerable to the Lord, but have become man-pleasers. They no longer fear God, but rather man, specifically the collection of brothers known as Blendeds.
No leader enjoys the liberty to serve the Lord with faithfulness and obedience. Ministry "spies" can report all suspicious and "independent" local activity to higher-ups.
Local leaders care little for hearing what the "Spirit is speaking to the churches" and instead care only for what "the ministry" is speaking to the churches.
Steve Isitt's on-going situation with LSM is an indicator of the following:
Quarantines by LSM, contrary to all published information, were never intended to be temporary. Every one of his attempts at reconciliation have fallen on deaf ears.
The LC's are not autonomous. All published literature to this effect are just lip-service to the truth. Elders from all LC's must submit to agents from headquarters.
The Recovery clearly is a denomination with a definite headquarters. Their talk of "one body" simply is a smokescreen to hide this fact.
Leadership in the Recovery are definitely not answerable to the Lord, but have become man-pleasers. They no longer fear God, but rather man, specifically the collection of brothers known as Blendeds.
No leader enjoys the liberty to serve the Lord with faithfulness and obedience. Ministry "spies" can report all suspicious and "independent" local activity to higher-ups.
Local leaders care little for hearing what the "Spirit is speaking to the churches" and instead care only for what "the ministry" is speaking to the churches.
Thanks for crystallizing this information in an easy to read summary. Even though I have been out of the LC for 36 years it all sounds eerily similar to what I experienced and observed in the latter half of my involvement in the LC.
Unregistered
11-07-2014, 08:15 AM
My experience in Spokane was highlighted by the home meeting I was brought into, as we viewed videos on messages from the Philippians and Galatians LS Trainings. The three I saw were excellent as was our fellowship together before and afterwards. The two Sunday morning meetings I attended were a profound exercise of spiritual singing and corporate sharing from the saints’ rich deposit within them. Additionally, there was an outstanding Sunday evening of fellowship that “featured” a video out of Anaheim, along with the saints’ sharing...word came from Seattle to Spokane about me...I came one more time and heard from an open window the singing and speaking of the saints. Before long I was infused and left amazed, smiling and enlivened....
ooh, yeah, yum-yum...that cold, smooth, tasty, grape-flavored Kool-aid...so, so enticing...
Brother, you knew what was in it....and you still drank it
awareness
11-07-2014, 08:32 AM
Steve Isitt's on-going situation with LSM is an indicator of the following:
Quarantines by LSM, contrary to all published information, were never intended to be temporary. Every one of his attempts at reconciliation have fallen on deaf ears.
The LC's are not autonomous. All published literature to this effect are just lip-service to the truth. Elders from all LC's must submit to agents from headquarters.
The Recovery clearly is a denomination with a definite headquarters. Their talk of "one body" simply is a smokescreen to hide this fact.
Leadership in the Recovery are definitely not answerable to the Lord, but have become man-pleasers. They no longer fear God, but rather man, specifically the collection of brothers known as Blendeds.
No leader enjoys the liberty to serve the Lord with faithfulness and obedience. Ministry "spies" can report all suspicious and "independent" local activity to higher-ups.
Local leaders care little for hearing what the "Spirit is speaking to the churches" and instead care only for what "the ministry" is speaking to the churches.
That's a checkmate post bro Ohio.
ooh, yeah, yum-yum...that cold, smooth, tasty, grape-flavored Kool-aid...so, so enticing...
Brother, you knew what was in it....and you still drank it
The Kool-aid is from Anaheim. What was "cold, smooth, tasty, and grape-flavored" came from the hearts of the saints.
Why is it so hard to differentiate a publishing house from the family of God?
Is it really impossible to do?
awareness
11-07-2014, 09:44 AM
The Kool-aid is from Anaheim.
And if bro Indiana ever hopes to be accepted back into the LC he's gonna have to commit to mixing up that Kool-aid for Anaheim. And I don't believe bro Indiana will ever be able to do such a thing.
Lisbon
11-07-2014, 10:34 AM
I wish Isset would cut the cords that have held him for such a long time. The LC is not going to change. They're just like the king of the sects. Unless you can get to them with enough millions of dollars as the pedaphyles litigation did the RCC, Anaheim will not budge. There's no reason for them to retract, repent, or else. The leadership is bankrupt as many other sects are. We have to go on. As the Lord has done nothing about the countless sects of Christianity, we had better stay out.
To me it's a real mercy that we have the desire to persue the Lord. I strongly feel the Lord is still saying "come unto Me all you that labor and are heavy laden an I will give you rest." I personally think I can fellowship with those who have long been my friends but if they choose to cut me off, so be it.
We have to move on.
Lisbon
We have to move on.
Never let the demons of your past reach into your present to ruin your future.
We have to move on.
The "restorationist" sects create an idealized past, like WN's "normal church", that exists only in their simplistic histories. News flash: you can never go back. You can only go forward.
History has occurred. We cannot and should not pretend that it hasn't, unless we want to, ahem, declare that we are all happy to be ostriches with our heads suck in the sand.
If God wanted some 1st century church as the apotheosis of all redeemed creation then that is arguably what we'd see here & now. He didn't, & we don't.
UntoHim
11-07-2014, 01:37 PM
To me it's a real mercy that we have the desire to persue the Lord. I strongly feel the Lord is still saying "come unto Me all you that labor and are heavy laden an I will give you rest." I personally think I can fellowship with those who have long been my friends but if they choose to cut me off, so be it.
We have to move on.
Lisbon
Amen Lisbon. This is one of the main reasons that this forum exists - To help us all to move on!
awareness
11-07-2014, 02:04 PM
Amen Lisbon. This is one of the main reasons that this forum exists - To help us all to move on!
Seems I like to move back ... ain't that okay?
TLFisher
11-07-2014, 06:24 PM
I wish Isset would cut the cords that have held him for such a long time. The LC is not going to change. They're just like the king of the sects. Unless you can get to them with enough millions of dollars as the pedaphyles litigation did the RCC, Anaheim will not budge. There's no reason for them to retract, repent, or else. The leadership is bankrupt as many other sects are. We have to go on.
I would say not only is the leadership bankrupt, but deluded with pride. Whether you want to use sect or denomination, each are applicable.
Steve has proved, the LC is a sect when they claim to receive all blood-washed redeemed believers, but they won't receive him (or others) nor have the LC's proved any scriptural basis why he should be refused.
Seems I like to move back ... ain't that okay?
Only for a few laughs ... then turn around ... and head back in the right direction.
Freedom
11-07-2014, 07:53 PM
I wish Isset would cut the cords that have held him for such a long time. The LC is not going to change. They're just like the king of the sects. Unless you can get to them with enough millions of dollars as the pedaphyles litigation did the RCC, Anaheim will not budge. There's no reason for them to retract, repent, or else. The leadership is bankrupt as many other sects are. We have to go on. As the Lord has done nothing about the countless sects of Christianity, we had better stay out.
To me it's a real mercy that we have the desire to persue the Lord. I strongly feel the Lord is still saying "come unto Me all you that labor and are heavy laden an I will give you rest." I personally think I can fellowship with those who have long been my friends but if they choose to cut me off, so be it.
We have to move on.
Lisbon
Yes, I do agree, however, I have appreciated the writings that have been produced as a result of Steve's endeavors. As a disillusioned LC member who began to search the internet, his writings are one of the first things that came up for me. I found one of his more recent writings very helpful. That was the paper regarding the Sandovals that was posted by Terry.
It seems like many who have left the LC in the past, just left and moved on wanting to put the past behind them. That provides good closure to someone as an individual, but current members who are hurting such as myself are not able to learn from the experiences of those kinds of people. Steve's endeavors may never prove successful, however, what we now know as a result of his endeavours is quite valuable, and it has helped me to see the darkness and deception of the current LC leadership.
awareness
11-08-2014, 09:28 AM
Only for a few laughs ... then turn around ... and head back in the right direction.
Going back is fun. That's the purpose of LCD.
Mephibosheth2
11-12-2014, 04:51 AM
This is my first post since last Nov (2013). I am compelled to share some developments.
To elders, brothers, sisters in Seattle, (Sept 27, 2014)
Excerpt from 1st letter
I have had recent church life experience in the church in Spokane after a 12 year absence from an environment of fellowship in the ministry of Witness Lee. This came after enough experience with believers elsewhere to comprehend the shortcoming in ministry of the word that there is in so many places.
You know, I heard a story once about a shoe-company out in Buffalo back in the 1950's. It was looking to expand and reach into markets outside of the US.
The company had two very energetic, very savvy marketing people who knew everything there was to know about shoes and all types of footwear; and the Manager decided that these two should spearhead their new thrust into domains thitherto unexplored. The Manager had had his mind turned to two remote islands out in the Pacific. He would send one salesperson to one island and the other to the other island. And so they were sent on their way.
After several days, the salesperson who had been sent to Island 'A' called back and he didn't sound very excited or enthused over the phone. He didn't have good news he informed the shoe-company. He whined and complained that he had trooped up and down the island in the hot sun everyday for three days and he had not seen one single person wearing shoes on the island. There was, he informed the Manager, no potential for business whatsoever on the forsaken island. He was sorry he had wasted the company's time and resources and would return to Buffalo on the next available flight.
That very same afternoon, the salesperson who had been sent to Island 'B' called the shoe company. He was all excited and could barely contain himself. "What is it, what is it?" the Manager asked him excitedly over the phone, himself becoming infected by the salesperson's ecstatic exuberance. The salesperson explained that he had gone all around the island twice, and twice over again, and he had not seen one single person wearing shoes on the island! The Manager was confused. "Don't you see?", the salesperson exclaimed, "there is great business to be had over here," he cried out..."I already have orders filled out for a hundred and ten pairs of shoes, and the demand is high, everybody wants shoes now!...send enough shoes on the next available flight and let's make mooooney!!!"
The first salesperson received a telegram at the airport as soon as he landed informing him that he had been fired!
______________________________________________
He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear what the salesperson saith unto the churches
______________________________________________
Unregistered
11-14-2014, 08:48 PM
So what happened in the 80s that caused a dispute among the saints. I see all these post referring to it. What is it?
So what happened in the 80s that caused a dispute among the saints. I see all these post referring to it. What is it?
See: The Philip Lee Affair. Witness Lee's version of events could be seen in the now out-of-print classic " The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion". Other, more comprehensive treatments include "Speaking the Truth in Love" and "Hiding History in the Lord's Recovery".
Basically, Lee's "business decision" to install his admittedly unspiritual son to run the LSM enterprise blew up in his face. So it became loyalty to the truth or to Lee. Most evidently picked Lee.
See: The Philip Lee Affair. Witness Lee's version of events could be seen in the now out-of-print classic " The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion". Other, more comprehensive treatments include "Speaking the Truth in Love" and "Hiding History in the Lord's Recovery".
Basically, Lee's "business decision" to install his admittedly unspiritual son to run the LSM enterprise blew up in his face. So it became loyalty to the truth or to Lee. Most evidently picked Lee.
Phillip Lee was a lightning rod, for sure, to expose the corruption and unrighteousness in Lee's LSM, but it was accompanied by Lee's megalomanic goals and grandiose schemes to dominate and lord it over the church of God.
awareness
11-15-2014, 05:54 AM
Phillip Lee was a lightning rod, for sure, to expose the corruption and unrighteousness in Lee's LSM, but it was accompanied by Lee's megalomanic goals and grandiose schemes to dominate and lord it over the church of God.
Question bro Ohio. Philip happened in the late 80s. You didn't leave until 2006. Is that because of the TC filter factor? Was LSM able to keep the lid on the Philip scandal, so that all the other localities and saints didn't know what happened?
I'm asking because I'm wondering how many stayed in the LRC even after learning about Philip. In other words, I guess, when WL put Philip in charge did many know about his debauchery?
I was long gone by then. How widespread in the LC's was the knowledge of Philip's degeneracy?
Lisbon
11-15-2014, 07:01 AM
Replying to awareness 273.
I was also in the lc from 1972 and I assure you that BP, RG, and others kept an air tight lid on the PL fiasco. Nothing, not one word was ever mentioned in the Dallas area. I heard two very casual references probably around that time but none other so that there was plenty of reason that the whole thing was somewhat of a hoax.
Not until I came to this forum did I ever hear of details of PL, JI, BM, JS and others. A lot of testimony was very carefully swept under the rug in a very secrety way.
The cat is out of the box but vigorously denied by the hierarchy. If it actually came out the house of cards would come tumbling down.
Lisbon
awareness
11-15-2014, 07:18 AM
Replying to awareness 273.
I was also in the lc from 1972 and I assure you that BP, RG, and others kept an air tight lid on the PL fiasco. Nothing, not one word was ever mentioned in the Dallas area. I heard two very casual references probably around that time but none other so that there was plenty of reason that the whole thing was somewhat of a hoax.
Not until I came to this forum did I ever hear of details of PL, JI, BM, JS and others. A lot of testimony was very carefully swept under the rug in a very secrety way.
Let me get this straight. So when PL was in charge, and localities were calling him for instruction and reporting, no one knew about Philip?
In short, they/Lee successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of those faithfully giving their lives to what they were taught to be the very movement of God? That's devious, and crafty -- devil like -- and without a doubt a hoax.
All I can do is shake my head, realizing that it's still going on. Those poor people ... Lord have mercy on them. They know not what they do.
Unregistered
11-15-2014, 09:50 AM
You know, I heard a story once about a shoe-company out in Buffalo back in the 1950's. It was looking to expand and reach into markets outside of the US.
Dude, what's the point of this pointless story?
.
TLFisher
11-15-2014, 11:19 AM
Question bro Ohio. Philip happened in the late 80s. You didn't leave until 2006. Is that because of the TC filter factor? Was LSM able to keep the lid on the Philip scandal, so that all the other localities and saints didn't know what happened?
I'm asking because I'm wondering how many stayed in the LRC even after learning about Philip. In other words, I guess, when WL put Philip in charge did many know about his debauchery?
I was long gone by then. How widespread in the LC's was the knowledge of Philip's degeneracy?
In some localities elders who were willing to bury their head in the sand, shielded their congregations from the fiasco happening in Anaheim.
From firsthand knowledge Phillip's degenerate behavior is regarded as rumors.
All the readers really need to know how LSM was able to keep a lid on the Phillip Lee scandal is read Isaiah 5:20
"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"
Having this understanding you will see truth is substituted for falsehood and falsehood is substituted for truth.
SO, brothers and sisters accept what they are told as truth. It's like this, Witness Lee and the ones doing his bidding (some of which are known as blended brothers) pass a lie as being truth. The local elders don't know any better. Out of respect, they have no reason to doubt so they unwittingly pass on lie's to their congregations as being true. Brothers and sisters in the congregations respect their elders and see no reason why their elders would lie to them. As a result you have seeking brothers and sisters who go by what "the brother's say".
Dude, what's the point of this pointless story?
.
Obviously the simple point of the story went over your head ... that is, in most situations, there are two ways of looking at it, half-empty or half-full.
Perhaps there is a third way, being "half full of it."
Unregistered
11-15-2014, 06:48 PM
I am going to make an attempt to get this last message of the Chinese speaking conference(last speaking of Lee) for my own edification. But to think that WL had any kind of real repentance is hard for me to understand. I saw a video of WL's last words and two of them were, (tell my wife I have taken care of her) and the last was (sacrifice, or a synonym). It would seem to me that the word to his wife indicated he was still in control although he had maybe only a few hours or minutes to live. Maybe he thought his minions should or would repent and change their ways but since he didn't, why would we expect them to repent or change. And they didn't. It seems to me they got worse but that is not necessarily true.
Dictators never change except to die or get killed. Stalins death changed Russia really very little. Lee's death didn't change the lc at all. Sects that last for 50 years or more are going to stay. I had a cousin who claimed she was a dyed in the hide Baptist and she and family were such to death. All sects are that way and the lc won't be any different.
What really scares me is that the lc is changing. The BBs are sanitizing the past history so that new ones will have no reason to search the past. What do the catholics know or care about the past. Might the lcs be the same? The future lcers won't know they are following a bunch of lyers and in one generation they won't even be lyers but just stupid. Sad, sad, sad!
Lisbon
TLFisher
11-16-2014, 12:07 AM
See: The Philip Lee Affair. Witness Lee's version of events could be seen in the now out-of-print classic " The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion".
Since I have one in my possession, I never bothered to consider what if I try to order one.
What if?
If it's available to order, LSM stands by their publication.
If it's unavailable to order, it's a subtle way of saying we at LSM regret this book was published and that it contains many serious mistakes.
Unregistered
11-16-2014, 02:23 AM
Perhaps there is a third way, being "half full of it."
umm...er...I still don't get it...half full of what? *scratching-my-head*
.
awareness
11-16-2014, 11:50 AM
What really scares me is that the lc is changing. The BBs are sanitizing the past history so that new ones will have no reason to search the past. What do the catholics know or care about the past. Might the lcs be the same? The future lcers won't know they are following a bunch of lyers and in one generation they won't even be lyers but just stupid. Sad, sad, sad!
Lisbon
What difference does it make if their founder is/was a phony? Same was true for the JWs and Mormons, that started circa 150 yrs ago. And look at them now.
In a hundred years no one will have heard of John Ingalls, Philip Lee, et al. But LSM will still be publishing Nee and Lee books, by a whole new set of Blended Brothers.
So Lee's Recovery farce will continue. Buyer beware.
Let me get this straight. So when PL was in charge, and localities were calling him for instruction and reporting, no one knew about Philip?They knew about PL running point for LSM and strong-arming the churches — or at least the ones who handled certain administrative oversight for each particular church did.
But that does not mean that they knew anything about his philandering and other sins, or that daddy Lee had driven off the few that attempted to have baby Lee removed from his position in the LSM. They just knew about the enforcer Lee.
Indiana
11-22-2014, 04:38 PM
www.lordsrecovery.us/HidingHistoryNeeLeeEras.pdf
"I shall walk in my integrity" - King David, Israel
When I started this thread I stated that "Although there are legitimate reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum."
And, this is why I am here again, since the church administration apparently prefers I write rather than be restored to fellowship in the churches. If I am in the church life I am positive for the things in the church life; if I am cut off I address the things that ought to be addressed for truth's sake and a positive outcome for the churches.
www.lordsrecovery.us/HidingHistoryNeeLeeEras.pdf
Indiana
04-03-2015, 02:27 PM
To Local Church Leaders in the U. S. and around the globe,
I was in the “local churches” for 30 years, 1971-2001 and still manage to have a basic positive view of them. Last year I began to meet with a group quite similar to them, without the drama, yet with the same origin, that is, with a leader having come out of China under Watchman Nee’s early tutelage.
The teachings are the same in the essential truths of the Bible and they have a similar goal of life, gospel and the building up of the Body of Christ for a testimony of God. They meet as assemblies in the U. S. and around the world, rather than as the church in a city. They are careful in receiving believers according to Christ as their one and only center, and they have received me gladly and others I bring. A sister asked me this week after our prayer meeting how I came to their fellowship at Seattle Christian Assembly. I told her, “by a brother’s recommendation”, John Ingalls, from Southern California.
She soon found out I was associated with Witness Lee in the past, about whom she (and her husband) heard from two friends in India, how one brother was “burned” and the other became discouraged. I identified with what she then said about the attention given Witness Lee and his ministry (minister of the age), with, perhaps, as many say, more attention given to his publications than to the Bible (ministry of the age). This was of concern to her two friends. I then testified that I wasn’t like that and that many others in the Local Churches do take the Word first, of course; but also allow the help of a ministry to enhance their understanding and appreciation of what they read. I told her this is what I have done and why there is a deposit in me (that I draw from in our smaller meetings).
The concern of her two friends also was that “they call themselves the church. This and the lifting up of only one man and his ministry alarmed her very much. I told her that if she went to some meetings that she would understand more about their appreciation, but that this was indeed a problem and has led to division.
I shared with her what I spoke briefly on at the beginning of this writing, which Watchman Nee had once shared more fully on, “Whenever a special leader, or a specific doctrine, or some experience, or creed, or organization, becomes a center for drawing together the believers of different places, then because the center of such a church federation is other than Christ, it follows that its sphere will be other than local. And, whenever the divinely-appointed sphere of locality is displaced by a sphere of human invention, there the divine approval cannot rest. The believers within such a sphere may truly love the Lord, but they have another center apart from Him, and it is only natural that the second center becomes the controlling one. Christ is the common center of all the churches, but any company of believers that has a leader, a doctrine, an experience, a creed, or an organization as their center of fellowship, will find that that center becomes the center, and it is that center by which they determine who belongs to them and who does not. The center always determines the sphere, and the second center creates a sphere which divides those who attach themselves to it from those who do not. (Normal Christian Church Life)
“Anything that becomes a center to unite believers of different places will create a sphere which includes all believers who attach themselves to that center and excludes those who do not. This dividing line will destroy the God-appointed boundary of locality, and consequently destroy the very nature of the churches of God.”(p. 184, Nee)
In their church life at Seattle Christian Assembly, they don’t lift up anyone, but the Lord Jesus Christ. They are trained to be focused on Him in all things, in service, in the gospel, in the meetings. They are a praying church. They pray before meetings, going to different rooms, they pray in the meetings, they pray for speakers and serving ones, for new ones, for unbelieving members of families, for the physically weak, for the unemployed, and for a conference in July! And all aspects of it: “Please pray for Stephen Kaung’s health. He is currently experiencing pain in his sciatic nerve, which is hampering the mobility of his left leg. His eyes are also suffering age – related macular degeneration. May the Lord use His power to heal our brother so that he could get well quickly.” __He is scheduled to speak at the West Coast Conference (at 100 years old) along with three other speakers.
There is no book room (that I have seen yet) No plate is passed or place available to drop a money envelope (that I have seen yet) There are also no testimonies. There is a speaker with a translator for English, then we are dismissed to the cafeteria across the hall for lunch, after every Sunday morning meeting where fellowship could ensue from the meeting, or otherwise. There are opportunities for testimonies and sharing in several small group meetings throughout the week.
There is no scriptural reason for any division to exist between a Witness Lee led group of believers and one where Stephen Kaung’s presence has been felt. Believers who possess the same essential extracts of truth from God’s word should come together as adherents of the same cause. Stephen Kaung would welcome this joining together of members under the headship of Christ for the building up of the Body in Love that the world may know....He has approached them before but to no avail at that time. But today, especially with the world situation and war looming, and end-time prophecy possibly unfolding before us, we should give heed to our calling to make straight the way of the Lord and take care of the oneness in His Body, the church universal and local and go opposite of a crumbling scene around us to proceed on the earth by taking an upward path in our spirits to the Throne.
We owe this to the Lord, to the co-workers of the faith, to fellow believers, to relatives and friends and to people in every land - to be one …even as “I and the Father are one..." John 17
new version
www.twoturmoils.com/HidingHistoryofNeeLee.pdf
Steve Isitt
stephen.isitt@gmail.com
April 3, 2015
Bro Indiana, please forgive my rudeness, but is a connection to Nee required for an expression of Christianity to be legitimate and pleasing to the Lord? Must all legitimate Christian expression proceed from some connection to Nee? Have you not seen that there is only one oracle of God and that is Christ Jesus? Do you not understand there was only one apostle Paul and that he referred to himself as the least of all the saints? So who is this Nee that you highly regard? Is he an angel? The oracle of God? An apostle at the level of Paul? Is he even the equivalent of Luther? No. Nee was a dear brother whose writings have helped many increase their love and appreciation of our Lord Jesus Christ, but he was also the one that spawned Lee and the extremes his movement has foisted upon the body of Christ. You have given up Lee, it is now time for you to give up Nee and to look to the Lord Jesus Christ and to the ministry of the true apostle of the age, Paul.
TLFisher
04-04-2015, 05:22 PM
I then testified that I wasn’t like that and that many others in the Local Churches do take the Word first,
My experience more often then not, if there is taking the Word first, it's immediately followed by an intense focus on the footnotes. If one has a recovery version without the footnotes, they will be encouraged to get a recovery version with footnotes.
TLFisher
04-05-2015, 02:05 PM
Bro Indiana, please forgive my rudeness, but is a connection to Nee required for an expression of Christianity to be legitimate and pleasing to the Lord? Must all legitimate Christian expression proceed from some connection to Nee? Have you not seen that there is only one oracle of God and that is Christ Jesus? Do you not understand there was only one apostle Paul and that he referred to himself as the least of all the saints? So who is this Nee that you highly regard? Is he an angel? The oracle of God? An apostle at the level of Paul? Is he even the equivalent of Luther? No. Nee was a dear brother whose writings have helped many increase their love and appreciation of our Lord Jesus Christ, but he was also the one that spawned Lee and the extremes his movement has foisted upon the body of Christ. You have given up Lee, it is now time for you to give up Nee and to look to the Lord Jesus Christ and to the ministry of the true apostle of the age, Paul.
As I have seen in the local churches in recent decades, the ministries of Nee and Lee is the common denominator for there to be fellowship in/with the local churches. Without any reference to Nee or Lee as a common denominator, you might expect a deer in the headlights glazed look. :stunned:
Bro Indiana, please forgive my rudeness, but is a connection to Nee required for an expression of Christianity to be legitimate and pleasing to the Lord? Must all legitimate Christian expression proceed from some connection to Nee? Have you not seen that there is only one oracle of God and that is Christ Jesus? Do you not understand there was only one apostle Paul and that he referred to himself as the least of all the saints? So who is this Nee that you highly regard? Is he an angel? The oracle of God? An apostle at the level of Paul? Is he even the equivalent of Luther? No. Nee was a dear brother whose writings have helped many increase their love and appreciation of our Lord Jesus Christ, but he was also the one that spawned Lee and the extremes his movement has foisted upon the body of Christ. You have given up Lee, it is now time for you to give up Nee and to look to the Lord Jesus Christ and to the ministry of the true apostle of the age, Paul.
HERn, FYI, Indiana (Steve Isitt) is not interested in online discussion. He just uses the board as a means to publicly communicate with LSM and the other powers-that-be in the LCM and to broadcast his insights. So don't feel ignored. I mean, feel ignored but don't get your feelings hurt about it. Indiana is a brother with a good heart who has dreams of fixing the LCs. I personally think he is wasting his time, but he might think I waste my time, too. He has to follow his own conscience and we by convention allow him that freedom here.
HERn, FYI, Indiana (Steve Isitt) is not interested in online discussion. He just uses the board as a means to publicly communicate with LSM and the other powers-that-be in the LCM and to broadcast his insights. So don't feel ignored. I mean, feel ignored but don't get your feelings hurt about it. Indiana is a brother with a good heart who has dreams of fixing the LCs. I personally think he is wasting his time, but he might think I waste my time, too. He has to follow his own conscience and we by convention allow him that freedom here.
10-4. I figured. I know I'm a rabid anti-LSM type. Maybe with time . . .
Indiana
04-06-2015, 03:03 PM
A brother where I meet, Godwin Sun, shares in a booklet called "Our Goal", "Forgive me for saying this, but if we have this attitude, we will be a problem in Christ's body. Not one person in the church should feel that they have a special position. Only Christ has the position of being the Head and we are all members of His body....Fellowship is the life flowing one to another..."
I shared in my letter,
"Stephen Kaung would welcome this joining together of members under the headship of Christ for the building up of the Body."
"Believers who possess the same essential extracts of truth from God’s word should come together as adherents of the same vision."
Nee and Lee have noted that they stand on the shoulders of others in recovering these essential truths. We realize this also. They knew who they got help from. Many of us also realize who we got immense help from.
Indiana is a brother with a good heart who has dreams of fixing the LCs.
WL once famously told WN, "If you don't take this way, I will take it." Maybe Steve is saying that WL and the BBs lost the way, but he hasn't. (not to put words in anyone's mouth, but that's what I see him saying here).
They were/are eventually for "the ministry", but he remains here for the church. If you look at it that way it seems pretty simple. And thus his stubborn refusal to give up on his dreams.
HERn, FYI, Indiana (Steve Isitt) is not interested in online discussion. He just uses the board as a means to publicly communicate with LSM and the other powers-that-be in the LCM and to broadcast his insights. So don't feel ignored. I mean, feel ignored but don't get your feelings hurt about it. Indiana is a brother with a good heart who has dreams of fixing the LCs. I personally think he is wasting his time, but he might think I waste my time, too. He has to follow his own conscience and we by convention allow him that freedom here.
I believe Igzy's comments here are fairly accurate. Several years ago, after numerous forum debates, I encouraged him to do what he does best, and not to get bogged down with the daily banter of forum debate. I'm not sure if he actually took my suggestion, but it seems so.
Indiana (Steve Isitt) has benefited all of us ex-members with his research and networking with many former members, including well-respected former leaders. In this regard, he understands the Recovery probably as well as any. His ability to document our history has been tremendously informative. I consider him to be like the "Ken Burns" of the LCM in the US.
As far as his lack of participation on the forum goes, there are many others who this forum as a clearinghouse for their writings. I think this mix of historical accounts and daily feedback is what makes this forum so beneficial.
Indiana
04-09-2015, 06:36 AM
WL once famously told WN, "If you don't take this way, I will take it." Maybe Steve is saying that WL and the BBs lost the way, but he hasn't. (not to put words in anyone's mouth, but that's what I see him saying here).
They were/are eventually for "the ministry", but he remains here for the church. If you look at it that way it seems pretty simple. And thus his stubborn refusal to give up on his dreams.
That is correct Aron.
WL once famously told WN, "If you don't take this way, I will take it." Maybe Steve is saying that WL and the BBs lost the way, but he hasn't. (not to put words in anyone's mouth, but that's what I see him saying here).
They were/are eventually for "the ministry", but he remains here for the church. If you look at it that way it seems pretty simple. And thus his stubborn refusal to give up on his dreams.
The thing is a church according to "the proper vision" (whatever that is, I don't claim to know completely) can be started anywhere. It does not require the cooperation of anyone who used to follow "the vision" but no longer does. It seems to me that if you are inspired by a vision you should seek out those who are open to it, not seek to convince those whose minds are made up another way. In fact, if the vision is a good one, it should be applicable with any group of seekers. At some point shaking the dust off your feet is a legitimate course of action.
I understand trying to warn the deceived, but it seems one should be content with people leaving the movement to take the way of the Lord. Reforming the movement (any movement for that matter) is not part of the Great Commission. Certainly I want to help as many LCMers as possible. But my hope for them is for something outside that movement. God doesn't call us to save movements, but people. Movements are a dime a dozen and when they've outlived their usefulness we should not be sentimental about them.
It's my opinion (and just my opinion) that Indiana is still a bit confused about the difference between the church and a movement. The church is the people, nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps you could add in the faith and some very broad doctrines. But the rest is just the horse the church rides, and as much as we might like the old steed, when it's time to put her out to pasture and saddle up another, it's time. In the case of the LCM, the old nag is way past due and in fact ready for the glue factory.
The LCM does not have "first dibs" on being the church. It never did and it seems to me Indiana's efforts still reveal a belief that for God to "go on" he must reform that movement. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Still perhaps his efforts are a genuine expression of care for the people. If so, great. But after a certain point we should not waste any more time trying to reform any movement. Thinking that God must go through "the Recovery" to get things done shows a very distorted view of God and reality. If a movement gets to an intractable point our call should change from "repent" to "come out of her my people." God will not be held hostage by anyone; and he is jealous for his people, not any movement or "Recovery."
TLFisher
04-09-2015, 12:53 PM
Indiana (Steve Isitt) has benefited all of us ex-members with his research and networking with many former members, including well-respected former leaders. In this regard, he understands the Recovery probably as well as any. His ability to document our history has been tremendously informative.
Indiana did what was on my mind even while I was a single brother living in the brother's house. That is, taking time to travel, visit, and interview many former leading brothers.
Without his contribution, would there be any way to correlate the late 80's turmoil to that of 2004-2006?
In each of these turmoils, brothers are marked negatively for expressing their concerns.
I didn't want to take anything away from Indiana's invaluable research and documentation of the history of the LCM. As with Lilly Hsu's book, church historians will find his work useful.
However, again, I have detected in his work a thread which seems to reveal a devotion to restoring a movement. This may be rooted in a mistaken devotion to this idea of "recovery"--recovery realized as a special privilege movement within the church as a whole. The problem with anything like this is that it displaces our proper devotion to God coupled with care and service for all people, and replaces it with devotion to an abstract idea or institution.
The same problem occurs with devotion to "the Church," when the Church is seen as anything but God's people. Lee taught us to be devoted to "the Church" as a ideal, not as simply God's people. So people became expendable, and the end of the gospel became not the salvation of people but the production of an idealized and impersonal institution, "the Church."
Human history generally and church history specifically are full of examples of devotion to even the best idea eventually doing damage. Once we make the end an idea (e.g. the Recovery, the Church, reason, liberty, equality, whatever) then people become a means to that end, and sacrificing people for that end becomes standard and acceptable.
We heard time and again, "We must be for the Recovery," and even "God loves his Recovery." Both those quotes are false. We should be for God and people, because that's all God loves and expects us to love. Anything else and be alert for the devil's wiles.
But the rest is just the horse the church rides, and as much as we might like the old steed, when it's time to put her out to pasture and saddle up another, it's time. In the case of the LCM, the old nag is way past due and in fact ready for the glue factory.
Only a guy from Texas would even think this way. :hysterical:
Only a guy from Texas would even think this way. :hysterical:
:deadhorse: Wake up, Recovery! Wake up! Yeehah!
TLFisher
04-10-2015, 07:05 PM
I didn't want to take anything away from Indiana's invaluable research and documentation of the history of the LCM. As with Lilly Hsu's book, church historians will find his work useful.
However, again, I have detected in his work a thread which seems to reveal a devotion to restoring a movement. This may be rooted in a mistaken devotion to this idea of "recovery"--recovery realized as a special privilege movement within the church as a whole. The problem with anything like this is that it displaces our proper devotion to God coupled with care and service for all people, and replaces it with devotion to an abstract idea or institution.
As a blended co-worker formerly of Bellevue once told Steve as I paraphrase; he (Steve) has to drop his concepts. The recovery isn't going to change for you. It isn't going to change for anyone.
I would have to agree with SR. Living Stream Ministry is a revenue generating business. Regardless of a business' tax status, they do have to generate revenue. For Living Stream, whether it's through book sales or real estate.
As I see Steve's writing. it's not a matter of changing the recovery, but to tell the truth. If there is any impact to be made I hope it is the spiritual principle of reconciliation. I know it has to a degree, Steve's writing has produced a spiritual responsibility to reconcile. Whether or not any of the blended brothers have an ear to hear, it's on each of them individually before God.
TLFisher
01-03-2016, 07:10 PM
Ron also heard of my writings that were circulating among at least enough people to make him very concerned. Among those writings was Bill Mallon’s letter to Brother Lee, which I had commented on and which Ron alluded to in his 2008 message in Ecuador.
But, he did so in derogatory fashion, not making reference to Bill Mallon’s devastating experience with LSM co-workers in the late 1980s [COLOR="Teal"]who at that time themselves did not recognize the headship of Christ with the elders among the churches,which was a big problem to Bill and other elders in the Southeast churches. This vital matter was skipped over by Ron in his speaking in Ecuador, as he mentioned Bill's letter only in a negative light. Because Ron Kangas did not want to justify Bill's concerns or my writings, he portrayed Bill Mallon’s letter as bad for his appeal to Brother Lee about LSM’s ignoble behavior in the Southeast, and he portrayed me as bad, as well, for circulating Bill’s letter, and other writings also.
I emphasized this in bold in reference to Bill Mallon. Following is what Ron actually said.
"I would just add this: In 1988 certain co-workers severely criticized Brother Lee, and then they separated themselves, they went their own way. One of these brothers, in particular, his whole situation is tragic. I would like to ask him, after you wrote that letter to Brother Lee, and after you began to
speak a certain way, what is your spiritual situation? How would you compare it with your situation when you were in Elden Hall? Aren’t you more experienced now than then? Would you say you are more living now?"
Although Ron didn't mention brother Bill's name as he did brother Steve's, we can deduce it was Bill who Ron was referring to. Of course it was not revealed when Bill had heart surgery in 2001, a brother from Riverside came to Anaheim and approached the blended brothers present about visiting Bill in the hospital. They declined.
NewManLiving
01-03-2016, 07:50 PM
Col 3:12 - 3:15 RCV
Put on therefore, as God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, inward parts of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, long-suffering;
Bearing one another and forgiving one another, if anyone should have a complaint against anyone; even as the Lord forgave you, so also should you forgive.
And over all these things put on love, which is the uniting bond of perfectness.
And let the peace of Christ arbitrate in your hearts, to which also you were called in one Body; and be thankful.
How ironic that some brothers can write and speak volumes on these verses and have absolutely no experimental reality of them in their own lives - year after year, training after training. One has to wonder if they have any "inward parts". Just goes to show that we DO NOT grow in life by going to trainings or getting the "ministry into us". We grow in life by denying ourselves. -- That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His Death
Indiana
01-05-2016, 05:45 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/TheocracyintheLocalChurches.pdf
Ron Kangas – Thank you for the invitation, Chris, to participate in this particular radio program introducing quite a marvelous subject, of theocracy, of the rule of God…. I hope that we can be very exercised in our spirit and with our understanding …In Deuteronomy is a record of the children of Israel, a type of us, the believers, the church people today, so there must be a spiritual reality in the church life that corresponds to the outward picture of theocracy among the children of Israel. (LSM radio transcription).
Witness Lee – We have to know that today in the church we don’t exercise autocracy, a dictatorship; or democracy, according to people’s opinion; but we like to honor God’s authority as our government, and this is what we call theocracy, Gods government.
Firstly, you must have the judges in order to keep God’s justice. The divine government pays attention firstly to justice. Even today, any government on this earth that does not practice justice, that government will sooner or later be over, right? A strong government must be one that is built upon justice. Everything must be just. Everything must be fair. Everything must be right. Right? This is justice. (LSM radio transcription)
Any comments on what you post?
Are they right, wrong, partly both?
Is there truth but misapplied?
Indiana
01-06-2016, 09:45 AM
I won't be adding any further material on the subject, and shortened link content in post #303.
UntoHim
01-06-2016, 10:56 AM
With the minds of elders galvanized into one accord for a man and a ministry, elders handed over the reins of leadership in their localities to a universal leader. Turmoil and division was the result, with blame placed on certain leaders who chose not to submit to an extra-local leader.
From the very beginnings of "The Lord's Recovery" in America, the minds of all of Witness Lee's followers (NOT just the elders) were galvanized into one accord for a man and a ministry. The elders didn't have to hand over the reins of leadership because they never had it to begin with. And one by one, over the decades, various elders/co workers found this harsh reality out. Anytime a local elder would try to exercise even the slightest bit of independence, no matter how it was going to be for the benefit of the local flock, he would be "reported to headquarters" and severely rebuked by Lee himself, or if he was lucky, Lee would send out a hatchet man to do the work for him. This dynamic was repeated over and over again, and is well documented by the testimony of many brothers, some on this very forum.
Since the original "Church in Los Angeles" spit into different halls, and since the advent of the early migrations, the Local Churches in America had an "extra-local leader" and his name was Witness Lee. Any other so called "co-worker" or any kind of regional leader was in fact just a "regional manager" of sorts, with the elders functioning as "branch managers" of sorts. Lee was the CEO/CFO/President all wrapped into one. Actually this was "the system" set up by Watchman Nee back in Mainland China from the very beginning. Of course Witness Lee enhanced and perfected the system.
While Lee was alive there was a tacit understanding by all that this system was in place and that's just how things were. Of course anyone who challenged the system was severely dealt with, by removal, shunning or the dreaded "quarantine".
Today, the "Blended Brothers" don't even try to deny the system or the history of this system. There is indeed an extra-local leader, it is "the ministry" aka "the One Publication". While Lee was alive the Local Churches were lead and controlled by the person and work of Witness Lee. Now that the person is gone they only have the work, and this is why the Local Church looks and behaves very much like the systematic, institutionalized, religious organization that it has decried for 50 years.
TLFisher
01-06-2016, 12:53 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/TheocracyintheLocalChurches.pdf
Witness Lee – We have to know that today in the church we don’t exercise autocracy, a dictatorship; or democracy, according to people’s opinion; but we like to honor God’s authority as our government, and this is what we call theocracy, Gods government.
Firstly, you must have the judges in order to keep God’s justice. The divine government pays attention firstly to justice. Even today, any government on this earth that does not practice justice, that government will sooner or later be over, right? A strong government must be one that is built upon justice. Everything must be just. Everything must be fair. Everything must be right. Right? This is justice. (LSM radio transcription)
The LSM/LC brand of theocracy is a skewed one. It is not recognized when a brother is under Christ's headship. Rather the LSM brand of theocracy is according to group think (aka being one with the brothers). It is this form of group think who claim to determine God's government.
I won't be adding any further material on the subject, and shortened link content in post #303.In other words you are continuing to post "facts" but making no comments on them, thereby leaving it unclear what you are trying to say. And since you have in other contexts seemed to say things that have gone both ways over time, that lack of clarity is fairly significant.
Indiana
01-08-2016, 09:14 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/TheocracyintheLocalChurches.pdf
Ron Kangas – Thank you for the invitation, Chris, to participate in this particular radio program introducing quite a marvelous subject, of theocracy, of the rule of God…. I hope that we can be very exercised in our spirit and with our understanding …In Deuteronomy is a record of the children of Israel, a type of us, the believers, the church people today, so there must be a spiritual reality in the church life that corresponds to the outward picture of theocracy among the children of Israel. (LSM radio transcription).
Witness Lee – We have to know that today in the church we don’t exercise autocracy, a dictatorship; or democracy, according to people’s opinion; but we like to honor God’s authority as our government, and this is what we call theocracy, Gods government.
Firstly, you must have the judges in order to keep God’s justice. The divine government pays attention firstly to justice. Even today, any government on this earth that does not practice justice, that government will sooner or later be over, right? A strong government must be one that is built upon justice. Everything must be just. Everything must be fair. Everything must be right. Right? This is justice. (LSM radio transcription)
www.twoturmoils.com/TheocracyintheLocalChurches.pdf
I made more changes and want to re-post the link on Theocracy.
Government in the Local Churches
Our brothers in Christ have taken bold and daring steps to become what they are, ministry churches of Witness Lee. This is what they have labored for, and this is what they have gained. I wish they would admit what they are, instead of pretending to be the recovered New Testament church, inclusive of all believers in autonomous “local churches” around the world.
They have had no shame about promoting a man next to the Lord Jesus, or for establishing a second center to draw people to him in oneness with his ministry and leadership.
Due to their lofty standing of ultimately endorsing a “minister of the age” with the “ministry of the age”, it is hard for the leaders to practice justice in cases that shine light unfavorably on the name of Witness Lee - the name they live to protect. Practicing justice in such cases is not what they do; it is what they most assuredly choose to avoid.
Because of this, government in the Local Churches has not been built upon justice. Instead, their architect and builders are widely known for their absurd practice of not caring for right and wrong - the antithesis of a true theocracy, a government built upon justice, according to God and what He is.
Indiana
01-09-2016, 08:53 AM
www.twoturmoils.com/TheocracyintheLocalChurches.pdf
I made more changes and want to re-post the link on Theocracy.
Government in the Local Churches
Our brothers in Christ have taken bold and daring steps to become what they are, ministry churches of Witness Lee. This is what they have labored for, and this is what they have gained. I wish they would admit what they are, instead of pretending to be the recovered New Testament church, inclusive of all believers in autonomous “local churches” around the world.
They have had no shame about promoting a man next to the Lord Jesus, or for establishing a second center to draw people to him in oneness with his ministry and leadership.
Due to their lofty standing of ultimately endorsing a “minister of the age” with the “ministry of the age”, it is hard for the leaders to practice justice in cases that shine light unfavorably on the name of Witness Lee - the name they live to protect. Practicing justice in such cases is not what they do; it is what they most assuredly choose to avoid.
Because of this, government in the Local Churches has not been built upon justice. Instead, their architect and builders are widely known for their absurd practice of not caring for right and wrong - the antithesis of a true theocracy, a government built upon justice, according to God and what He is.
Example 1THE SUBTLE ISSUES OF RIGHT AND WRONG
DURING THE LATE EIGHTIES REBELLION
I was listening to a tape by Ron Kangas (from 1997) encouraging saints to follow the sense of life in a normal way in their daily life and not care for issues of right or wrong, when I came to this statement:
“How many were lured away during the last rebellion (late 80s) by subtle issues of right and wrong.” Referring to the talk going around in the church about certain issues, he said, “What a travesty that the saints of God would speak out of the knowledge of good and evil and kill each other.” He added, “I simply will not sit in a brothers’ presence and allow him to fill me with death,” meaning that he would not listen to those concerned with issues of right and wrong in the church.
What were those issues of right and wrong, brother Ron, in the late 80s turmoil? Didn’t you write about them in your book, A Response to Recent Accusations, in which you recorded your disagreement with the 18 points John Ingalls made to the church in his resignation fellowship?
Brother Lee also spoke to these issues that John Ingalls raised, saying that, “In his withdrawal from the eldership of the church in Anaheim on March 19, 1989, Brother John Ingalls charged us with a number of accusations concerning our present situation. Hence, I have the burden to present to the saints in the Lord’s recovery some truths that will blow away the cloud that has dimmed the clear vision of the Lord’s recovery among us, and will bring back to us a clear sky with a clear view in the recovery.” Then, brother Lee goes on to explain his disagreement with “John’s dissenting accusations”. (Book 10, Elders’ Training, ch. 6, p. 93)
What two major leaders in the Lord’s recovery referred to as “subtle issues” and “dissenting accusations”, others regarded as major matters of Christian conscience and causes of stumbling that needed desperate attention from responsible church leaders.
http://www.twoturmoils.com/SubtleIssues.pdf
TLFisher
01-09-2016, 10:28 AM
Example 1THE SUBTLE ISSUES OF RIGHT AND WRONG
DURING THE LATE EIGHTIES REBELLION
I was listening to a tape by Ron Kangas (from 1997) encouraging saints to follow the sense of life in a normal way in their daily life and not care for issues of right or wrong, when I came to this statement:
“How many were lured away during the last rebellion (late 80s) by subtle issues of right and wrong.” [COLOR="Black"]Referring to the talk going around in the church about certain issues, he said, “What a travesty that the saints of God would speak out of the knowledge of good and evil and kill each other.” He added, “I simply will not sit in a brothers’ presence and allow him to fill me with death,” meaning that he would not listen to those concerned with issues of right and wrong in the church.
Expediency: Convenient and practical, although possibly improper or immoral.
Brothers who say they don't want to be concerned with right and wrong, that's because to be concerned with right and wrong is not the expedient thing to do. To be concerned with right and wrong, righteousness, and justice is neither convenient nor practical. LSM's practice of political correctness promotes expediency even if it may be improper or even immoral.
What Ron Kangas flippantly discards as "subtle issues of right and wrong" are actually grave matters of sin and unrighteousness. When I hear this nonsense from someone in the know, then I realize what grave darkness and blindness has descended over time upon the leadership at LSM. For decades they have been complicit with crimes and coverups against their brothers.
Isn't it so hypocritical that RK could say this about so many former members and leaders, all of whom beloved and godly, and then when genuinely "subtle issues of right and wrong" arise in nearly all of the Midwest and Brazil, he sees fit to quarantine and excommunicate them as as incurably rebellious lepers.
If anyone wishes to know who the Blended leadership at LSM really are, tell them to read what the Lord Jesus Himself says of and to the Pharisees in the Gospels and what the Apostle Paul says about the Judaizers. Let me give you an appetizer from the book of Philippians: "Beware of dogs! Beware of evil workers!"
From the very beginnings of "The Lord's Recovery" in America, the minds of all of Witness Lee's followers (NOT just the elders) were galvanized into one accord for a man and a ministry. The elders didn't have to hand over the reins of leadership because they never had it to begin with. And one by one, over the decades, various elders/co workers found this harsh reality out.
Every time I think about this post, I can't let it go and just be silent.
Every single brother I knew believed that our mission was "Christ and the church," and that we gave our lives for the building up of autonomous local churches. That's why many of them left their denominations. Every message Lee and others gave in the beginning days supported this mission statement. Many who came this way did so after reading Nee's book TNCCL.
Now whether Lee, or leaders like RK, BP, TC or others had this view is doubtful, since I have witnessed so much meddling in local affairs by these ones.
Every time I think about this post, I can't let it go and just be silent.
Every single brother I knew believed that our mission was "Christ and the church," and that we gave our lives for the building up of autonomous local churches. That's why many of them left their denominations. Every message Lee and others gave in the beginning days supported this mission statement. Many who came this way did so after reading Nee's book TNCCL.
Now whether Lee, or leaders like RK, BP, TC or others had this view is doubtful, since I have witnessed so much meddling in local affairs by these ones.And I think we really believed it. But after the fact, I think that we were fed false information as to what was truly Christ and the church, therefore we were misguided, even from the beginning. We just didn't realize it. We brought a desire for Christ. We got fed something that was labeled "Christ and the church" and we accepted that it was real. Only when the mantra began to alter did we leave.
And though I do not think we were really that "right" before, at least we woke up. But I am becoming more and more convinced that even many of our positive experiences in the earlier (earliest) days were tainted by the shadow of a leavened teaching. Even Christ and the church, because we were misdirected to a version of both that was not true to the Word.
And I think we really believed it. But after the fact, I think that we were fed false information as to what was truly Christ and the church, therefore we were misguided, even from the beginning. We just didn't realize it. We brought a desire for Christ. We got fed something that was labeled "Christ and the church" and we accepted that it was real. Only when the mantra began to alter did we leave.
And though I do not think we were really that "right" before, at least we woke up. But I am becoming more and more convinced that even many of our positive experiences in the earlier (earliest) days were tainted by the shadow of a leavened teaching. Even Christ and the church, because we were misdirected to a version of both that was not true to the Word.
What's interesting is that so many others have gone down this similar path. Both John Darby and W. Nee and W. Lee have all started out promising local assemblies patterned after Antioch only to morph themselves into controlling headquarters patterned after Jerusalem.
I wouldn't be surprised if most denominations have followed a similar road. The RCC definitely did. Remember that the lust for power always corrupts, and the powers-that-be love to use distorted oneness to subjugate the sheep.
I wouldn't be surprised if most denominations have followed a similar road. The RCC definitely did. Remember that the lust for power always corrupts, and the powers-that-be love to use distorted oneness to subjugate the sheep.While I think that there is some truth in what you are saying, I also think that we have a distorted view of people who truly serve the Christians with whom we align themselves to follow. Not just in local assemblies, but also within denominations. And sometimes in denominations that we might not personally find as appealing as others. We were conditioned for so many years to distrust all non-LCM leadership that we still have something inside that is expecting the kind of self-prompting leadership that we were taught to expect.
Indiana
01-11-2016, 07:45 AM
Witness Lee: When you are talking about a brother’s wrongdoing, you better be careful, not too much. To degrade a brother in people’s eyes is sinful. Don’t forget that brother has been purchased with a great price, that is, with the blood of the Lord. This is to keep the justice among God’s people.
Ron Kangas: In His kingdom there must be justice. Where justice is violated, there must be some just measure of discipline. That’s the way it is. So we have a case of a wrongdoer receiving discipline. But according to our fallen nature when we feel we’re right and that others are wrong, its really easy for us not to be restrained in our expression of judgment, criticism, or condemnation. God is not like this, and if we are like this we are not living in the theocracy according to what God is.
Example 2
http://twoturmoils.com/RonKangasManofDeath.pdf
http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_Ecuador-Ambato-enero.2008/comunion.para.hnos.responsables.y.servidores.mp3
On sensing death - when I initially read Fermentation of the Present Rebellion, I was positive, wholly so. Yet I sensed death, and became confused: I wanted life and yet came to the ministry and got death? What to do? (also got death when reading Witness Lee vs Bible Answer Man [at Melodyland], and hearing Ron Kangas speak of those who didn't make the cut [Titus Chu, Max Rapoport, Jane Anderson]). LC'ers should realize that "sensing death" cuts two ways: if you live by this sword you'll eventually die by it.
Second, and quite related: if you look at theocracy as presented in the Bible, the promoted human King, heir of Davidic line*, is fully obedient to God the Father in heaven, and as such becomes peace and salvation to all who obey Him. Please note well that Psalm 2 follows hard upon Psalm 1, and fulfills it. Jesus fulfilled all righteousness. Jesus kept the law, utterly. So He's the True King, the Anointed (Gk:Christ) Son of God, glorified forever.
Now the enemy comes in and usurps this: see Psalm 3. Absalom rebels. Someone else, a sinner, disobedient, and not anointed, comes in and proclaims that he's the new King, the new Deputy God. A sinner, unauthorized, promotes himself into the position of kingship, which should be held by Jesus alone. Chaos ensues; look at all the vain efforts to maintain the so-called Authority of this usurping one, in the context of Little Flock/Local Church history. Storm after storm. Turmoil after turmoil.
*Matthew 21:9 "The crowds that went ahead of him and those that followed shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" "Hosanna in the highest heaven!"
Indiana
01-12-2016, 10:12 AM
From an LSM radio broadcast, Ron Kangas speaks about the church life corresponding to a theocracy and the kind of men needed to judge cases among them, men who would be fair, just, and unbiased. We have seen anything but such men in Local Church government in cases they made public and in many other cases that have come to our attention, such as in the Sandoval letters.
Ron Kangas says in the broadcast: "Israel is a type of us, the believers, the church people today, so there must be a spiritual reality in the church life that corresponds to the outward picture of theocracy among the children of Israel in Deuteronomy." (LSM Radio on Deut.)
Ron in Ecuador link
In the link below, Ron advises the responsible brothers in South America to protect the church by avoiding the spreading of death, yet the blending brothers themselves have been major conduits of its spread.
www.twoturmoils.com/RonKangasProtectingChurch.pdf
Funny that the quote provided I did not find in the one-page pdf linked afterward. And they were not really on the same subject.
These say-nothing posts are getting a bit irritating. And the disconnect between the topic of the post and the topic of the link makes is all the more irritating.
Indiana
01-13-2016, 08:58 AM
In Bill Mallon's letter to Witness Lee he describes the troubling maneuvering of co-workers of Witness Lee in the Southeast to establish ministry-centered churches. Ron Kangas refers to Bill's letter in his message in Ecuador after denouncing me for putting the letter on the internet. Then, before the Body, he dismisses Bill's letter and Bill, with no regard for his testimony or the divisive behavior of the co-workers. I am denounced, Bill's experience is disregarded, and Ron pushes his agenda forward in South America, in Christless fashion, to establish ministry churches in alignment with him, with Anaheim, with the program - in the same spirit of the movement Bill Mallon reported 20 years earlier.
EXCERPT FROM BILL'S LETTER
6. "The young trainers (Minoru Chen, Howard Higashi, Paul Hon, Jake Jacobson, Benson Phillips, Dan Towle, Andrew Yu) during the 1986 summer training in Irving had sessions of so called fellowship with the elders, grouped according to the different sections of the country, held in Benson's house. Some of these were overheard while eating lunch, analyzing the brothers in order to categorize them, identifying the brothers who presumably control in order to isolate them, and plotting to force the brothers into a mass resignation in order to manipulate them.
Then in the afternoon meeting, these trainers intimidated the brothers with statements like: 'You have an incurable disease,' 'the only cure is amputation,' 'you are a babylonian protestant, because you do not preach that Witness Lee is a one man show,' 'we preach that Witness Lee is a one man show. and you brothers have a problem with this,' 'everyone must go to Taipei to show your oneness', and 'asking what to do is the old way... just present yourself, and don't ask questions.'
Don Rutledge tried to speak, but the thick intimidating atmosphere suppressed him. He was later branded with being in the old way. Afterwards, these young trainers said, "We have to be better prepared so no one can speak up like Don did." What kind of attitude is this when brothers should be practicing the inner anointing and the mutual fellowship? You cannot imagine how threatening the atmosphere was, being full of ultimatum and denouncements.
In summary, there was no sense of their identification with the Body, speaking from a mutuality as being members one of another, sharing from the intrinsic flowing out of the divine fellowship. Instead, it tends to tear down, not build up."
Bill's Letter and Witness Lee's Response in The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion. WL did not mention Bill's letter to let people know about Bill's experience with WL's co-workers.
www.twoturmoils.com/MallonLeeHidingHistory.pdf
Ron speaks about Bill Mallon in Ecuador,
"In 1988 certain co-workers severely criticized Brother Lee, and then they separated themselves, they went their own way. One of these brothers, in particular, his whole situation is tragic.
I would like to ask him, ‘after you wrote that letter to Brother Lee, and after you began to speak a certain way, what is your spiritual situation? How would you compare it with your situation when you were in Elden Hall'?
Aren’t you more experienced now than then? Would you say you are more living now’?
When many rebelled against brother Watchman Nee, and some of them wanted to be recovered, Brother Lee asked them, ‘how is your situation? You say you are right, you say Brother Nee was wrong’. They all confessed they were dead. If we would practice this one way of discernment, we would avoid most problems.
I am not afraid to be simple in this way, You say this, and you say this, I don’t know the facts, I don’t know who is right or wrong. But I know when I listen to you, I get death. And, when I listen to Brother Lee’s ministry, I get life. So it is so simple, I stand with life.
Why do you feel you have to know so much? It’s endless trying to know so much.
Now I hope you can understand experientially, what I am saying. But if you cannot discern between life and death, I have a suggestion for you, withdraw from responsibility in the church until the life in you grows. Those who take responsibility must have this discernment….. END
Ron's use of the story of Witness Lee's not so honorable blind loyalty support for W. Nee, is no way to shame Bill Mallon and it was no way for Lee to shame the elders in Shanghai during Nee's righteous suspension as we have learned from the accounts of ones who were in Shanghai made known in Dr. Lily Hsu's book...
And, Ron Kangas doesn't explain why brother Lee was "severely criticized" by brothers, who, he said, "went their own way".
NewManLiving
01-13-2016, 10:26 AM
Dear brother Steve,
First let me say that I appreciate your dedication and resoluteness in defending the truth, believing that the Lord leads you to do so. I would just ask you to please explain your use of the term "Body" instead of perhaps a more appropriate term like "assembly". In and of itself, the Body of Christ encompasses all truly regenerated believers who are sealed with His Holy Spirit. Not just members of the LC who share the same experience. To refer to the LC or any other group as the "Body" sends the wrong message and reinforces the sectarian nature of the LC as being the only true Body of Christ. Do you actually believe that the LC is "The Body" ? Perhaps your use of the term itself is simply from habit.
Praying for you and the LC
John
Indiana
01-13-2016, 10:52 AM
Dear brother Steve,
First let me say that I appreciate your dedication and resoluteness in defending the truth, believing that the Lord leads you to do so. I would just ask you to please explain your use of the term "Body" instead of perhaps a more appropriate term like "assembly". In and of itself, the Body of Christ encompasses all truly regenerated believers who are sealed with His Holy Spirit. Not just members of the LC who share the same experience. To refer to the LC or any other group as the "Body" sends the wrong message and reinforces the sectarian nature of the LC as being the only true Body of Christ. Do you actually believe that the LC is "The Body" ? Perhaps your use of the term itself is simply from habit.
Praying for you and the LC
John
Thank you, John. You make an important point. I used the term "Body" purposely as I was referring to the members of the Body of Christ sitting before Ron, with whom he needs to be honest, many of whom he would choose to discard, I believe, due to their "independence" from him and Anaheim headquarters. He is more in line with what Lee warned about becoming, a church of Gideon and his 300 men. I am currently meeting in an assembly associated with Stephen Kaung. They speak of the Body of Christ, but never limited to themselves as a special, separated group of elite believers. They are are well-taught that they are but an assembly of believers, one with every believer, and should behave this way. I know the strong tendency in the Local Churches....their appreciation is very high for a man and his ministry...thus the movement.
www.twoturmoils.com/TheChurchofGideonandHis300Men.pdf
NewManLiving
01-13-2016, 12:34 PM
Thank you for clearing that up Steve. I also appreciate the ministries of Kaung and others associated with the assemblies. I attended the summer conference in Virginia. I had a most glorious time. Met a lot of former members of the LC who continue to rejoice in the Lord. Thankfully, Stephen was all to aware of the mis-aimings of his former co-worker to repeat those mistakes, having had some experience with the LSM sect's "take-over mentality" with the assemblies in New York.
The fact is, the current executives of the LSM churches practice a type of conditional "life and death" philosophy which is extremely nefarious. It is a counterfeit of true light given by the Holy Spirit, whereby members of the business churches are taught ( brainwashed to use a stronger but accurate term)
to discern what is life and what is death by what comes out of Anaheim. The continued practice, reinforcement and acceptance of this lie deepens its hold on the members the longer they are exposed to it. Eventually, they are no longer able to discern for themselves making it extremely difficult to shake this concept even after leaving the sect. The proof of this is the blendeds themselves ( at least some of them ). They have completely lost the ability to discern what is truly life and what is actually death, often confusing the two. Ron's statement about you is a perfect example that this brother is spiritually sick. May the Lord have mercy on all of us. It is so easy to be deceived.
May the Lord continue to strengthen you by the bountiful supply of His Spirit
John
TLFisher
01-13-2016, 12:41 PM
Thank you for clearing that up Steve. I also appreciate the ministries of Kaung and others associated with the assemblies. I attended the summer conference in Virginia. I had a most glorious time. Met a lot of former members of the LC who continue to rejoice in the Lord. Thankfully, Stephen was all to aware of the mis-aimings of his former co-worker to repeat those mistakes, having had some experience with the LSM sect's "take-over mentality" with the assemblies in New York.
There's an audio on the internet where Stephen goes into detail about the 1960's in New York. Stephen knew what Witness Lee's intention was and still invited him to New York.
TLFisher
01-13-2016, 12:57 PM
Back to Steve's writing, blendeds such as Ron among so-called responsible brothers in the local churches view themselves as deputy or delegated authorities of a theocracy.
Following is from Exodus 18:17-26
"Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “The thing that you are doing is not good. You will surely wear out, both yourself and these people who are with you, for the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. Now listen to me: I will give you counsel, and God be with you. You be the people’s representative before God, and you bring the disputes to God, then teach them the statutes and the laws, and make known to them the way in which they are to walk and the work they are to do. Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them as leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. Let them judge the people at all times; and let it be that every major dispute they will bring to you, but every minor dispute they themselves will judge. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. If you do this thing and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure, and all these people also will go to their place in peace.”
So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did all that he had said. Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. They judged the people at all times; the difficult dispute they would bring to Moses, but every minor dispute they themselves would judge."
Leading brothers, Coworkers, elders, etc don't fit the bill described in the preceding verses. No desire to hear any dispute; major or minor. Steve knows. He tried to appeal to brothers locally in Seattle and Bellevue. No one had an ear to hear.
Responsible brothers in general just want everyone to go along positively. Don't make an issue of matters, persons or things.
By contrast that is what Moses selection of responsible men was for. To hear disputes of matters, persons, or things. With the most serious of disputes brought before Moses.
Thus it is quite clear the deputy authority that exists in the local churches is not God's government. There is no resemblance of righteousness or justice. It's fleshly, dishonest and partial.
Lisbon
01-13-2016, 01:44 PM
If this is pure redundancy, please delete.
It seems incredible that very shortly before the cross, the Lord caught his disciples arguing about who was to be boss, MOTA, dictator, oracle,etc. He spoke directly to the problem. Hear me you disciples, what you are talking about is the way the gentiles operate. With you it is not going to be that way. Whoever is to be great is going to be your servant. It seems that's not that difficult to understand. No kings, dictators, oracles. By the way oracle is not mentioned in the NT except refering to the OT. Peter instructs all of us to speak as oracles of God but never one Oracle. No singular apostle, only apostles spoken of in NT. I almost wanted to vomit at poor RK's going on about WL as a bond slave at the time of Lee's passing. I never heard of anyone disagreeing with WL and living to tell about it. WL had no co-Workers. What? A slave. It's just plain silly.
Lisbon
If this is pure redundancy, please delete.
It seems incredible that very shortly before the cross, the Lord caught his disciples arguing about who was to be boss, MOTA, dictator, oracle,etc. He spoke directly to the problem. Hear me you disciples, what you are talking about is the way the gentiles operate. With you it is not going to be that way. Whoever is to be great is going to be your servant. It seems that's not that difficult to understand. No kings, dictators, oracles.
Yes, Lisbon, that was pure redundancy, at least for those of us who read the Bible, but keep saying it, since few in leadership seem to be hearing.
By the way oracle is not mentioned in the NT except referring to the OT. Peter instructs all of us to speak as oracles of God but never one Oracle. No singular apostle, only apostles spoken of in NT. I almost wanted to vomit at poor RK's going on about WL as a bond slave at the time of Lee's passing. I never heard of anyone disagreeing with WL and living to tell about it. WL had no co-Workers. What? A slave. It's just plain silly.
That's kind of like these career politicians in Wash DC calling themselves "public servants."
The only true "public servants" are the volunteers.
Indiana
01-14-2016, 10:43 AM
In Bill Mallon's letter to Witness Lee he describes the troubling maneuvering of co-workers of Witness Lee in the Southeast to establish ministry-centered churches. Ron Kangas refers to Bill's letter in his message in Ecuador after denouncing me for putting the letter on the internet. Then, before the Body, he dismisses Bill's letter and Bill, with no regard for his testimony or the divisive behavior of the co-workers. I am denounced, Bill's experience is disregarded, and Ron pushes his agenda forward in South America, in Christless fashion, to establish ministry churches in alignment with him, with Anaheim, with the program - in the same spirit of the movement Bill Mallon reported 20 years earlier.
Bill Mallon and John Ingalls were compelled to meet and seek the Lord over their growing concerns.
John Ingalls in Talks with Bill Mallon
“In the following month, September 1987, due to my health, and also due to a burden to fellowship with Bill Mallon, a co-worker with whom I had an intimate relationship for twenty-four years, I decided to go to Atlanta, Georgia, for a two-week period of rest and fellowship. Bill had recently passed through sore trials and sufferings, and I hoped that our fellowship could render comfort and encouragement to him. We drove up to the nearby mountains and had a number of days opening to one another.
At that time I was entirely supportive to Brother Witness Lee and his ministry and work related to the “new way” that was being promoted. I therefore did my utmost to persuade Bill to visit Taiwan and participate in the full-time training. I felt that this might be the answer to his need. On four separate occasions during those days I attempted to convince Bill to take this step, but he steadfastly refused, affirming that he was not free or clear to do that.
During that time Bill explained to me how he had suffered in various ways by events that had transpired in recent months in the churches and in the work in the Southeast. I came away from our talks with one deep impression: Philip Lee was becoming increasingly involved in spiritual things concerning the Lord’s work, the churches, the elders, and the co-workers. I had already noticed this in Irving, Texas the preceding month. This, I felt, was completely untenable, incompatible with his position and person, and intolerable. Philip Lee was employed by his father, Witness Lee, to be the business manager of his office and was reportedly instructed to deal only with business affairs. He was totally unqualified both in position and character to touch spiritual matters related to the work of the Lord and the churches. I became alarmed and began to fear for the Lord’s testimony. With this burden I determined upon my return to Anaheim to fellowship with Godfrey Otuteye, who then was involved in coordinating with Philip Lee in the Living Stream Office. I wanted to frankly ask him about Philip’s role, expressing my alarm and concern”.
Discussion Concerning LSM Manager
Godfred had been an elder in the church in Irvine, California, for close to ten years, and had recently been appointed as an elder in Anaheim by Brother Witness Lee. Thus we had been put into a position of more intimate fellowship and coordination. I had known Godfred since 1972 and over the years had numerous occasions of fellowship with him. I respected him for his genuineness, wisdom, and devotion to the Lord. Hence, upon returning from Atlanta on Sept. 22, 1987, I made an appointment for dinner with Godfred on September 25, Friday evening.
We sat together in the restaurant, and after some general conversation, I said to him in a serious tone, “Godfred, I would like to ask you a question. Would you please tell me who Philip Lee is? It seems that he is being promoted and is going altogether too far in his involvement in the spiritual side of the work, greatly overstepping his position as a business manager. Have you noticed this? I myself could never agree with this.”
It seemed that my question took him by surprise. We had never discussed these matters before. He hesitated a few moments. Then, in a very grave tone, he replied, “John, the situation is very serious.” If he was surprised by my question, I was somewhat taken aback by his answer. Godfred continued, “I have seen and heard many things in the Living Stream Office in recent months. I cannot go into detail, but I can tell you there is much that is very serious and very wrong.” Then I began to be more alarmed and concerned. Godfred fully agreed that Philip Lee’s involvement in the work was way out of line, but he indicated that there were more serious things than that.
Two days later, on Sept. 27, the Lord’s Day, as we met in the Elders’ Room before the morning meeting on Ball Road, Godfred had a few moments alone with me, and he said, “John, it is very timely that you opened up to me the other night. Let me tell you that the whole situation is sick and corrupt. I have seen and heard too much.” Then I knew that we were really in trouble, though he did not mention any details or any names.
A Shocking Development
September 1987
On the following Tuesday, Sept. 29th, Godfred left for a business trip to Europe. On the next day, Wednesday, Sept. 30th, I received a telephone call from a sister who had a prominent position in the Living Stream Ministry Office, asking if she could see me that night. I consented. That evening she sat in my living room and with tears opened her heart to me. She had served sacrificially and faithfully for many years in the LSM office, and now she said she could not tolerate anymore the gross misconduct that was being perpetrated upon some and especially upon her. I had been acquainted with this sister for many years and knew her to be faithful, upright, and trustworthy; therefore, I took her word very seriously. I was amazed that she could put up with such conduct for so long. She stated that she tolerated it only for the sake of Brother Lee and his ministry. She said that she had no other recourse but to resign. I confirmed her intention.
That conversation utterly shocked me. I deeply felt that something must be done to acquaint Brother Lee with the situation and to let him know that we would not tolerate it. I obtained Godfred’s telephone number in Europe and called him as soon as the difference in time zones permitted, telling him the things that had come to my ears. Godfred listened and said that he already knew it. I was amazed. That night I considered what could be done. That we had to go to Brother Lee I was certain.
Link to John Ingalls' book, Speaking the Truth in Love.
www.twoturmoils.com/johningalls.pdf
Indiana
01-15-2016, 07:03 PM
Lee may have lost half of the SoCal Recovery due to Philip's abusive streak... What we really needed to hear was a sobering repentance concerning how much damage Lee and son had wrought on God's people, complete with basic details. All Christians can understand that.
[Quote is from a different thread]
www.twoturmoils.com/ATrueManofDeath.pdf
Indiana
01-16-2016, 06:07 PM
This restoration letter was read at a church meeting in Anaheim, August 22, 1993, although Philip had never repented for anything publicly or to anyone privately, certainly not elders, and, no sisters at LSM that those who were close to the Anaheim situation heard of. Also, no word was ever given publicly in the churches about Philip Lee’s major role in causing division, as graphically seen interwoven throughout the accounts of John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So.
www.twoturmoils.com/PhilipHistoryandRestorationinAnaheim.pdf
Indiana said:
This restoration letter was read at a church meeting in Anaheim, August 22, 1993, although Philip had never repented for anything publicly or to anyone privately, certainly not elders, and, no sisters at LSM that those who were close to the Anaheim situation heard of. Also, no word was ever given publicly in the churches about Philip Lee’s major role in causing division, as graphically seen interwoven throughout the accounts of John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So.
Yet Ed Marks recently told ZNPaaneah in NYC that he did it because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Indiana said:
This restoration letter was read at a church meeting in Anaheim, August 22, 1993, although Philip had never repented for anything publicly or to anyone privately, certainly not elders, and, no sisters at LSM that those who were close to the Anaheim situation heard of. Also, no word was ever given publicly in the churches about Philip Lee’s major role in causing division, as graphically seen interwoven throughout the accounts of John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So.
Yet Ed Marks recently told ZNPaaneah in NYC that he did it because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Just think about how many sinful, unrighteous things were done at LSM because it "pleased Brother Lee."
NewManLiving
01-16-2016, 08:56 PM
Indiana said:
Yet Ed Marks recently told ZNPaaneah in NYC that he did it because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Just think about how many sinful, unrighteous things were done at LSM because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Yes Ed also told him, rather mindlessly, that Phillip went to be "with the Lord". I would like to think that he did. However, repentance under those circumstances would involve confession and restitution. Also since none of them think they did anything wrong there is the probability that Phillip never did repent. His fellow co-workers are just as guilty for not taking a stand for righteousness but instead turned against those dear defenseless saints and continue to do so today. How unconscionable, May the Lord Judge and bring about true repentance
Freedom
01-16-2016, 10:46 PM
Indiana said:
Yet Ed Marks recently told ZNPaaneah in NYC that he did it because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Just think about how many sinful, unrighteous things were done at LSM because it "pleased Brother Lee."
The fact that leaders like Ed could admit without remorse to being Lee-pleasers shows how numb they have really become. The fact that this doesn't bother the rank and file shows how well the blendeds have insulated themselves.
At this point in time, the facts have long since been made available for those who wish to know the truth. What remains is a need for LC leaders to repent. That may never happen, but what can be done is to help keep LC members from being led astray by these leaders.
TLFisher
01-17-2016, 09:16 AM
Indiana said:
Yet Ed Marks recently told ZNPaaneah in NYC that he did it because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Just think about how many sinful, unrighteous things were done at LSM because it "pleased Brother Lee."
Another illustration how LSM practices consequentialism....."the end justifies the means".
Indiana
01-23-2016, 12:19 PM
The fact that leaders like Ed could admit without remorse to being Lee-pleasers shows how numb they have really become. The fact that this doesn't bother the rank and file shows how well the blendeds have insulated themselves.
At this point in time, the facts have long since been made available for those who wish to know the truth. What remains is a need for LC leaders to repent. That may never happen, but what can be done is to help keep LC members from being led astray by these leaders.
In 2002 I made contact with James Lee and Dick Taylor of the blending brothers and asked them to meet with me to discuss our past history. I asked for a couple of quarantined brothers to meet with us also there in Southern California. I sent them materials to read by John Ingalls and Bill Mallon and John So, along with the booklet I initially wrote, In the Wake of the New Way.
www.twoturmoils.com/AppealforFellowshipWaived.pdf
NewManLiving
01-23-2016, 02:00 PM
I find it extremely interesting and quite subtle that James Lee does not go on and finish Paul's letter to the Corinthians. In fact not only does Paul make it abundantly clear what "sins" will not be tolerated in light of the Kingdom of God but also hands over a brother to Satan for the destruction of his flesh because this brother continued to practice such sin. He also warned "The Body" against "tolerating" such behavior and its impact upon their spiritual health. Is this in fact the degraded situation in the LSMLC today? Fortunately, the Corinthians including this brother apparently repented and were restored because of Paul's "strong" word. James Lee and the leaders of the LSMLC need to move on to II Corinthians and make a full repentance. Paul presents the crucified Christ as the solution and not an excuse. No where in both letters does Paul encourage the believers to "get out of their mind" and "just take life". As a matter of fact he encourages them to use their minds to examine the contrast between the crucified Christ and their current living. Its time to get into your mind to examine your heart and then use your mouth to repent dear blendeds!
TLFisher
01-23-2016, 10:43 PM
No where in both letters does Paul encourage the believers to "get out of their mind" and "just take life". As a matter of fact he encourages them to use their minds to examine the contrast between the crucified Christ and their current living. Its time to get into your mind to examine your heart and then use your mouth to repent dear blendeds!
I consider the saying "get out of your minds" is another manner of saying ignore your conscience. It becomes convenient for brothers to PRETEND "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. Key word being PRETEND. It's more like an unwillingness to acknowledge unrighteousness that has transpired within the recovery over the past decades.
TLFisher
01-23-2016, 10:55 PM
Ron's statement about you is a perfect example that this brother is spiritually sick.
I do think Ron has a problem and specifically regarding sisters. I've heard a fair share of messages given by Ron and nearly all there's an undercurrent with sisters being the focal point of his attempts at humor.
Why is that? As one poster suggested to me today, could it be sisters in general see through the charade. Or is it something deeper that causes our brother to speak as he does towards sisters?
I consider the saying "get out of your minds" is another manner of saying ignore your conscience. It becomes convenient for brothers to PRETEND "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. Key word being PRETEND. It's more like an unwillingness to acknowledge unrighteousness that has transpired within the recovery over the past decades.
I think that is so true that ignoring our consciences is what get out of your mind can mean. What is being practiced seems to be strong spiritual deception.
TLFisher
01-24-2016, 10:55 AM
I think that is so true that ignoring our consciences is what get out of your mind can mean. What is being practiced seems to be strong spiritual deception.
There are many verses on light some of which are found in 1 John. One that struck me is in James 1:17
Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.
The system LSM operates in is much as "shifting shadows". We're familiar with various phrases:
get out of your mind
it's not about right or wrong
don't make an issue of persons, matter or things
I'm sure others can add to the list, but the system LSM operates in mandates to be "one with the brothers" you don't expose them to the light. If one isn't one with the brothers, then it's acceptable to expose him or her to the light. That's how LSM/LC are like shifting shadows. When it's the politically expedient thing to do, it's acceptable.
I consider the saying "get out of your minds" is another manner of saying ignore your conscience. It becomes convenient for brothers to PRETEND "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil. Key word being PRETEND. It's more like an unwillingness to acknowledge unrighteousness that has transpired within the recovery over the past decades.
When I first heard this "get out of your minds" stuff back in the mid-70's, it was presented to us as "don't sweat the small stuff," or would you please "stop nit-picking" every little thing. At least all the brothers and sisters I knew would echo my sentiments. No one would consider this an instruction to ignore our conscience in light of some criminal cover up. Little did we know.
But Titus Chu knew. And that's one of the issues I have with him. (The other issue was how he shamed, manipulated, and controlled the brothers.) It was always said in the GLA, that Titus was an "umbrella" to protect us from some of the crazer things that went on at LSM. For some reason, I and others considered that a good thing. What were we thinking? It was not a good thing!
Titus, for some reason, was thus often an enabler, and in some cases complicit in a criminal conspiracy, and here I'm thinking about what Norm posted when he and Toledo were asked by Titus to review Benson Philip's official quarantine letter to John Ingalls. The rest of us in the GLA were kept in the dark from knowing the true nature of Lee and Son, who owned and managed LSM.
I think that is so true that ignoring our consciences is what get out of your mind can mean. What is being practiced seems to be strong spiritual deception.
I now agree with this.
Indiana
01-26-2016, 03:47 PM
The fact that leaders like Ed could admit without remorse to being Lee-pleasers shows how numb they have really become. The fact that this doesn't bother the rank and file shows how well the blendeds have insulated themselves.
At this point in time, the facts have long since been made available for those who wish to know the truth. What remains is a need for LC leaders to repent. That may never happen, but what can be done is to help keep LC members from being led astray by these leaders.
www.twoturmoils.com/ProblemoftheChurchProblemintheSoul.pdf
TLFisher
01-27-2016, 01:13 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/ProblemoftheChurchProblemintheSoul.pdf
"He was a man who lived out God in all his actions, who moved and had his being among the brothers and sisters in the churches."
I was meeting with the Church in Bellevue in 1997 when the eulogy was given at the memorial service. I distinctly remember thinking "am I the only one thinking how one dimensional they're making brother Lee out to be?" Unrealistic to suggest to the entire recovery Witness Lee would never do what anyone else would do. Or that sin never had a hold on his living.
In the years since 1997 it's become evident Reconsideration of the Vision was far more accurate a writing than Fermentation of the Present Rebellion ever was...."lived out God in all his actions"? I don't think so. Well, Witness Lee is gone, but the blendeds have had nearly 20 years to change their speaking. There's been no repentance. They've had plenty opportunity to be part of the solution instead of being part of the problem.
Indiana
01-27-2016, 05:03 PM
Brother Witness Lee does have a remarkable testimony, but not in the way of being the perfect God-man depicted in his eulogy, in lofty thoughts of him through "monkey vision".
This link provides a timeline of the Witness Lee era.
www.twoturmoils.com/EulogizingWitnessLee.pdf
Freedom
01-27-2016, 05:25 PM
Brother Witness Lee does have a remarkable testimony, but not in the way of being the perfect God-man depicted in his eulogy, in lofty thoughts of him through "monkey vision".
This link provides a timeline of the Witness Lee era.
www.twoturmoils.com/EulogizingWitnessLee.pdf (http://www.twoturmoils.com/EulogizingWitnessLee.pdf)
WL refers to shortcomings regarding the care for certain needs of people. I believe that these were shortcomings in his own ministry. At the point in time at which some started promoting WL as a one-man show, with an "all-inclusive" ministry, that is the point in time at which the possibility was eliminated from people's minds that he had any shortcomings. Even though he made certain admissions, these things are not taken to mean anything significant.
The blendeds have tasked themselves with promoting a man and a ministry, and this has necessitated their monkey vision. I don't think those like Ed have even a second thought about calling themselves monkeys. In their minds, right and wrong is dependent on what supports WL.
WL refers to shortcomings regarding the care for certain needs of people.Seems to me that Lee insisted that his followers have no business caring for any needs of any people except for just enough to get some "good material" in the doors and involved in the system. That mostly means buying LSM materials and going to trainings.
Yeah, I'm pretty cynical.
Freedom
01-27-2016, 09:52 PM
Seems to me that Lee insisted that his followers have no business caring for any needs of any people except for just enough to get some "good material" in the doors and involved in the system. That mostly means buying LSM materials and going to trainings.
Yeah, I'm pretty cynical.
The LC does seem to be catered towards a specific group of people, and it’s probably fair to say that it meets certain needs - at least initially. The classic example might be the college freshman who is looking for community and finds it with the LC.
What I have seen in the LC is that as people age, the LC is less likely to meet whatever needs it met previously. I’ve seen people leave that I never have expected to, sometimes when “life happens”, or sometimes it’s just because they aren’t getting any attention anymore like they were in college. Whatever the case is, it seems that those who have stayed and are older tend to be excessively needy. For many, it’s probably a cry for help. I feel sorry for them, but there’s not much that can be done.
WL refers to shortcomings regarding the care for certain needs of people. I believe that these were shortcomings in his own ministry.
I heard a few dismal apologies in this regard from both WL and TC. Actually their "apology" was really "spinning" an abusive situation. TC would make this type of apology after another one of the gifted brothers would leave following decades of severe abuse.
My question is "what are you actually apologizing for?" Do you have remorse for hurting them or just loosing them? And what "would you do different?" Would you treat these brothers with decency and respect? Would you put an end to public blaming and shaming?
No? I didn't think so.
Quote button not working, so . . . .
Freedom wrote: What I have seen in the LC is that as people age, the LC is less likely to meet whatever needs it met previously. I’ve seen people leave that I never have expected to, sometimes when “life happens”, or sometimes it’s just because they aren’t getting any attention anymore like they were in college.I know an older man whose wife died several years ago. Her death was not sudden, but was gradual over several months. As her condition worsened, he seldom went to the meetings. And it was seldom that anyone came by to see him (although some did come by for other reasons — he wasn't alone in the house). On at least one occasion, another brother asked him in that chipper way that they often do "How's it going, [name]." He sort of floored the guy when he responded "Well, except that my wife is dying, I guess its OK."
But that was about as close to any contact concerning the situation there was until they all showed up to have a rah-rah session at her funeral (much to the dismay of non LCM relatives).
The point here is not to comment on that situation specifically, but to observe how un-attentive to the needs of the "uncomely members" that the LCM displays. They are all about the multi-talented ones, plus those who have the wherewithal to finance their endeavors. The rest can be called "marginal" privately. And the "marginal" label even applies to their financiers in many cases.
Freedom
01-28-2016, 08:29 PM
The point here is not to comment on that situation specifically, but to observe how un-attentive to the needs of the "uncomely members" that the LCM displays. They are all about the multi-talented ones, plus those who have the wherewithal to finance their endeavors. The rest can be called "marginal" privately. And the "marginal" label even applies to their financiers in many cases.
I have seen some devout members leave as well. In many such cases there was no effort to retain such persons. At the time, I couldn't believe that they would just let people go so easily, but they did. In retrospect, it was for the better, but all the same, it just goes to show that they have no clue about how to really care for people and their needs.
I have seen some devout members leave as well. In many such cases there was no effort to retain such persons. At the time, I couldn't believe that they would just let people go so easily, but they did. In retrospect, it was for the better, but all the same, it just goes to show that they have no clue about how to really care for people and their needs.I think that they don't go after people because they know that the fact that they left means that there is something wrong. They don't want anyone to speak out about what is considered wrong, so letting them go as if a cancer that has been cut off is preferred.
In other words, you have to be willing to at least try to hang on while suffering in silence. If you are actually thinking that it is beyond sticking around for, it is better that you just go.
I got 1 phone call after I left. My wife and I had been sporadic for a while, so in hind sight I think when the gap got bigger it was just an encouragement to get back to a meeting. But we had already been to meetings.
Elsewhere.
I didn't even tell them that. But no more phone calls.
Freedom
01-29-2016, 11:05 AM
I think that they don't go after people because they know that the fact that they left means that there is something wrong. They don't want anyone to speak out about what is considered wrong, so letting them go as if a cancer that has been cut off is preferred.
Yes, it seems that this is the case. Ironically, sometimes leaders will tell members that the so-called backsliders need to be 'recovered'. If members actually took this to heart and just started contacting people who had left, I'm sure it wouldn't last long before leaders put a stop to it. None of the ex-members I know have anything good to say about the LC.
Indiana
01-29-2016, 12:42 PM
Eulogy Signs of Sickness
"Whoever wrote the eulogy of Witness Lee was neither honest nor balanced in his thought process. Those who were close to brother Lee who agreed with its dispersion to the churches had spent many years forming an unhealthy and abnormal mindset about their mentor".
www.twoturmoils.com/EulogySignsofSickness.pdf
TLFisher
01-29-2016, 12:49 PM
I think that they don't go after people because they know that the fact that they left means that there is something wrong. They don't want anyone to speak out about what is considered wrong, so letting them go as if a cancer that has been cut off is preferred.
When I last met with a LC regularly (5-6 year ago), one of the sentiments being echoed was to shepherd the soul....meet people where they're at. I received it as lip service.
Do they meaning the brothers really want to try to shepherd me? They won't want to know. Any speaking out about the real situation would be considered negative..:blahblah:
Really all that's wanted is for everyone to go on positively. Any objections to anything isn't wanted.
NewManLiving
01-29-2016, 02:25 PM
Eulogy Signs of Sickness
"Whoever wrote the eulogy of Witness Lee was neither honest nor balanced in his thought process. Those who were close to brother Lee who agreed with its dispersion to the churches had spent many years forming an unhealthy and abnormal mindset about their mentor".
www.twoturmoils.com/EulogySignsofSickness.pdf
I have often wondered if brother Lee was suffering from some type of dementia or possibly a mental breakdown due to his son. On the one hand he goes before the Lord and seems to get some type of permission to write the horrible un-truths that appear in his book and distribute these lies to the body. He probably believed in his mind that these things were true. He also has expressed abnormal behavior in elder meetings that certain brothers took to be mental illness. Then he repents before his death. Looking back at his history he has always had a temper problem early on. But in his latter years he appeared more unstable in his thinking - saying one thing and doing another. It's unfortunate that no one was "perfected" enough to help him, at least in his own mind. That was his undoing
Freedom
01-29-2016, 04:40 PM
I have often wondered if brother Lee was suffering from some type of dementia or possibly a mental breakdown due to his son. On the one hand he goes before the Lord and seems to get some type of permission to write the horrible un-truths that appear in his book and distribute these lies to the body. He probably believed in his mind that these things were true. He also has expressed abnormal behavior in elder meetings that certain brothers took to be mental illness. Then he repents before his death. Looking back at his history he has always had a temper problem early on. But in his latter years he appeared more unstable in his thinking - saying one thing and doing another. It's unfortunate that no one was "perfected" enough to help him, at least in his own mind. That was his undoing
WL's "high peak" ministry happened as he reached his 90's. At such an age, the very fact that he moved to something entirely 'new' seems highly suspect. I wouldn't automatically discount anyone because of their age, but just the way that everything happened, including the preceding late 80's 'turmoil' indicates that he wasn't completely lucid.
WL's "high peak" ministry happened as he reached his 90's. At such an age, the very fact that he moved to something entirely 'new' seems highly suspect. I wouldn't automatically discount anyone because of their age, but just the way that everything happened, including the preceding late 80's 'turmoil' indicates that he wasn't completely lucid.Being lucid may not be the problem. It could be that he was becoming more and more enamored with his own self-worth and was therefore working with the equivalent of spiritual blinders on. He only saw what he expected to see.
Freedom
02-01-2016, 07:40 PM
Being lucid may not be the problem. It could be that he was becoming more and more enamored with his own self-worth and was therefore working with the equivalent of spiritual blinders on. He only saw what he expected to see.
I would be the first to admit that I have a difficult time seeing things from WL's point of view. Even if I could better understand him, much of the nonsense that transpired towards the end of his ministry still has no viable explanation. He was delusion. Whether that was only limited to 'spiritual' things or not is debatable, but I suspect that he would have been unable to function in the real world outside of a building on Ball Rd.
But I read the first few pages of The Economy of God some time back (mid-late 60s) and found that it was just as preposterous as the things from later on. The only difference was in how outwardly preposterous that later things were. The earlier things were no less ridiculous. But he was able to use oratorical tricks to bring the listener/reader along. Tricks that would be called logical fallacies in the context of any real search for truth. Assert that the evidence is everywhere yet not provide one example. Declare the evidence to be found in a search that was beyond the possibility of most of the listeners, therefore accepted as claimed.
There is a reason that so many of them are constantly saying "Bro Lee said . . . ." Very seldom saying that the Bible says. In fact, where just reading the Bible is a problem, the answer is found in what Lee said.
Moving on.
In between, there was a lawsuit with depositions. There were questions asked of him about what he was called. Things like apostle. In all cases he declared that he did not claim such titles and said that he would never allow such a statement to stand if said in his hearing. (Did he really do this or just say so for the deposition? not sure.) But then just a few years later he was proud to be everything that he claimed not to be in those depositions.
Did Lee really change? Or did he just get more confident to let his grandiose dreams out of the bag? I suspect more of the latter than the former. He had a history going back to Taiwan, and even to China before that.
Freedom
02-03-2016, 07:24 PM
Did Lee really change? Or did he just get more confident to let his grandiose dreams out of the bag? I suspect more of the latter than the former. He had a history going back to Taiwan, and even to China before that.
I think that this is a difficult question to answer. I do think that certain characteristics of WL that later became more problematic were there from day one. I also think that WL didn't set out to become the person he was at the end of his life.
What I see is that WN served as WL's role-model. WN ruled churches in an autocratic fashion, and that is what WL saw as an example, an example which he imitated. Eventually the lust for power consumed him, just like it would for anyone handed that kind of power. Combined with insulation from criticism and negative feedback, things got more and more bizarre.
I think that under different circumstances, namely him not having a free pass to do whatever he chose, yes, his ministry would have still have had that 'fringe' element to it, but things might have not been so bizarre.
Did Lee really change? Or did he just get more confident to let his grandiose dreams out of the bag? I suspect more of the latter than the former. He had a history going back to Taiwan, and even to China before that.
I think that this is a difficult question to answer. I do think that certain characteristics of WL that later became more problematic were there from day one. I also think that WL didn't set out to become the person he was at the end of his life.
What I see is that WN served as WL's role-model. WN ruled churches in an autocratic fashion, and that is what WL saw as an example, an example which he imitated. Eventually the lust for power consumed him, just like it would for anyone handed that kind of power. Combined with insulation from criticism and negative feedback, things got more and more bizarre.
This topic has been discussed at length on this forum. Many here, like OBW and our moderator, believe Lee never changed, and was always "bad." I can somewhat agree with them, however, based on all my research, and the scores of brothers I have known, I am convinced that Lee left his early principles, at least those he promoted during the Jesus people movement. Definitely in the early 1974 "consolidation" and in the 1985 "new way," Lee enacted numerous changes to bring all the LC's under subjection.
I will say also that many brothers in the GLA still hold to the simple maxim handed down from Titus Chu: W.L. good, B.B. bad.
This topic has been discussed at length on this forum. Many here, like OBW and our moderator, believe Lee never changed, and was always "bad." I can somewhat agree with them, however, based on all my research, and the scores of brothers I have known, I am convinced that Lee left his early principles, at least those he promoted during the Jesus people movement. Definitely in the early 1974 "consolidation" and in the 1985 "new way," Lee enacted numerous changes to bring all the LC's under subjection.
I will say also that many brothers in the GLA still hold to the simple maxim handed down from Titus Chu: W.L. good, B.B. bad.And there is a possibility that this view is accurate. I look at the available history from before the U.S. and see what eventually came here and note that the early days in the U.S. were not like that. There are two (actually probably more) possibilities here:
1. He truly repented of what went before and came here with a different attitude.
2. He came here hiding his dark side until he could gain sufficient control over us.
My reasons for thinking the second is more likely is that while he was still gentle with us here in America, he went back to Taiwan and cleaned house in a way that was a lot like times yet to come in the U.S. To me, that casts a big cloud over any claim of genuineness in those "Jesus People" days in the 60s and early 70s.
Indiana
02-04-2016, 03:24 PM
And there is a possibility that this view is accurate. I look at the available history from before the U.S. and see what eventually came here and note that the early days in the U.S. were not like that. There are two (actually probably more) possibilities here:
1. He truly repented of what went before and came here with a different attitude.
2. He came here hiding his dark side until he could gain sufficient control over us.
My reasons for thinking the second is more likely is that while he was still gentle with us here in America, he went back to Taiwan and cleaned house in a way that was a lot like times yet to come in the U.S. To me, that casts a big cloud over any claim of genuineness in those "Jesus People" days in the 60s and early 70s.
OBW's first point is covered in the following email (2001 Don Hardy)
Basically, Paul Ma would only verify to you, that WL
seemed to be repenting, while Paul was travelling
with him the early 60s. For Paul told some of us:
"he would just sit in a chair facing the corner, and
groan, and say: "O Lord, Mercy! O Lord, Mercy!"
for a LONG time (hours?)." That touched me Steve.
So I do believe when WL ministered in the early 60s,
he was forgiven (...for we have a "big" God!), renewed
and a clean vessel, to impart God's precious realities
to us at Elden.
OBW's 2nd point is covered in a translation from a portion of Larry Chi's book.
www.twoturmoils.com/TaipeiHistory.pdf
The book by Larry Chi was sent to me from his home in San Francisco in 2003. The selected portion from the book on the Taipei church history was professionally translated here in Seattle. Also, Larry Chi discusses from the Taipei saints' viewpoint,the life practices they heard about in the U. S., and that, before long, was introduced to them by visiting saints, stirred up to share their enjoyment with them.
I had two copies of the book that ended up in the hands of two Taiwanese brothers in my area, who wanted to read the book. I got the part I wanted at the time, but it would be good to retrieve the books, if I can, and see now what the teachings were that the brother addressed in the book that he was concerned about. The whole book has not been translated into English that I know of.
(In the writing, the names were replaced with blank lines for presenting on the forum.)
UntoHim
02-04-2016, 03:43 PM
I, like Mike, must reluctantly defer to the "available history" that we now know of "early Lee" back in Taiwan, and even of the early Lee behind the scenes in the early days here in America. After all, there is ample evidence that he was hiring and firing elders on his personal whim, melding in the affairs of local churches, and even engaging in financial malfeasance back in the 1960s. These are well chronicled facts, and not just the petty grumblings of some bitter, former LC members. (get that, our dear Blended lurkers?)
In any event, I would echo what OBW has just posted:
2. He came here hiding his dark side until he could gain sufficient control over us.
My reasons for thinking the second is more likely is that while he was still gentle with us here in America, he went back to Taiwan and cleaned house in a way that was a lot like times yet to come in the U.S. To me, that casts a big cloud over any claim of genuineness in those "Jesus People" days in the 60s and early 70s.
I will say also that many brothers in the GLA still hold to the simple maxim handed down from Titus Chu: W.L. good, B.B. bad.
You know, I heard the exact same thing in Orange County CA back in the late 1980s, except back then the mantra was "Witness Lee good, John Ingalls and John So bad". And you can bet that before that, in 1950s-1960s Taiwan/Hong Kong/Philippines, the cry was "Witness Lee good, fill-in-the-blank brother(s) bad". Get the picture...and the picture is not pretty folks. History is a very repetitive thing when it comes to us sinful, selfish and proud creatures, and unfortunately, with a shamefully large number of Christian leaders.
***I actually wrote this post before Indiana made this last post. I have heard of such writings from brothers expressing such things, but this is the first time I have ever seen early Local Church history related in such a detailed and succinct manner. When Indiana gets a chance, maybe he could give us more detail about this book and if it has been fully translated into English yet.***
-
Yep. There it is. A "cleaning exercise" in 1965. A man who was no longer functioning as an elder, or anything else, in Taiwan returns to oust those who will not put him back on the throne of the MOTA. The term was not yet in play, but he was claiming the top spot that Nee had defined in Spiritual Authority.
Meanwhile, back in America, he was still an itinerant preacher with no place of authority.
He may have been seen in the corner saying "Oh Lord, Mercy" over and over, but since the U.S. history is not older than 1962 or 63, to be so dictatorial in 1965 is not really much of a time off.
Meanwhile, we in America were just getting ready to see the first of his venture failures in the early-mid 70s. So we had this continuing honeymoon while he was acting very differently to the churches in Taiwan (and possibly elsewhere?). I am having a hard time being very generous concerning his period of repentance because it seems more like those brief forays into Christianity like Bob Dylan did. When things get rough, cry out for mercy (which Lee mocked us for singing in the Psalms) then toss it aside and return to the SOP when things get better.
I begin to wonder if he was ever more spiritual in any way than any of the rest of us. Just had the look of it.
Reminds me of a discussion between Elizabeth and Jane Bennett concerning Mr. Darcy and Mr. Wickham. I can't find the exact words now, but the paraphrase would be something like "One has all the appearance of propriety while the other actually has the propriety." (I thought I could find a copy in my nook (shared with wife) but it is not there.)
Lee clearly created the appearance of a man of God but whether he was actually capable of ever being so is much less certain. (Actually sort of like another comment about Mr. Wickham.)
I know that I am being hard on someone who many still think of as a good teacher gone bad. I once thought that way. But my mind began to change in about 2007 (fully 20 years after leaving the LCM). Now I keep seeing reasons that he should never be accorded the rank of "good teacher," or even be a teacher at all. They just keep piling up.
WN ruled churches in an autocratic fashion, and that is what WL saw as an example, an example which he imitated. Eventually the lust for power consumed him, just like it would for anyone handed that kind of power...
I can think of two maxims, here. First is Lord Acton's dictum that "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely". Acton was a historian and had a broad data base to qualify his remarks.
The second line is from Jesus. "That's the way it is with gentiles, but it shouldn't be like this with you."
Meanwhile, back in America, he was still an itinerant preacher with no place of authority.Not yet. But it does seem inevitable, at some point, given the character.
I'll never forget the story of the young brother in S. Cal who came up and laid his sizable inheritance at WL's feet. This so-called man of God and apostle of the age, with all his business failures and troubles behind him, which might have taught him to repent and go a different route, still decided to create a motor home company: Daystar. He made one of his sons President, made appeals for "investment" from within the church meetings, etc. What a fiasco. The guy never changed.
Freedom
02-04-2016, 06:44 PM
The book by Larry Chi was sent to me from his home in San Francisco in 2003.
Pardon my asking, but who exactly is Larry Chi? Is he someone who was associated with WL in Taiwan?
Indiana
02-04-2016, 06:50 PM
Pardon my asking, but who exactly is Larry Chi? Is he someone who was associated with WL in Taiwan?
(This was added to post #365 at the bottom.)
The book by Larry Chi, formerly a responsible brother in Taiwan, was sent to me from his home in San Francisco in 2003. The selected portion from the book on the Taipei church history was professionally translated here in Seattle. Also, Larry Chi discusses, from the Taipei saints' viewpoint,the life practices they heard about in the U. S., and that, before long, were introduced to them by visiting saints, stirred up to share what they had been enjoying in the U.S.
I had two copies of the book that ended up in the hands of two Taiwanese brothers in my area, who wanted to read the book. I got the part of the book I wanted at the time, but it would be good to retrieve the books, if I can, and see now what the teachings were that the brother had addressed in the book that he was concerned about. The whole book has not been translated into English that I know of.
(In the writing, the names were replaced with blank lines for presenting on the forum.)
You know, I heard the exact same thing in Orange County CA back in the late 1980s, except back then the mantra was "Witness Lee good, John Ingalls and John So bad". And you can bet that before that, in 1950s-1960s Taiwan/Hong Kong/Philippines, the cry was "Witness Lee good, fill-in-the-blank brother(s) bad". Get the picture...and the picture is not pretty folks. History is a very repetitive thing when it comes to us sinful, selfish and proud creatures, and unfortunately, with a shamefully large number of Christian leaders.
For the record, I should add (and you know this very well) that I never agreed with this paradigm handed down to the GLA from Titus Chu: W.L. good, B.B. bad for a number of reasons.
My primary reason is the one you stated -- why does Lee always come out smelling like a rose and never taking any responsibility for his failures? Why does he assemble this massive smear machine to go after the prophets sent to him by God? How is Lee any different than the Pharisees who killed the prophets sent to them?
Indiana
02-04-2016, 10:39 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/PeopleChangeBensonLetter.pdf
Benson Phillip's referral some years ago in a letter to the church in Akron about a comment Witness Lee made that "people change".
UntoHim
02-05-2016, 07:21 AM
Around 1959 Mr. Lee had some investment failures and he lost a great deal of money. This brought the first financial crisis to the church. All the donations and contributions from the church members were used, and still the church owed people a large amount of money. Because of this situation, brother Lee forced the elders to sell a piece of land belonging to the church in order to pay the debt. That piece of land was located on 19 East Road, section 4, and had been bought by the church to build a training center and a new assembly building. Because of that many coworkers and church members were especially unhappy about this fiasco. Mr. Lee knew this was something that he did wrong and because of that he went to the United States and stayed on the west coast.
There was another incident that happened toward the end of the 1950’s that involved Hong Kong, the Philippines, Singapore, and Malaysia. Mr. Lee and some of the overseas coworkers developed some serious differences because the coworkers could not take Mr. Lee’s absolute authority. Everything was dictated by Mr. Lee, and he would not take any input from anybody. In addition some of the well-to-do church members were very unhappy about his handling of the financial matters. This was due to the fact that a lot of the money had been contributed by these church members, and Mr. Lee would handle the finances according to his own viewpoint. The overseas coworkers did not feel they could trust him anymore. Because of the differences they split up. Originally, the Philippines were very important for Mr. Lee because there were several well-to-do church members there who supported the church financially for a long time. So in 1960 the Manila church decided to sever relationships with Mr. Lee totally.
When Mr.Lee left Taiwan to the U.S. in 1960, it was not really that he went there to open up new frontier. Rather, it was because of his own personal failure in Taiwan that he escaped to the U.S.
Early Mr. Lee, meet Late Mr. Lee. SAME MR. LEE.
-
Early Mr. Lee, meet Late Mr. Lee. SAME MR. LEE.
UntoHim, you just said exactly what I said you have said all along and now you say it again. In the future I will no longer say it is you who says what you say and rather just say it myself, and then let you say what you say for yourself. :thumbup:
UntoHim
02-05-2016, 10:42 AM
What did he just say? :eek::rolleyes::cool:
-
Witness Lee Business Failures Disrupt the Church
Around 1959 Mr. Lee had some investment failures and he lost a great deal of money.
This brought the first financial crisis to the church. All the donations and contributions from the church members were used, and still the church owed people a large amount of money. Because of this situation, brother Lee forced the elders to sell a piece of land belonging to the church in order to pay the debt.
That piece of land was located on 19 East Road, section 4, and had been bought by the church to build a training center and a new assembly building. Because of that many coworkers and church members were especially unhappy about this fiasco. Mr. Lee knew this was something that he did wrong and because of that he went to the United States and stayed on the west coast.
After Mr. Lee left Taiwan, the church coworkers formed two sides. One side was Mr. Lee’s strong followers, while the other group had questions about some of Mr. Lee’s Lee’s activities. Those two groups had a strong difference of opinion, which greatly impacted the church activities and made much of the church work difficult to carry out.
Finally, some of the coworkers who were Lee followers asked Mr. Lee to come back to Taiwan to resolve differences. In the summer of 1969. Lee came back to Taipei. He decided to get rid of those coworkers who disagreed
with him.
There appears to be similarity between what happened in Taipei in 1959 and the U.S. in the 1979 (Daystar Motor Home Company and Phosphorous Overseas Stewards) and also in Brasil about 2008 or 2009 with Dong Yu Lan.
In all cases, there was a division between two camps, one group which tried to examine what appeared to be gross financial impropriety, and one group which said, "Ask no questions. Follow blindly." In the case of the phone conversation between Sal Benoit and Witness Lee, and in some of the records of the Estancia Arvore da Vida and Dong Yu Lan, the answer was the same. "None of your business". In the Brasilian case, the answer was phrased thusly: "The business finances of Dong Yu Lan are a black box. You cannot see what is inside."
So much for the kingdom of transparency and light. In all cases, asking for transparency led to mass exodus, as all but the "true believers" couldn't handle the stench of hypocrisy. The humble servant of God was revealed to be an autocrat, accountable to no one.
Glorious Atmosphere Did Not Last Long
Unfortunately the glorious atmosphere did not last very long. There was a big change in 1970. In the summer of 1970 there was a special international gathering in Los Angeles. There were about 100 members who came to join the gathering from the Far East, with about two-thirds of them coming from Taiwan. Most of them were the leading coworkers from various churches in Taiwan. In that special gathering, Mr. Lee used strong derogatory language to insult and degrade coworkers from Taiwan. He called them outdated and said all the churches from the Far East were outdated. There were two reasons for him to do so...
He wanted to use the free spirit and animated style of the American church members to shake up the members from the east. He wanted the Far East members to believe that the yelling, screaming and jumping up and down by the American church members was an expression that showed that the Holy Spirit had entered into them. He forced the Far East members to accept that they were outdated and that they ought to be ashamed. He wanted to re-establish his absolute authority and power over them.
In Chinese culture, screaming and yelling and jumping up and down entails "loss of face", no? No wonder they were unwilling. If Lee shows up, and says you are outdated, and you need to jump up and down and scream "O Lord Jesus" then essentially your doing so is not a surrender to God, but to Lee.
Also makes it very interesting that the Lee disciples in Mainland were called "Yellers" and "Screamers" and "Shouters". He noted their numbers approvingly, and called them by this name, before they were revealed to be under cultic influence (Lee is the Fourth of the God head or the Returned Messiah or whatever).
When we speak of Early Lee and Late Lee, it reminds me that way back (maybe 2005) when posting on the old Berean site, I was struck with the sameness of the new v the old and commented with a line from a song:
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
And was somewhat razzed for saying it.
But it is still true. The BBs are like Lee, who was like Nee, who learned from other somewhat abusive persons like ME Barber and the Brethren.
When we speak of Early Lee and Late Lee, it reminds me that way back (maybe 2005) when posting on the old Berean site, I was struck with the sameness of the new v the old ...
Here is a post from another thread which is just one example why I say that Lee changed ...
This inversion of things "ministry above the word" astounds me, because I recall Witness Lee asking the saints not to do this at the 1981 Winter Training on Corinthians. "Don't say Witness Lee says this", say "the Bible says this". I always understood that the ministry was an aid to help us get into the Word, and if the Lord Spirit and the clear Word didn't support what was in the ministry to drop that part.
This is why nearly all the LC saints I know would not agree with this site. UntoHim pukes every time I mention this, but they will not visit this site because some posters here refuse to acknowledge that Lee was once an anointed minister of the word.
OK, I'm already ducking. :duck:
Here is a post from another thread which is just one example why I say that Lee changed ...
This is why nearly all the LC saints I know would not agree with this site. UntoHim pukes every time I mention this, but they will not visit this site because some posters here refuse to acknowledge that Lee was once an anointed minister of the word.
OK, I'm already ducking. :duck:And in 1981, I think we were still somewhere in or shortly after the lawsuits in which one of the things that Lee had to combat was that everyone simply took his word on everything.
But recall that even Nee's teaching about deputy authority never said "I am the top dog." He always dodged around it. And so did Lee. For some time he refused the title of anything like minister of the age. But he declared that there was a ministry of the age. And made indirect references to the one who brought the ministry.
Too much like those "speak of yourself in third person" athletes like Dion Sanders. "Now if a Deon Sanders blah blah blah . . . . "
I'm sorry, but if his goal was to become so much, he couldn't declare it too quickly. Maybe some were ready to crown him MOTA in 1975. But it wouldn't fly then. Nor in 1981. But it would come. His position at the top of the spiritual authority chain would be established so that eventually everyone would accept that if he said it, it just had to be true. Therefore, saying "Bro Lee said" would then be OK.
But not when the world through a court was looking inside.
Given the history of his mentor (Spiritual Authority) and his own history in Taiwan prior to being in the U.S., it is hard to see this as little more than the gradual turning up of the heat until he could openly say he liked being exalted.
Given the depth or error in his teachings long prior to 1981, I have a hard time with any claim to "anointed minister of the word" (unless the word referred to was really just his).
Ohio,
BTW. I am not throwing this at you. You are not the enemy. I just hope that you might see what I think I am seeing, just like you hope the same for what you are seeing.
For me, this position concerning Lee has been very helpful in my ability to get past the ideas from his teachings that for so long kept me somewhat distant from the other Christians that I was meeting with. I even still had the idea that I somehow knew more than they did.
While I continue to see things in the Bible which I am not that sure many others see, I am much less married to them now and can get along just fine.
In Chinese culture, screaming and yelling and jumping up and down entails "loss of face", no? No wonder they were unwilling. If Lee shows up, and says you are outdated, and you need to jump up and down and scream "O Lord Jesus" then essentially your doing so is not a surrender to God, but to WL.
Also makes it very interesting that the WL disciples in Mainland were called "Yellers" and "Screamers" and "Shouters". He noted their numbers approvingly, and called them by this name, before they were revealed to be under cultic influence...
I think the language used by Larry Chin was describing WL's actions upon returning to Taiwan after being in the U.S. was calculated: "shamed", "derogatory", "insulted", "degrade" etc. WL's actions purposefully created an environment where people would have to submit to him absolutely if they were to go on. The cultural mandates made it so.
Gaining and Losing Face in China
By Sean Upton-McLaughlin on 10/10/2013
Most Westerners who are planning to China for business have almost certainly heard of the concept of “Face,” or Miŕn zi (面子). China’s more traditional society indeed places a great deal of importance on Face within society, business, and politics. However it can be difficult for Westerners to understand the specific rules relating to Face in China, as well as the different contexts where it should be used. For example, what actions will cause someone to gain or lose Face? In what situations should Face be given? How can Face affect your business and daily life in China? In the following article, several of the basic points surrounding Face will be explained, which all Westerners need to be familiar with to succeed in China.
What Is Face?
In China and much of Asia, Face represents a person’s reputation and feelings of prestige within multiple spheres, including the workplace, the family, personal friends, and society at large. The concept of Face can be understood more easily by breaking it down into three separate components: the individual view, the community view, and actions. The “individual view” pertains to the amount of prestige individuals feel based on their accomplishments, and the amount of respect they feel they are due based on their position and status, such as in a company or the home. For example, in the modern Chinese economy there are many opportunities to buy status symbols, which help a person gain prestige. And in China’s hierarchy-focused society, the respect a person is due is determined first by status relative to another person’s, not necessarily by personal achievements.
The “community view” pertains to the amount of respect individuals feel necessary to give to someone else based upon that person’s position or status, such as in a business, the family unit or within a group or friends. For example, status in a Chinese family is divided by very distinct roles; there are even separate terms used to address older and younger cousins, aunts, and uncles. Giving the same amount of respect to older and younger aunts or uncles might be viewed as a serious breach of etiquette.
“Actions” pertain to the various activities that can cause an individual to gain or lose Face. Based upon one’s position relative to someone else, several different actions can be employed to either cause a loss or gain of Face. In some cases these actions might occur unintentionally, or instead be used as tactic to achieve a specific result. For example, giving someone Face (e.g. more than they might deserve) can be used to build relationships and influence decisions. Also, causing someone to lose Face can reinforce one’s own authority and status, or pressure someone toward a desired action, such as quitting their job or fulfilling a promise.
Face and Business in China
Face is very visible in the Chinese business environment and plays an important role in inter- and intra-company communication, business negotiations, and the development and maintenance of relationships. In China, company hierarchy is much more important than in many Western countries. Not only are leaders and managers placed on a higher pedestal, but the distinction between different levels of management is much clearer and more important. Many Chinese leaders and managers expect respect from their subordinates and in many cases expect to be obeyed without question, no matter the rationality or fairness behind a request. Not obeying “the will” of a Chinese leader or manager does not give them the perceived necessary prestige they (and others) feel is deserved. Indeed, survival in a Chinese company depends on knowing one’s place, and Face plays a very important role in facilitating that function.
When Chinese business people build relationships with one another, Face is very important. On one hand, relationships in China are built and maintained through giving Face and increasing the prestige of one’s friends and contacts. With two business people of the same relative position or status, Face is often given and received equally and is the cement that holds a relationship together.
“To me, your “face” is your position and standing in the eyes of others, and it also has to do with the degree of respect you receive. Face can also be saved up over time and used to accomplish things later on. If you drove a fashionable or luxurious car to attend a friend’s party, then the majority of your friends would feel that you had face. Also, if you can achieve something through your personal contacts that others cannot through normal channels, you would also be thought to have face. You can gain face if you are praised by your boss, or if you accomplish a difficult task at work. However, if you greet others warmly at social events, but are met only with indifference, then you would lose face. Questioning someone’s ideas or opinion in a public setting would cause that person to lose face. ”
– James Tan, Sales Manager, Shanghai
I have a Chinese manager and she got really upset at one of my co-workers. She told me about what happened, and was laughing while she described his actions. Like it was comical, so absurd, what he did by blowing her off. But actually she was laughing to cover the anger. She was mad, but didn't want to show anger because then a subordinate would make her to lose 'face', which she didn't want (obviously). In the USA we don't lose prestige so readily by showing emotion.
So when WL threw down the gauntlet to the Taiwan elders, publicly shaming them, they either had to 'submit or quit'. This way he ensured that whatever number remained, whether it was 150 or 15,000, would be absolute for his ministry. To me, that was clearly the goal the whole time. Even the "storms" and "turmoils" were part of the plan. The "young Galileans" episode and all that. WL was quite willing to shake the Lord's recovery if it left him with people who were absolutely loyal, and would question nothing.
Lisbon
02-05-2016, 05:48 PM
Fair and simple, we were all conned. There is always a smart when you have to admit you were not that smart. I have been conned several times in my life and usually it involved my wife as well. We took our losses and forgot about it.
It was a little different here however because it involved our walk with God.
Beginning in 1972, we had just been enthralled with six months reading of Née.
We heard right at first "we read and study Née all the time." For one year maybe."
We just pay attention to the "pure" word of God. Really?
Witness Lee is just a simple poor Chinaman, no big deal.
I still remember the sister who spoke of WL as an apostle. I didn't like it but didn't hear it that much in 72 ,73. There were too many apostles near my business. I considered them all self appointed which I do 40 years later.
No high no low. Everyone can speak. We're all the same, equal before the Lord. Of course some more equal than others. I still can remember an elder remarking,"I didn't think "he" would make it." That had a terrible 'ring' to me. The church life was something you had to 'make?" I thought we were born into the church.
This all became the garlick room WL talked about so much. We were numbed, befuddled, just like Lee said we were. We were moo cows and we laughed as we were taken down the road of captivity. And we stayed down there for many years. Oh the mercy of the Lord!
Lisbon
TLFisher
02-05-2016, 07:12 PM
This all became the garlick room WL talked about so much. We were numbed, befuddled, just like Lee said we were. We were moo cows and we laughed as we were taken down the road of captivity.
Let's take the blendeds for example. My feeling is if you remove them from the system; the garlic room they're in they become normal, respectable, and loving Christian brothers. In the garlic room, they're captives of the system. One that demands preservation of the ministry above all else.
I saw first hand over a period of years what happens to a brother when removed from the garlic room. After my uncle retired and moved to Central Washington, over a period of some years prior to his passing my uncle became more sensitive especially towards brothers who left the recovery several decades earlier.
I'm still thinking about that sentence in the quote in post #385:
"Questioning someone’s ideas or opinion in a public setting would cause that person to lose face.”
In the USA, Senator Smith can publicly challenge President Jones over monetary or foriegn policy. In fact if Senator Smith is from the opposition party he would be expected to. That is his job. And questioning the Maximum Leader doesn't threaten the social coherence or the viability of governement; rather it is seen as a form of public discourse, and part of the deliberative process.
In contrast, in China if you publicly question Chairman Mao, even 40 years after his death, you will lose your job. Because by criticizing Mao you criticize the government, the society, and the people. Social coherence in this cultural milieu demands that the Maximum Leader's 'Face' be preserved.
In this vein, Top Brother WL could dismiss the writers and compilers of the scriptural record (e.g. Psalms, Proverbs, Job, James, Jude, Peter, etc) as having 'fallen opinions', while he had none; rather he was fueled by God's revelatory oracle.
In this vein, current Top Brother RK could say of WL, 'no self' could be seen in his ministry; not only when he was animatedly speaking in front of a group but 24/7; and this not only because of his personality but because of his position as Maximum Leader. In fact the coherence and identity of the group demanded this.
In this vein, WL could say (in Life-Study of John) that Jesus did things according to His will, when Jesus Himself in the same gospel said that He didn't do things according to His will but the will of the Father who sent Him. This NT gospel statement is fully in accord with the OT prophecy: "Behold I come to do Thy will" etc. Yet WL could blatantly overturn this in a public setting and not one dissenting or questioning voice would be raised because to do so would cause WL to lose face, and the viability of the Lord's recovery would then be threatened. Talk about a house built on sand!
In this vein, a Blended Brother could say, during one of the "storms" when the evil behaviors of the Maximum Leader's profligate son were exposed, that he was proud to be an ostrich with his head stuck in the sand. Sooner or later you get clear in the LC: to survive you must be an ostrich with your head stuck in the sand. If you do this you'll not only survive but prosper and flourish.
In this vein, Larry Chi said that when WL returned to Taiwan in 1970, he shamed and denigrated the elders of the church there for being old and out-dated and missing the move of the Holy Spirit. In so doing he was clearly establishing himself as unquestioned Maximum Leader. No mutuality would be permitted; absolute and explicit hierarchy must be delineated and enforced. I (WL) make you (elders) lose face; you can't make me lose face.
And anyone attending LC trainings or conferences sees this pattern of shaming and denigrating from the podium. Individual members, classes or groups are singled out and exposed; however any attempt to reciprocate is deemed rebellion. Taking public shame in the LC to "gain Christ" and to "be perfected", but questioning the Maximum Leader in any way is to "rebel against God's Deputy Authority".
In this vein, WL could teach that once per generation God raises up a special vessel to carry out His burden for the age. The apostle of the age and all that... MOTA -ministry of the age. There is one Maximum Leader allowed per generation. All others must "get in line" and "hand over" their material assets and their spiritual journeys. Everything and everyone must be under the aegis of God's Deputy Authority. Social coherence demands it.
I must repeat that Chinese culture isn't inferior to that of USA or Germany etc; all are fallen. But in assuming that no trace of worldly human culture tainted his ministry, and also WN's vaunted "Normal Christian Church" model, WL and the the current Leaders of the Lord's Recovery assumed that they could see where others (e.g. 'fallen Christianity') could not. In thinking that they alone could see, their blindness remained (cf John chap 9).
I must repeat that Chinese culture isn't inferior to that of USA or Germany etc; all are fallen. But in assuming that no trace of worldly human culture tainted his ministry... their blindness remained (cf John chap 9).
An interesting thing about the LC experience is that it began as a reaction to Western imperialism, which came to Asia alongside the gospel imperative. Eventually, WN and the indigenous Chinese church threw off the yoke of the running dogs of the West, i.e. the denominations.
One hundred years later, WL returned the favor. We were willing to accept their Eastern imperialism, and the Asian-flavored kingdom of God, if it gave us a leg up on the gospel. Turns out, that it didn't. The "virgin soil" of China wasn't that virginous, after all.
www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf
"Although there are proper reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010
I'm sure you all know this, but for the record "tell it to the church" is the last step in confronting a sinning brother (not keep your mouth shut). Thus the function of this forum is to tell it to the church in hopes of gaining repentance from our brothers.
Mat 18:15-17 (New American Standard Version):
"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."
TLFisher
02-08-2016, 01:03 PM
An interesting thing about the LC experience is that it began as a reaction to Western imperialism, which came to Asia alongside the gospel imperative. Eventually, WN and the indigenous Chinese church threw off the yoke of the running dogs of the West, i.e. the denominations.
One hundred years later, WL returned the favor. We were willing to accept their Eastern imperialism, and the Asian-flavored kingdom of God, if it gave us a leg up on the gospel. Turns out, that it didn't. The "virgin soil" of China wasn't that virginous, after all.
Just as Europe had their nationalism movement in the mid 19th century, China had theirs in the first half of the 20th century. You could say the so-called recovery movement as seen through Watchman Nee/Witness Lee was part of the nationalism movement.
This thread parallels that somewhat of the Asian Mind and the Western Mind. Those in LSM leadership embrace the characteristic of the Asian culture where authority is absolute and submission is unconditional. As a result those in leadership don't need to be accountable nor responsible to anyone.
Indiana
02-08-2016, 04:05 PM
I'm sure you all know this, but for the record "tell it to the church" is the last step in confronting a sinning brother (not keep your mouth shut). Thus the function of this forum is to tell it to the church in hopes of gaining repentance from our brothers.
Mat 18:15-17 (New American Standard Version):
"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."
Two of my posts on Larry Chi book - 2009
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=6421&postcount=3
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=6425&postcount=7
This thread parallels that somewhat of the Asian Mind and the Western Mind. Those in LSM leadership embrace the characteristic of the Asian culture where authority is absolute and submission is unconditional. As a result those in leadership don't need to be accountable nor responsible to anyone.
It was a LARGE Mtng (bros. had flown in), and WL was sitting up-front in “the captain’s chair”. John Smith of San Diego, asked him something like this: “WHAT happened with Daystar, WL? Soooo many saints are still suffering. Somehow we have to pay them $$ back”
WL’s answer: something like this (I’ll “never” forget): “They have lost their virginity”.
Dick Taylor was very perplexed, and asked: ”Why, WL, what on earth do you mean?!!”
“Well bros. when the saints first came into Elden Hall, in the “early days” they were all somewhat pure virgins, WHOLLY for the LORD, seeking the Lord, wanting only the Lord. But over Daystar, so many LOST their virginity, they lost their first love. (They got mixed).
Dick (or someone else) said, HOW did that happen WL?
WL said, they were (all) SEDUCED, they lost their virginity!”
And there were MANY brothers there, but NOT one asked, “WHO did the seducing, WL?” I did not ask publicly, but I asked (and was answered) within me! "Why, the "little precious man" sitting right in front of us, IS THE MAN who seduced us all!!"
Notice that this is a big meeting, many "responsible" and "mature" ones have come in from afar, many of the LC members are suffering, and confused, the appearance of unrighteousness or impropriety or malfeasance rears up, and no one says a thing! They couldn't, because their culture had paralyzed them. To question WL in a public setting would make him lose face, and that wasn't an option. Righteousness was optional, but making the leader publicly lose face was simply not possible.
Once you see the cultural element in the Leadership structure of the LC, it is hard not to see it. Because it's so obvious.
The (Larry Chi) book had been circulated among Chinese to some degree, but no one had it translated into another language, particularly English. I wondered how this could be that the book was written in the eighties and I come along in the 2000s and have it translated. The price was high ($680) and the Chinese could have done it themselves for the sake of English readers, but for some reason no one did. I was told it was a cultural matter just as there was no warning from the Chinese about Daystar at its inception.
I think it's pretty clear that this culture avoids airing dirty laundry at all costs. Even when the cost includes violating scripture: i.e. "tell it to the church". Anyone who hung around the LC for a while saw culture repeatedly trump scripture.
Notice that this is a big meeting, many "responsible" and "mature" ones have come in from afar, many of the LC members are suffering, and confused, the appearance of unrighteousness or impropriety or malfeasance rears up, and no one says a thing! They couldn't, because their culture had paralyzed them. To question WL in a public setting would make him lose face, and that wasn't an option. Righteousness was optional, but making the leader publicly lose face was simply not possible.
Once you see the cultural element in the Leadership structure of the LC, it is hard not to see it. Because it's so obvious.
This is why I don't believe all cultures are equal. They may be equally fallen, but I don't think they are all equal. The fact that none of the strong-willed American brothers like MR could take down WL tells me he was incredibly intelligent, strong-willed, and possibly under the influence of evil spirits.
Originally Posted by Don Hardy
And there were MANY brothers there, but NOT one asked, “WHO did the seducing, WL?” I did not ask publicly, but I asked (and was answered) within me! "Why, the "little precious man" sitting right in front of us, IS THE MAN who seduced us all!!"
This is why I don't believe all cultures are equal. They may be equally fallen, but I don't think they are all equal. The fact that none of the strong-willed American brothers like MR could take down WL tells me he was incredibly intelligent, strong-willed, and possibly under the influence of evil spirits.
Don Hardy, on a number of occasions, also mentioned the seduction in the Recovery by evil spirits. This goes way beyond the influence of culture, which aron has often discussed on the forum.
I believe the delusion of evil spirits was most evident when men who knew better actively halted the voice in their conscience in order to silence the prophets God sent to us.
TLFisher
02-09-2016, 04:23 PM
I think it's pretty clear that this culture avoids airing dirty laundry at all costs. Even when the cost includes violating scripture: i.e. "tell it to the church". Anyone who hung around the LC for a while saw culture repeatedly trump scripture.
Avoiding airing dirty laundry has a pseudo-scriptural spin: "cover the brothers".
TLFisher
02-09-2016, 04:31 PM
Two of my posts on Larry Chi book - 2009
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=6421&postcount=3
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=6425&postcount=7
What will DCP say?
I seem to recall years ago when LSM had the Manila 1990 meeting transcription. They wanted to make sure John So didn't have the last word. This tells me some of the reports that come out, LSM/DCP isn't refuting anything. They just want to put their own spin if they're not able to control the information.
Let's take the blendeds for example. My feeling is if you remove them from the system; the garlic room they're in they become normal, respectable, and loving Christian brothers. In the garlic room, they're captives of the system. One that demands preservation of the ministry above all else.The only problem is that without the blendeds, they are normal, respectable, and loving Christians with no shepherd and no direction. All those that would likely be able to rise up to fill the void would be the reason there is a void. I fear that the blendeds are not the whole problem. It is also that those below them are caught in the system. If they had to go it on their own, could they? Some maybe could. But I wouldn't hold my breath for a lot of them. They would no longer have their direction and would simply become part of the shepherd-less flock.
Indiana
02-10-2016, 05:15 PM
“Brother Nee stressed two things: Christ as life to produce the church and the church as the Body of Christ to express Christ.” (W.L.) That is, until the resumption of his ministry in Shanghai when he began to use terms like “the minister of the age” for the first time.
www.twoturmoils.com/BobDankerontheVisionoftheAge.pdf
NewManLiving
02-10-2016, 07:11 PM
“Brother Nee stressed two things: Christ as life to produce the church and the church as the Body of Christ to express Christ.” (W.L.) That is, until the resumption of his ministry in Shanghai and he began to use terms like “the minister of the age” for the first time.
www.twoturmoils.com/BobDankerontheVisionoftheAge.pdf
If it were not so sad it would indeed be funny. Our brother singles out Acts 26:19 which relates to the preceding verses that describe Paul's experience in the greatest detail and has nothing to do with "one vision for the age" nonsense. It could be that reading and comprehension (even apart from revelation) are not our brothers best gifts. It is this type of rationalization that is accepted hook-line-and-sinker by those whose minds are subverted from the true knowledge of God to something that is more in line with cult-thinking. Once the simple one accepts this bait then the storyteller can create any type of believable scene from types and shadows in the Old Testament.
Now we move on to Acts 9:15. "This man is A chosen vessel". This again has nothing to do with "unique", "one-and-only", "in every age" absurdities. Our brother has a great imagination - that's about it. Our brother disqualifies the exact meaning of the verse. God has many chosen vessels in every age. The evidence is quite obvious. Even apart from the fact that we ourselves are called chosen vessels.
I was listening to this weeks message on the CTM website. The brother who was speaking said something that startled me; "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on the Church we become a cult". I use quotes but this is essentially what he stated. My dear blendeds you would do well to give heed to our simple brother's statement. He is a chosen vessel!
I was listening to this weeks message on the CTM website. The brother who was speaking said something that startled me; "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on the Church we become a cult". I use quotes but this is essentially what he stated. My dear blendeds you would do well to give heed to our simple brother's statement. He is a chosen vessel!
How about "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on ANYTHING ELSE we become a cult".
THE MINISTRY
THE MOTA
GOD's ORACLE
THE HIGH PEAK TRUTHS
Unregistered
02-11-2016, 05:02 AM
Can someone tell me about the history of LSM? If possible I would like to know when the original Stream Publishers became LSM.
Thanks
This is why I don't believe all cultures are equal. They may be equally fallen, but I don't think they are all equal..One leader who I respect today is George Washington. Washington was surrounded by brilliant and able men: Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, etc. but he wasn't threatened by them. He was secure, not in his position but in his person. He never cared about position, either his or others'. As a result, men like Hamilton were able to flourish, and use their powers of rhetoric and persuasion, because they didn't have to constantly look over their shoulders at the Commander in Chief.
WL said we in the LC were an army, not a democracy - he'd have done well to look at the Continental Army that Washington commanded. People in Washington's army had opinions, and were allowed to voice them. After "much discussion", a la Acts 15:7, the generals of the army would reach consensus, and General Washington would pronounce his opinion of the consensus, and the army would move.
Where was the "much discussion" in Witness Lee's Army? Where was mutuality, the "submit to one another"? No, it was 1) Know Who's Boss, and 2) Get in Line.
The fact that none of the strong-willed American brothers like MR could take down WL tells me he was incredibly intelligent, strong-willed, and possibly under the influence of evil spirits.
But WL was abetted by a system. The man is gone but the system remains. It would be good to expose it for what it is. You know, fallen human culture and fallen spirits are not that far apart - they're arguably quite related. One is motivated by the other, and the other takes refuge in the one, and is manifested through it.
And if you begin to critically compare Recovery "church life experience" with scripture, it soon begins to reveal of what sort it is. LSM is practiced in the art of critique (see e.g. Affirmation and Critique, etc); they'd do well to be subject to the same.
I was listening to this weeks message on the CTM website. The brother who was speaking said something that startled me; "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on the Church we become a cult". I use quotes but this is essentially what he stated.
There's a hymn that says, "The Bride eyes not her garments/but her dear Bridegroom's face." Church leaders unfortunately specialize in eyeing our garments, and comparing them to those of everyone else. Unbalanced subjectivity, myopathy, bias (self-selection), judgmentalism, and self-justification then become the garments with which we drape ourselves.
I don't know how many times I heard young females blurt out emotionally in meeting that we should "love the church". Christ loved the church; so should we, right? Wrong. Christ loved the church and the church should love Christ.
Instead the church gets seduced, and distracted: instead of loving Christ, the church loves the church and it all goes south in a hurry. The Bridegroom is left waiting at the altar, and the church is hurried off by an interloper, waving a fun-house mirror before her, telling her to eye herself and her garments. "How beautiful you are, my queen!" (See e.g. Rev 18:7's "I sit a queen!")
And what is the Christ that comes out of this? A Christ that doesn't care about one's neighbor, or the poor, or the sick or weak or imprisoned, but wants to scour universities for "good building material". A Christ who is selective with scripture; it's no longer "every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" but only those words which prop up a hermeneutic or teaching. A Christ that elevates fallen men. A Christ that judges everyone else as deficient. A Christ that doesn't care about "right and wrong", i.e. righteousness. I could go on, obviously.
The Christ that is the "centrality and universality" of this church-fixated world is not the Jesus of Nazareth of Whom Moses and the prophets wrote, and to Whom Peter and Paul and James and John were discipled. It's not the Christ Whom the Father sent, but rather the Christ whom the self-obsessed church manufactures to justify herself.
One leader who I respect today is George Washington. Washington was surrounded by brilliant and able men: Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, etc. but he wasn't threatened by them. He was secure, not in his position but in his person. He never cared about position, either his or others'. As a result, men like Hamilton were able to flourish, and use their powers of rhetoric and persuasion, because they didn't have to constantly look over their shoulders at the Commander in Chief.
But WL was abetted by a system. The man is gone but the system remains. It would be good to expose it for what it is. You know, fallen human culture and fallen spirits are not that far apart - they're arguably quite related. One is motivated by the other, and the other takes refuge in the one, and is manifested through it.
Since I have seen these fallen characteristics in both the Recovery and Brethrenism, I am under the belief that religious (think Laodicean) pride, manifested in exclusivism and elitism, produces basically insecure leaders who must be the recipient of all the glory the system provides. I personally have witnessed this on the local, regional, and national level, and that is why I believe this disease is systemic and inherent to the system.
I remember years ago a family counselor explained to me that unhealthy self-esteem can manifest itself either as depression or egotistical behavior. This surprised me at the time, since I was more familiar with the "down" side of unhealthy self-esteem, but equally unhealthy were those with a bully-nature, glory-possessed, and megalomanic personalities.
One of the common complaints I have heard working with LC leaders is their obsession with having all the ideas. Since they are supposedly next in line to the throne of God, it must always be so. This goes two ways. Whether their idea is good or worthless, all must promote it unquestioningly, and continually sing its praises. But, should the idea of an underling be accepted, THE MAN will always steal it and make it his own, and like before, all must promote it unquestioningly, and continually sing its praises.
That is why I have concluded that at the root of all the so-called "storms" or quarantines, or whatever language is used to spin them, is the fallen nature of talented egotistical men to eliminate potential rivals who might share their glory. Though not a church leader, apparently G. Dubya escaped these pitfalls, and the country was blessed for it. When James and John exhibited these traits among the early disciples, Jesus was able to nip it in the bud, and the church has been blessed for it.
With all their great learning and abundant talents, ministers like Darby, Lee, and Chu have not learned these same lessons. In their early days, other gifted men surrounded the movements and flourished, but eventually one-by-one they were driven out as potential rivals due to their "independent" thinking, and those sycophants who remained also rose to preeminence in the program.
Ricky,P
02-11-2016, 11:43 AM
www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf
"Although there are proper reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010
Thanks to open forums like this one local church members are far less uniformed and the truth is far less suppressed. It's probably the younger more techy members that have made their way to this forum and that's a good thing because the older ones are probably far too brainwashed by Lee and the blended bros to see what's going on out here in the real world.
TLFisher
02-11-2016, 01:48 PM
Can someone tell me about the history of LSM? If possible I would like to know when the original Stream Publishers became LSM.
Thanks
By all indications, the transition from The Stream Publishers to Living Stream Ministry more or less coincided with the Daystar collapse.
NewManLiving
02-11-2016, 02:18 PM
Thanks to open forums like this one local church members are far less uniformed and the truth is far less suppressed. It's probably the younger more techy members that have made their way to this forum and that's a good thing because the older ones are probably far too brainwashed by Lee and the blended bros to see what's going on out here in the real world.
And that is what baffles me. Since the major part of their recruitment is focused on smart, young, college students; it should be highly probable that these individuals would Google "Witness Lee", "Local Church", "Christians on Campus"... and do some research. I know that would be the first thing I would do. The LSM philosophy may focus more on a certain type of person that is somewhat insecure to begin with. Otherwise, they would not be able to retain anyone. These people should be smart enough to realize they are getting themselves into an authoritative system: The ministry being more important than the headship of Christ.
By all indications, the transition from The Stream Publishers to Living Stream Ministry more or less coincided with the Daystar collapse.
Great observation!
Time wise, it was the mid-70's, about the same time W. Lee moved out of Los Angeles, hoping for a fresh start in Anaheim, Orange County.
TLFisher
02-11-2016, 06:58 PM
And that is what baffles me. Since the major part of their recruitment is focused on smart, young, college students; it should be highly probable that these individuals would Google "Witness Lee", "Local Church", "Christians on Campus"... and do some research. I know that would be the first thing I would do.
From what I have heard firsthand and from others are the LC brothers stressing against the internet. Truth is the system the LC/LSM is in wants to be the ones controlling the flow of information instead of reacting to it.
NewManLiving
02-11-2016, 07:23 PM
But that is what puzzles me. These are new recruits. They are not familiar with their new environment and therefore not yet sold on the LSM bill of goods. If someone told me not to go on the internet because it is "negative", that would immediately raise red flags. Why should any group be afraid of the Internet unless they are hiding something. I would like to think that young college students have at least a little common sense.
How about "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on ANYTHING ELSE we become a cult".
THE MINISTRY
THE MOTA
GOD's ORACLE
THE HIGH PEAK TRUTHS
I need to add a few more things.
EVANGLICAL FAITH
TONGUES AND MIRICLES HAVE STOPPED
ALL MUST SPEAK IN TONGUES
BELIEVER's BAPTISM
ONCE SAVE ALWAYS SAVED
VERBAL INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE
BAPTISM BY IMMERSION ONLY
WALKING THE ISLE IN PROFESSION OF FAITH
KJV ONLY
MARY THE MOTHER OF CHRIST
No thanks to satan the list is probably endless.
There's a hymn that says, "The Bride eyes not her garments/but her dear Bridegroom's face." Church leaders unfortunately specialize in eyeing our garments, and comparing them to those of everyone else. Unbalanced subjectivity, myopathy, bias (self-selection), judgmentalism, and self-justification then become the garments with which we drape ourselves.
I don't know how many times I heard young females blurt out emotionally in meeting that we should "love the church". Christ loved the church; so should we, right? Wrong. Christ loved the church and the church should love Christ.
Instead the church gets seduced, and distracted: instead of loving Christ, the church loves the church and it all goes south in a hurry. The Bridegroom is left waiting at the altar, and the church is hurried off by an interloper, waving a fun-house mirror before her, telling her to eye herself and her garments. "How beautiful you are, my queen!" (See e.g. Rev 18:7's "I sit a queen!")
And what is the Christ that comes out of this? A Christ that doesn't care about one's neighbor, or the poor, or the sick or weak or imprisoned, but wants to scour universities for "good building material". A Christ who is selective with scripture; it's no longer "every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" but only those words which prop up a hermeneutic or teaching. A Christ that elevates fallen men. A Christ that judges everyone else as deficient. A Christ that doesn't care about "right and wrong", i.e. righteousness. I could go on, obviously.
The Christ that is the "centrality and universality" of this church-fixated world is not the Jesus of Nazareth of Whom Moses and the prophets wrote, and to Whom Peter and Paul and James and John were discipled. It's not the Christ Whom the Father sent, but rather the Christ whom the self-obsessed church manufactures to justify herself.
Well said, Aron. Lord Jesus, you are all and in all! Help us to keep our eyes on you, and point others to you.
But that is what puzzles me. These are new recruits. They are not familiar with their new environment and therefore not yet sold on the LSM bill of goods. If someone told me not to go on the internet because it is "negative", that would immediately raise red flags. Why should any group be afraid of the Internet unless they are hiding something. I would like to think that young college students have at least a little common sense.And just maybe that is the reason that there is the Christians on Campus group. They keep the new ones at a distance from he mother ship until they think they are able to just take the nonsense and go along quietly.
TLFisher
02-12-2016, 01:06 PM
But that is what puzzles me. These are new recruits. They are not familiar with their new environment and therefore not yet sold on the LSM bill of goods. If someone told me not to go on the internet because it is "negative", that would immediately raise red flags. Why should any group be afraid of the Internet unless they are hiding something. I would like to think that young college students have at least a little common sense.
I believe they target 17-18 year old because they're a bit more gullible than a 21-22 year old.
As to the term negative, it's all relative. Content LSM/LC want to hide isn't necessarily rumors and lies, but a history they aren't willing to own up to.
NewManLiving
02-12-2016, 02:59 PM
The LSM dictionary defines anyone who disagrees with them an opposer. Synonyms include: negative, death, self... These young ones are conditioned to believe this and unfortunately, over time, loose the ability to discern for themselves. I think we can all testify to this. When we left and sadly even until now, many former members are leary to speak the truth concerning the LSM organization because these old tapes keep playing. It becomes difficult to tell the counterfeit from the reality. At least for some of us, we came in at a time when you were encouraged to experience Christ and bring your share to the meetings to edify others. You were free to read books by others, spend personal time with the Lord and could speak freely about these experiences in the meetings with a resounding Amen. But more importantly when we called on the Lord it was out of a pure heart; when we pray-read we were filled with the Holy Spirit. So when things began to shift from Spirit to Flesh, the true discernment coming from a healthy spirit and a purified intellect made us uncomfortable.
From watching some of the videos today, I do not see this. Young members are quickly subdued and indoctrinated. Stand on the chairs and call on the Lord three times to get things frenzied up a bit; Stand in line and hope the people in front of you don't say what you are going to say because there is only so much anyone can say when you all have to read the same thing. Of course you can always scream out the Lord's name until the bell goes off.... I have yet to see any positive fruit and genuine growth in Life produced by this method. It always looks so scripted. I keep looking though, hoping that something will change. May the Lord have mercy. Many of the LC saints do love the Lord and have a deep personal relationship with Him, even if they have to keep it a secret for fear of being labeled independent, spiritual, individualistic etc.. Yet more negatives out of the LSM playbook
UntoHim
02-12-2016, 04:03 PM
The Christ that is the "centrality and universality" of this church-fixated world is not the Jesus of Nazareth of Whom Moses and the prophets wrote, and to Whom Peter and Paul and James and John were discipled. It's not the Christ Whom the Father sent, but rather the Christ whom the self-obsessed church manufactures to justify herself.
This really encapsulates much of went wrong in the Local Church of Witness Lee. Of course there is so much that could be said in this regard, and it would be impossible in just one post, but aron has hit upon the heart of the matter, I believe.
Ironically, Lee's messages on "the Centrality and Universality of Christ" (many from the Collosians Training as I recall) were among the best he ever spoke. I still vividly recall one of those particular messages, now over 30 years ago. The vision of such a Christ was glorious and wonderful. Such teachings focused all our attention on our Lord Jesus, and any thought of "eyeing our own garment" seemed ridiculous.
So how did the centrality and universality of Christ become the centrality and universality of the church? How did the biblical "CHRIST and the church" become "christ and THE CHURCH? How did the biblical "and God created man of the dust of the ground" become "Oh I'm a Man, I’m the center and the meaning of the universe"? No, it did not happen over night. Yet there were warnings to us from without and from within. After decades of these warnings we all found out. God will not be mocked. God will not share his glory with another, not even the Bride, no matter how lovely her garment.
And just maybe that is the reason that there is the Christians on Campus group. They keep the new ones at a distance from he mother ship until they think they are able to just take the nonsense and go along quietly.Nothing initially about the church or the ministry. "We're just simple lovers of Jesus, who choose to meet on the ground of oneness."
Then, groom the newbies with all the coded language. "There are terrible people out there, opposers who persecute the church which Christ purchased with His own blood. Hard to believe anyone could be negative against anything so wonderful as this."
The LSM dictionary defines anyone who disagrees with them an opposer. Synonyms include: negative, death, self... These young ones are conditioned to believe this and unfortunately, over time, loose the ability to discern for themselves. I think we can all testify to this. When we left and sadly even until now, many former members are leary to speak the truth concerning the LSM organization because these old tapes keep playing. It becomes difficult to tell the counterfeit from the reality.
I heard negative things right away. There recently had been a big storm, or rebellion, and many had left, and the remaining ones were subdued, and dispirited. But I was on honyemoon in the LC. I couldn't imagine why anyone would leave something so wonderful. I mean, here we all meet as one, here we have Christ as life, here are all the riches, and we've given up our search! Right?!?From watching some of the videos today, I do not see this. Young members are quickly subdued and indoctrinated. ... I have yet to see any positive fruit and genuine growth in Life produced by this method. It always looks so scripted.
It is always amazing, to see this. It is so blatant, and yet so successful. At best they are kept in a kind of perpetual kindergarden, unable to grow. Just keep reading the same script. See Spot run.
But they could be out playing Beer Pong, or huffing chemicals in the garage, so let them be. Maybe some of them will wake up, some day. You never know. God can do anything.
TLFisher
02-13-2016, 11:05 AM
Nothing initially about the church or the ministry. "We're just simple lovers of Jesus, who choose to meet on the ground of oneness."
There's a lot missing from the statement. Though partially correct, they're omitting stating "the ministry is indispensable to our faith". There is a ground of oneness, but it's not what they want you to think. The ground of oneness is not Jesus Christ, but rather Living Stream Ministry publications.
If the ground of oneness is truly Jesus Christ, drop the Living Stream publications. Drop bashing of Christians outside the LSM fellowship. Drop referring to Christian not meeting with LSM churches as meeting in denominations.
UntoHim
02-14-2016, 09:13 PM
Two of my posts on Larry Chi book - 2009
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=6421&postcount=3
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=6425&postcount=7
History of Witness Lee and the Local Churches
Larry Chi
On China Mainland Period
The testimony of the local churches was initiated by Watchman Nee in China during the 1920’s. At that time he attracted many people from different Christian denominations to switch over to follow the Lord and seek truth and salvation with him. With the blessing of the Lord many young people also joined in. They devoted all their life for the testimony of the church as well as for the gospel. Brother Nee was really a faithful servant of the Lord. He dispensed much resource and money for the church work, not only money donated by many church members but also his own money. He also devoted all his life and his effort to work for the Lord. He has never collected any registration fees or tuitions from the members, nor has he tried to sell any books or handouts to the members. He taught them all he knew and he worked very hard for the church.
He did not have much time to work for the Lord. For instance, he has taught the first class (training) for six months; he only started the second class for a period of time, but he has established a solid foundation for the testimony of the Lord. In 1939 there was a civil war in China and the mainland was taken over by the Communist government and brother Nee was arrested and put in jail because of his work for the church and finally he died after 20 years in confinement. Brother Nee had established a sound example for the followers and seeds he planted propagated and sprouted up in China as well as in many places all over the world. It is said there might be thirty to fifty million followers on the China mainland today of a work that began with Mr. Nee. The exact number nobody can tell. Only the Lord knows and in due time He will let us know how many there are.
We can tell that the Lord carried out the local church work thru many many people who followed Him. It is not any particular individual who can claim all the credit. For those people who faithfully serve the Lord, all the members will be able to see that. If there is any impostor or corrupted members who did inferior work then their true colors will be exposed sooner or later.
Section 2
The Full Period in Taiwan
The first period from 1938-65
As early as 1938 and even before that, a small group of brothers already started to have fellowship in Taipei. Bro Liu Kiang Yung___ was the first to start to serve full time. At that time he was still single, but he became a full time coworker. Bro Nee once went to Taipei in 1938. It is hard to tell if bro Liu went to Taipei from __or not. Back in spring of 1938 there were about 20 some members who got together in Taipei. At that time they assembled in a Japanese-style house on Shanghai Road in Taipei. Because it was a Japanses-style house the house had tatami, so the church members had to take their shoes off and sit on the floor. Many church members who came from the China mainland were not accustomed to this style, so they felt a little uncomfortable at the beginning. Actually, that house was donated by brother Nee and was used for assembly as well as for a lodging facility for the coworkers and church members who went to Taiwan.
After the middle of 1948 the political and military situation on the mainland of China changed rapidly. Many church members followed their schools, universities, government agencies, or the military to move over to Taiwan. As a result, many of these church members were spread out to all different parts of the island, to many different cities and towns. They went as far north as ____? Following th railroad. To the south of Gausheng? In September of the same year, ___and his family arrived to join the church assembly in Taipei. In November of the sam year ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___six brothers and their families went to Taipei from Shanghai on the same ship. Because of that the Taipei assembly increased rapidly to over 50 people. Also in 1948 ___went to Gaushen because of his job assignment? and teamed up with___?? married Dec 25 in Taipei. The church members took advantage of the new year holidays and they printed out many fliers, then went out into the busy streets to spread the gospel. They went to different sections of the city including the new part for the gospel and attracted many new members. In the spring of 1949, ____came to Taipei from the mainland and joined the congregation. At that time there were 150 people who had joined the congregation and the original Japanese house was not big enough for the congregation so often people had had to assemble in different places and in different assemblies. At that time, there were two members who were overseas Chinese from the Phiippines___ and bro ___. They went to buy a piece of propert, sect 2. A place to put a wooden struct that could accommodate 350 people. Afterwards that building was not big enough.and was rebuilt and expanded into a wooden structure that would accommodate 800 people. This is the current assembly hall number one located on Tien San Ban Liu.
Nee and Lee Come to Visit Taipei
At the beginning of 1949 brother Nee came to Taipei for the second time with the request of fellow members he has established five members___ ____ ____ _____ ____ to become the Taipei congregation elders. Three of these brothers worked for the church in Taipei on a full-time basis. In April of 1949 Mr. Lee and his family went to Taipei from China mainland. At that time he was very depressed. All the members of the congregation encouraged him from different directions and also coworkers took him to visit many members in the southern part of Taiwan.
At that time there were congregations established in many cities around the north –south railroad, such as ___ ___ ____ ____ ___ _____. His visits to these places helped him to recover from his depression. He became fully charged and ready to go again. Not much later, the construction of the number one assembly hall was completed. After a discussion anong fellow members it was decided to call the first all-Taiwan special congregation in Taipei on August 1, 1949. There were over 300 members who participated in this gathering. Among them there were about 70 coming from the central and southern part of Taiwan . There were about 30-40 people from denominations attending. And about 200 members coming from greater Taipei area. All these members were there long before Mr. Lee arrived in Taiwan. There were also approximately 150-200 members who did not make it to the special gathering. At that time there were about 500 members across the different parts of Taiwan. This is the very first period of church establishment and growth in Taiwan. This rapid growth of church work and the spread of the gospel brought more and more people to join the congregation. The work load increased at the same time. The Lord called many young people to come join the church and to serve. Indeed there were many young people, some of them having just graduated from college, while some were still in college. These young people decided to drop whatever they were doing to come work for the Lord. Because there were a lot of new people coming into the church, there was the need to have a full-time training. At that time many church members decided to ask Mr. Lee to take responsibility for the training exercise. . At that time there were about 100 church members, including some young people leaders from various parts of Taiwan who joined the training class. The training was quite successful. All the people who participated in the training became Mr. Lee’s special disciples. Also, because of this experience Mr. Lee established absolute authority over the people who had come to the training. Since many of them were leaders at different assemblies in various cities and towns in Taiwan, he could call on them to carry out many programs and projects. Due to this kind of cohesiveness, there was a period of very good cooperation among church members.
Although Taiwan is an island surrounded by ocean, it is a very open society, and the church members had the opportunity to communicate and have fellowship with other believers who were meeting in the denominations. And, many young people discovered that there are other groups who also work for the Lord. Their ideas were a little different from what they heard from their own church and leaders. So, many of them went to Mr. Lee and asked for a chance to have some fellowship and communication with other groups. With this repeated request, brother Lee agreed to invite brother Sparks from the UK to come to Taiwan to have a couple of special meetings. Through these special meetings, many church members in Taiwan learned many different teachings and different ideas and started to have questionings about Mr. Lee’s absolute authority. According to brother Lee, his greatest regret was to ask Mr. Sparks to come to Taiwan. Indeed, after Sparks’ visit, some of the coworkers started to have questions and started to split from the 100% followers of Mr. Lee.
As the church work went thru rapid expansion, the financial need and supply also had a big change. In the beginning, the congregation had fewer members and many of them didn’t have high paying jobs, so the church finances were rather difficult. But the increase with church members plus the whole economy in Taiwan had a big improvement and people had much better, high-paying jobs so the contribution to the church increased quite a bit.
Among the church members, it was a mostly informal and non-working procedure in handling financials. For instance, the full-time coworkers were told to handle themselves before the Lord according to their own conscience. Really there was nobody taking care of their living, but their assignment and place to work was assigned by chief coworkers. Whatever their assignment was, they had to accept, 100%. No arguments. And contributions from the donations coming in to the church for the work of the Lord was all collected under a special account and managed by the chief coworkers.
After many years of operation this kind of formal arrangement created some difficulties. For instance, many of the coworkers had a life that was very spartan and close to difficult. But the chief coworkers, because they had the authority to use the church funds, made some expenditures that were questionable.
Witness Lee Business Failures Disrupt the Church
Around 1959 Mr. Lee had some investment failures and he lost a great deal of money. This brought the first financial crisis to the church. All the donations and contributions from the church members were used, and still the church owed people a large amount of money. Because of this situation, brother Lee forced the elders to sell a piece of land belonging to the church in order to pay the debt. That piece of land was located on 19 East Road, section 4, and had been bought by the church to build a training center and a new assembly building. Because of that many coworkers and church members were especially unhappy about this fiasco. Mr. Lee knew this was something that he did wrong and because of that he went to the United States and stayed on the west coast.
After Mr. Lee left Taiwan, the church coworkers formed two sides. One side was Mr. Lee’s strong followers, while the other group had questions about some of Mr. Lee’s Lee’s activities. Those two groups had a strong difference of opinion, which greatly impacted the church activities and made much of the church work difficult to carry out. Finally, some of the coworkers who were Lee followers asked Mr. Lee to come back to Taiwan to resolve differences. In the summer of 1969. Lee came back to Taipei. He decided to get rid of those coworkers who disagreed with him. Consequently, there were 1000’s of people who left the congregation. At that time almost 30 % of the regular members left, a most serious situation was that about 80-90% of the young members who were college students left the church. This was a very bad example for the church in Taipei to have this type of cleansing massacre and also to establish factionism within the church. Moreover, there was clearly some tendency to promote individualism and worship of a certain idol.
There was another incident that happened toward the end of the 1950’s that involved Hong Kong, the Philippines, Singapore, and Malaysia. Mr. Lee and some of the overseas coworkers developed some serious differences because the coworkers could not take Mr. Lee’s absolute authority. Everything was dictated by Mr. Lee, and he would not take any input from anybody. In addition some of the well-to-do church members were very unhappy about his handling of the financial matters. This was due to the fact that a lot of the money had been contributed by these church members, and Mr. Lee would handle the finances according to his own viewpoint. The overseas coworkers did not feel they could trust him anymore. Because of the differences they split up. Originally, the Philippines were very important for Mr. Lee because there were several well-to-do church members there who supported the church financially for a long time. So in 1960 the Manila church decided to sever relationships with Mr. Lee totally.
When Mr.Lee left Taiwan to the U.S. in 1960, it was not really that he went there to open up new frontier. Rather, it was because of his own personal failure in Taiwan that he escaped to the U.S. As he left Taiwan, the church work in Taiwan was in serious disarray. Also the Philippines work was split off. This was the first period of our history.
Second Period 1965-75
During the period that Mr. Lee left Taiwan beginning in 1960 till he came back to Taiwan in 1965 to carry out his cleansing exercise, the church work in Taiwan went through a very difficult time. Because of that, there was a lack of cooperation between the coworkers. However, ___ and ____were going to try their best to keep the church going. After the 1965 massacre ___ ____and ____ stayed with the church and tried their best to rebuild it. With the blessing of the Lord and the effort of the sweet brothers’ leadership, over a two or three year period the church membership grew a lot.
One summer in the Taipei area a camp was held and about a thousand young people came together. There were many children who came to join various activities at the camp as well. The church in different localities in Taiwan went through a rapid recovery period. Therefore, Mr. Lee set up a special international gathering in Taipei in 1968 and invited people from all over the Taiwan area to come to attend, as well as about 160 members from the U.S. and Canada, and another 100 or so from various Southeast Asia regions, Japan, and Europe.
The attendees at the gathering were very impressed to see how the members in Taiwan worked together to establish this beautiful picture and to increase the church membership, so they learned the practice carried out in Taiwan and went back to their own area and became the leaders and the backbone of their church in their own areas.
In the period of the late 60’s and early 70’s there was a period of recovery and growth of the church in Taipei. We can take a look at the reasons why there was such a successful growth.
1)At that time the leaders of the church work ___ ____ and ____ were not the strong leader type. In other words, they did not dictate. They worked together. They were not selfish. They did not have the desire to hold power in their hands. So under their leadership the coworkers worked together very smoothly and respected each other so that the work could be carried out.
2) there was an atmosphere of freedom within the church. Everyone had the right to speak out. They could ask questions and express their feelings. The elders and coworkers sometimes led the members to express themselves. So the fellowship among the members was open and very much a free-flow. There was no central authority figure to dictate anything. Neither was there anyone who was there to give the one and only teaching to all the members. Consequently, during the assembly there was a lot of fresh air blowing through the church.
3) The coworkers had the freedom to follow their interests and their strength. If someone was good at the gospel, then he would pursue in that area; if someone was good at working with the children, then he would be given opportunity to do that kind of work. If someone was good at taking care of the sick then he will be assigned to a hospital to work with sick people. Due to these factors, all the church members and coworkers had the chance to fulfill their interest and to do their best in the area where they have their strengths. People were more than happy to do their work, since they were not following orders from any dictators. They enjoyed having the chance serve the Lord.
4) All the churches in Taiwan started to push the family fellowship and leaders asked the church members to do whatever they could do to promote it. In the Taipei church ___ ___ ___ were the ones who were the strongest promoters of this exercise. In 1975 the Taipei church had 22 congregations, 77 assemblies, and over 200 family fellowship groups with over 1000 members. The family fellowship members carried out many fundamental gospel works. They had to have some basic training as a help to take care of the children, to teach them the hymns, and to encourage them to read their Bibles. There were many such activities among family members. At that time I was just married and my residence was within #17 assembly under #3 congregation. I was not a leader nor did I have any responsibility for the assembly fellowship. The brothers did invite me to participate in some of the trainings. There was no tuition to be paid and there was no need to buy any materials or handouts. All the people who participated were on a volunteer basis. People participated not because of any personal gain – they were not for money or fame. They were just there to serve the church, to serve the Lord. Everybody worked together just like a big happy family.
5) The remaining coworkers within the church tried very hard to rebuild the youth and children congregation because in 1965 we were massacred. The most damaged part of the church was the college and youth branch. Coworkers that were driven away included the youth leaders. There was a big loss to the church. In Taipei,___ and Tainan the youth work almost became a vacuum. Some of the people who served in small villages and in small towns were asked to go to Taipei, Tainan, and ___ to rebuild. Supposedly, they were very effective. Within a very short period of time they achieved something really amazing. For instance, in 1965 __ was assigned from __ to ___. When he first went over there with ___ and ___ they were looked at by some of the local young members as the running dogs after Mr. Lee. They were throwing eggs and tomatoes on them and yelling and screaming at them. The original youth leader ___was gone. But after ___ loving and patience and care, explaining what they were going to do, just like a miracle within a year members within __University built up from almost nothing to about 150, and the youth congregation in ____reached a new high Afterwards, br___ was assigned back to #3 assembly in Taipei and ___ was assigned to ___ to continue the task.
In another case, in the city of___there was a collection of colleges and universities in central part of Taiwan. ___worked in ___ for many years and he had a good following from the youth and college students in ___ but bec he left the church a lot of college students all disappeared with him. At that time ___ was assigned to __from ___ He was responsible for the church work in central Taiwan. ___ was responsible to serve the colleges and universities there. Both of them worked hard day and night with tender loving care and they rebuilt the ___church congregation.
In the 1965 massacre the third congregation under the Taipei church suffered very severe damage. There are two reasons for this.
1) one of the persons who was fired,___, was well-respected by all the church members young and old. His knowledge and his work ethic were very much appreciated. The saints were very angry to see what was meted out to him. So, many followed him to leave the church. 2) In the meantime there was a cult movement going on in Taipei that was promoted by a person named ___. It was very popular. Some of the church members who were very anxious to follow the gospel but did not have a good understanding of the truth were fooled by this cult movement and left the church to join that crowd. At that time,__was the only senior member who helped out in the hall 3 congregation. After he worked for a period of time and made very little progress he asked for help. He invited __ and ___. to come from Tainan to Taipei to help him work at meeting hall #3. With the three of them working together, hall 3 started to recover. Within a couple of years they made big progress. During the international special gathering in 1968, the Sunday morning gathering at hall 3 usually had more than 400 people attending. It was so full they had to add seats to the hallway. The youth fellowship usually had to be held in three separate locations - at assemblies 18, 19, and at meeting hall #3. Usually more than 350 people attended. Among them there were about 40-50 high school students, 150 junior high students and another 600-700 children gathered to have meetings in ten different locations. Brother fellowship and sister fellowship in Taiwan Normal University and National Taiwan University were established in 1967, as well.
___ ____ ____ ___ and many other brothers all came to join the church during this period of time. The three examples of congregations that were mentioned above in Tainan, Taichung, and Taipei were only examples of the rebuilding of the churches that took place. The rebuilding was a very broad movement It not only covered the colleges and universities, it was everywhere. Many students who lived on campus, and the teachers, the faculty, all joined in for the movement. The rebuilding not only existed on campus, but also in society in general. All participated in this effort. The coworkers provided proper training and guidance to the young people and showed them how to work with high school students and junior high children. The whole church environment was just like a big happy family. The older people took care of the young people and there was love and care for each other with no generation gap whatsoever. The older ones really loved the younger ones and the younger ones all respected the elders. There was nobody looking down on the younger people. And the younger people did not look at the older people as outdated or stubborn. All the people were working within the church. There was no concept of position or ranking. There was nobody playing tricks on anybody. So the church was really the witness of the kingdom of God. Everybody got a chance to fulfill or receive what he was looking for. Everyone had the blessing from the Lord. Simply put, during that time the coworkers working at Hall 3 in Taipei were___and his wife and ___. In addition, there was ___ ____ ____ ________ __. They all contributed heavily to the rebuilding and expansion of the #3 congregation. In addition to these coworkers, there were many, many other church members who all loved the Lord and the church and they all contributed their fair share of the work. There was no way we could give all the credit for the rebuilding and expansion to any one or two 8 brothers, or to any other church member. That is just not fair. Here we are only talking about one congregation. In looking at all the churches all over Taiwan, their expansion and growth could not be attributed to any individual. We could only give this glory to the Lord. This is his work, which has been accomplished under His blessing.
In the early 1960’s up to 1965 many churches in Southeast Asia drifted away from Taiwan, but after 1968 we started to re-connect with some of the churches in Taiwan to re-establish the fellowship. Many of them sent letters to Taiwan to ask some of the coworkers to go there to help them. Because of this, ___ ____ often went to Japan, Korea, and ___ later on became stationed in Japan on a long-term basis. He is still there as of today. ___ was sent to Malaysia and ___was sent to Indonesia and afterwards ___ __ went to Manila, and ____went to Thailand, and in addition there were other full-time coworkers or church members in various parts of Southeast Asia who came to Taiwan to join some of the church congregations to work as interns. They include ___ ___ from Indonesia and ___from the Philippines.
Glorious Atmosphere Did Not Last Long
Unfortunately the glorious atmosphere did not last very long. There was a big change in 1970. In the summer of 1970 there was a special international gathering in Los Angeles. There were about 100 members who came to join the gathering from the Far East, with about two-thirds of them coming from Taiwan. Most of them were the leading coworkers from various churches in Taiwan. In that special gathering, Mr. Lee used strong derogatory language to insult and degrade coworkers from Taiwan. He called them outdated and said all the churches from the Far East were outdated. There were two reasons for him to do so. 1) He wanted to use the free spirit and animated style of the American church members to shake up the members from the east. He wanted the Far East members to believe that the yelling, screaming and jumping up and down by the American church members was an expression that showed that the Holy Spirit had entered into them. He forced the Far East members to accept that they were outdated and that they ought to be ashamed. He wanted to re-establish his absolute authority and power over them. 2) He understood that the church members from the East were passive and submissive. If he could show the church members of the West that he could overpower the well-trained senior church members from the East he could establish his power and authority over the church members in the West also.
What Lee did in his special gathering created two serious consequences. 1) After this special international gathering, the church members went back to Taiwan and tried very hard to transplant what they saw in the U. S. into Taiwan and thus created much conflict and confusion for quite a while. Many traditional church members in Taiwan could not stand the yelling and screaming in the meetings and started to drift away. Many neighbors next to the church could not stand the noise either and were thus violated. This destroyed the good image the church had established with the general public over the years. There were many arguments and conflicts with the outside community. As a result of all the conflict and confusion, there was a great negative impact on the church work.
-
Witness Lee Business Failures Disrupt the Church
Around 1959 Mr. Lee had some investment failures and he lost a great deal of money. This brought the first financial crisis to the church.
I think Mr. Lee was trying to follow Watchman Nee in speculative ventures; Nee had done this and succeeded, right? So this kind of business experience verified that Mr. Nee was "God's special anointed" and "the hand of God was with him" in commercial ventures. Mr. Lee then tried the same and flopped.
Then, interestingly, when Lee flopped it was the church's problem, not his! Lee's business failure brought financial crisis to the church, not to Lee.
Nice gig if you can get it. If you win, you win, and if you lose, Bailout Central steps in and covers the loss. So why not gamble? That was the bait dangling in front of Witness Lee and he took it.
Nice gig if you can get it. If you win, you win, and if you lose, Bailout Central steps in and covers the loss. So why not gamble? That was the bait dangling in front of Witness Lee and he took it.
Sounds no different than the politicians on Wall Street. :hysterical:
Sounds no different than the politicians on Wall Street.It's also nice to have a church in your pocket. Likewise, if you get caught with your hand in a vise, the church deems you Too Big To Fail and comes to your financial rescue. Certainly this was the case with Lee & Fam, on numerous occasions. If anyone loses his money, bad for him. If Lee loses money, bad for the church.
And the real rub is that the ones who knew what Lee did, back in Taipei, sat by quietly when he drummed up the USA saints for $$ for Daystar. They knew exactly what was going on and they said nothing. What a shame.
UntoHim
02-16-2016, 09:03 AM
And the real rub is that the ones who knew what Lee did, back in Taipei, sat by quietly when he drummed up the USA saints for $$ for Daystar. They knew exactly what was going on and they said nothing. What a shame.
Too bad the Internet wasn't around back in the 1960s/70s for this Larry Chi to inform us gullible Americans about the things Witness Lee had already pulled back in the Far East. Of course it would have taken tremendous courage to blow the whistle on Lee at that point, for he had already obtained near-idol status among the earliest brothers meeting in LA. Of course there was the language barrier, but there were plenty of English speaking brothers in Taiwan who could of translated for him.
I would love to get a hold of the entire book that he supposedly wrote. There is at least one forum member who could translate it for us. Maybe Indiana could find out how we could obtain a copy.
-
Too bad the Internet wasn't around back in the 1960s/70s for this Larry Chi to inform us gullible Americans about the things Witness Lee had already pulled back in the Far East.
I would love to get a hold of the entire book that he supposedly wrote.
-
So there is more to this book?
Any info on who this Larry Chi was?
How about a "fill-in-the-blank" version with names inserted. At least Anderson's ToG had fictitious names consistent throughout.
UntoHim
02-16-2016, 12:29 PM
Two posts by Indiana way back in 2009. I don't remember these or the Larry Chi letter. I must of been out sick that day!
http://www.twww.twoturmoils.com/TaipeiHistory.pdf
Larry Chi wrote a book that included the history of the church in Taipei and some other churches in Taiwan, after he left the recovery in 1985, (approximately). The book included a word about the young Titus Chu who had come onto the scene and became involved in giving training sessions, and became a concern to others, including Witness Lee. He is still a concern, whether or not it should be so great as "advertised".
The word about him is not included in the link above; but some very interesting historical accounts are given, including what is referred to as the 1965 massacre, which should relate to the 1966 so-called rebellion.
I can't confirm Larry Chi's accuracy, but he was certainly burdened to give his viewpoints, based on his experience and observation. He was in his 80s when I contacted him last in CA, both by phone and email, 5 years ago. He was referred to me by another dear Chinese brother in his 80s, from Sydney, who has since passed away. Both brothers were very much concerned for the developments that took place before them in the recovery under the leadership of Witness Lee.
I received two copies of the book from Larry Chi, written in Chinese. This might have been in 2003. Just part of it was on the history and I had that part alone translated by a Chinese professional. The rest of the book was on teachings, which I was not interested in at the time, and it would have been far to expensive to translate. The book is not online anywhere.
The two copies of the book are in the hands of two Chinese brothers, one of them being a brother who runs the concerned brothers site. He could confirm the word spoken about Titus, which for some reason is missing from the document I posted. I must have removed that speaking for some reason at one time, but haven't been able to retrieve the information.
The book had been circulated among Chinese to some degree, but no one had it translated into another language, particularly English. I wondered how this could be that the book was written in the eighties and I come along in the 2000s and have it translated. The price was high ($680) and the Chinese could have done it themselves for the sake of English readers, but for some reason no one did. I was told it was a cultural matter just as there was no warning from the Chinese about Daystar at its inception. Don Hardy had mentioned this that the Chinese saints, including Samuel Chang, could have given the history of WL's failed business ventures in the Far East and warned at least the elders in Southern CA who were cooperating with the hype for Daystar. Don said not a word of warning was given and that the brothers would have stopped him had they known.
What Ohio said about Titus likening WL to a father and giving him a pass at every turn is the heighth of cultural interference with God's moving and working in the Body in genuine display of spiritual authority and activity. In this matter I do not appreciate Titus Chu and the passivity of those under his influence in the GLA, as they do make strange bedfellows with those on LaPalma avenue in preserving the lies that prevail in the churches, and in keeping their Idol shiny, clean, and APPROVED - instead of smashing it into a thousand pieces.
TLFisher
02-16-2016, 01:00 PM
Any info on who this Larry Chi was?
Sounds as if he was an elder in the Church in Taipei. Perhaps until the 1980's.
TLFisher
02-16-2016, 01:05 PM
So there is more to this book?
I'm sure there is and likely to expose LSM more as a family business than as a non-profit business.
I had heard for years what happened in North America was just the tip of the iceberg and much more happened in Taiwan, Southeast Asia, and China.
Sounds no different than the politicians on Wall Street.Yes, I referenced the 2008 financial scandal of Wall Street deliberately.
The question for me, which can be arguably traced back to Genesis Chapter 6 is, "Who watches the Watchers?" Or, who judges the judge, when that person judges wrongly?
The USA political system was set up with "checks and balances", because it was known that men, even leaders, were fallible creatures. The Judicial System watches the Legislators, the Legislators appoint the Judiciary, the people vote for the Legislators etc.
In spiritual, Christian affairs, Jesus allowed for checks and balances: i.e. "tell it to the church"; as did Paul's "receiving accusations against elders". There should be covering of the inadequacy and frailty of human psyche and flesh; nonetheless there isn't and shouldn't be covering for evil. Darkness should be uprooted, exposed and expelled. The light shines and the darkness cannot overcome it. The church and its citizens should be holy, just as our God is holy.
Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed what they had done.
Obviously the system set up by Nee and Lee has no checks and balances, no accountability. The Leaders of the Lord's Recovery demand unquestioning submission, and absolute silence from the proletariat... Indiana's crime was his unwillingness to silence and hide what wasn't convenient to LSM's 'official' narrative. There was nepostism, favoritism, bias, cover-ups, financial impropriety, whitewashing (lies), political maneuverings, and more. So, his final recourse was to tell it to the church.
Indiana
02-17-2016, 04:32 PM
Yes, I referenced the 2008 financial scandal of Wall Street deliberately.
The question for me, which can be arguably traced back to Genesis Chapter 6 is, "Who watches the Watchers?" Or, who judges the judge, when that person judges wrongly?
The USA political system was set up with "checks and balances", because it was known that men, even leaders, were fallible creatures. The Judicial System watches the Legislators, the Legislators appoint the Judiciary, the people vote for the Legislators etc.
In spiritual, Christian affairs, Jesus allowed for checks and balances: i.e. "tell it to the church"; as did Paul's "receiving accusations against elders". There should be covering of the inadequacy and frailty of human psyche and flesh; nonetheless there isn't and shouldn't be covering for evil. Darkness should be uprooted, exposed and expelled. The light shines and the darkness cannot overcome it. The church and its citizens should be holy, just as our God is holy.
The Leaders of the Lord's Recovery demand unquestioning submission, and absolute silence from the proletariat... Indiana's crime was his unwillingness to silence and hide what wasn't convenient to LSM's 'official' narrative. There was nepostism, favoritism, bias, cover-ups, financial impropriety, whitewashing (lies), political maneuverings, and more. So, his final recourse was to tell it to the church.
Keep this post in mind saints. Aron encapsulates much of the whole of a huge problem, as many former and some current members know or have right to suspect.
The USA political system was set up with "checks and balances", because it was known that men, even leaders, were fallible creatures. The Judicial System watches the Legislators, the Legislators appoint the Judiciary, the people vote for the Legislators etc.Actually, there is at least one place where the checks and balances are relatively incomplete. That is the pinnacle of the judiciary. The top spots within the judiciary cannot be challenged other than by appeal back to the judiciary. While the administration can appoint, and the Senate confirm, no one can stand against them.
Well, not entirely. Technically, the judiciary cannot do anything that is not carried out by the administration. But no one has the gumption to test that. Therefore there is no check against the judiciary once it is in place. Only death changes things.
Now do not suppose that I think there is any very useful method of achieving that bit of balance. Simply refusing to execute the court's order is potentially whimsical. Alternately, Congress could step in and declare that aspects of a ruling are beyond the jurisdiction of the court. But what stops that from becoming another political whimsy? In short, there is no simply answer. The checks and balances ultimately have a stopping point unless one or two branches are willing to tell the third to take a hike. The President can veto. Congress can override a veto. Laws can be redrafted to fit within the parameters the court allows, but no one dares tell them that the vote of the people, through their representatives, overrides them.
I think the court would declare that the people would have to declare a constitutional convention to override them.
Effectively a veto-proof system for them.
I think there is a problem. But I've not seen a workable solution.
TLFisher
02-23-2016, 05:16 PM
Attached is a short one page article I found. I don't know if it's been posted already.
TLFisher
02-24-2016, 12:42 PM
Apparently the Taipei history Indiana went to the expense to have translated, someone took the translated content and had translated into Japanese:
http://www.geocities.jp/lee_localchurch/part1/taipei60s.html
Indiana
03-07-2016, 10:27 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/TheMinisteroftheAgeConceptToday.pdf
The vision Brother Lee started with was not the same as he introduced later in making dramatic changes similar to what Nee had done in China. At this point in each of their ministries their designation as a minister of the age was about to appear.
Tremendous reinforcement of this view of Nee and Lee came by their own church messages, special elders’ trainings, and by key people who supported them. Their measure of authority was strengthened and broadened greatly over the churches and the elders. Ready submission among the elders to the apostle figure was expected, in order to reach his goals.
Thus, the churches were in their hand and they were fixed on their apostle and his leading, dependent on him for their direction to a large extent.
The minister of the age concept did not exist until Nee introduced it, and, when the time was ripe, Lee resurrected it and ministered it to the churches, especially implanting it into the minds of attendees of intensified training meetings, regional and international.
Thus, the churches were in their hand and they were fixed on their apostle and his leading, dependent on him for their direction to a large extent.
"The practice of today’s Christianity is absolutely different in principle. Wherever there is a gifted person, a spiritual “giant” with a certain gift, that person will begin a work. He will build up a certain Christian organization or ministry, and possibly call it some worthy name. We are not opposing anyone, but we are against the wrong principles which damage the Body life."
When Witness Lee passed, the brothers loyal to him said, "The age of spiritual giants is over." Thus thyey declared that Lee was, indeed, one of these giants that damage the Body life. By their own words they indicted themselves, that they had created a monstrous "giant".
When Witness Lee passed, the brothers loyal to him said, "The age of spiritual giants is over." Thus they declared that Lee was, indeed, one of these giants that damage the Body life. By their own words they indicted themselves, that they had created a monstrous "giant".
When I got into trouble in the Local Church, I was accused of trying to be a spiritual giant and of seeking my own individual spirituality. I was told that the age of spiritual giants was over and that this was the age of the church, the "corporate Christ." But the truth is that there is no such thing as a spiritual giant. p.310
The LC faithful told JA that the age of spiritual giants was over, but when WL died, they tried to resurrect the theme. NOW, they said, the age of spiritual giants is over, now that WL has passed on.
Anyone who is called a spiritual giant, on this side of the Judgment Seat of Christ, is being delusional.
I honestly believe that there are spiritual giants. But that is not about great teaching. Or great skills at preaching. Or even evangelism. It is about great commitment to Christ and his people.
They are our servants, not our leaders in the way of the Pharisees.
But the day of "spiritual" giants in the manner of Lee is also not over. They proliferate. They promote themselves. They even call on the name of the Lord.
And one day they will call his name once again and learn that they were never authorized for such status.
Freedom
03-10-2016, 11:45 AM
"The practice of today’s Christianity is absolutely different in principle. Wherever there is a gifted person, a spiritual “giant” with a certain gift, that person will begin a work. He will build up a certain Christian organization or ministry, and possibly call it some worthy name. We are not opposing anyone, but we are against the wrong principles which damage the Body life."
From what I've seen in the LC, any amount of individual spirituality expressed could be potential characterized as seeking to be a "spiritual giant". It's just their way of discrediting those who don't fit the LC mold, namely their notion that all manifestations of spirituality must be "corporate".
I remember hearing a LCer wistfully say how all the outsiders coming to a Christians on Campus Bible study knew more of the Bible than they did. The average LCer might think that they know the Bible better than any other Christians. That knowledge, however, is mostly limited to all the key LC verse and passages that are frequently referenced.
What this all leads to is that anyone who has ventured outside the standard LC repertoire of material and cookie cutter fake spirituality is going to stand out noticeably. In an environment that desperately needs "normal Christians", such people could actually be a benefit to LCers. Thus, these people are threats to LC leaders. I personally have seen people come through the LC who would put most LC elders to shame in terms of what they know about the Bible. In the LC they can't have anyone interrupting the authority structure and it is conveniently to label such people as argumentative, independent, "not clear about God's economy", or whatever else is convenient. It's really all the same. Calling someone a spiritual giant is just another LC method to discredit someone, and the LC has many, many methods for doing so.
From what I've seen in the LC, any amount of individual spirituality expressed could be potential characterized as seeking to be a "spiritual giant". It's just their way of discrediting those who don't fit the LC mold, namely their notion that all manifestations of spirituality must be "corporate".
The LSM concept of building is one layer high like a wheat field, except for Lee who stands out like a transmission tower in the midst of the wheat field.
TLFisher
03-10-2016, 01:31 PM
What this all leads to is that anyone who has ventured outside the standard LC repertoire of material and cookie cutter fake spirituality is going to stand out noticeably. In an environment that desperately needs "normal Christians", such people could actually be a benefit to LCers. Thus, these people are threats to LC leaders. I personally have seen people come through the LC who would put most LC elders to shame in terms of what they know about the Bible. In the LC they can't have anyone interrupting the authority structure and it is conveniently to label such people as argumentative, independent, "not clear about God's economy", or whatever else is convenient. It's really all the same. Calling someone a spiritual giant is just another LC method to discredit someone, and the LC has many, many methods for doing so.
“Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
“And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’ Matthew 25:22-25
LC/LSM culture is just like in verse 25. There's so much rhetoric against multi-talented members, the message that's been promoted is we should all be the same one talented members. Even members who may be two talented members will be viewed as having the wrong concepts, individualistic, ambitious ,and as Freedom has said...whatever else is convenient.
Two lessons for sure a LSM-LCer may learn from a non-LSM Christian is love and grace.
I honestly believe that there are spiritual giants. But that is not about great teaching. Or great skills at preaching. Or even evangelism. It is about great commitment to Christ and his people.
They are our servants, not our leaders in the way of the Pharisees..
I don't think the term spiritual giants is incorrect, in the way you use it. The scripture says star differs from star in glory, and some have greater portion allotted from the Father.
But I used it in the way the OT uses it, pejoratively. The giants (Gk: grigori) were the unholy offspring of disobedient "sons of God" and the daughters of men. "There were giants on the earth in those days..." Gen 6:4.
And I think the Blendeds invited that application in characterizing one of their own as a giant. I remember distinctly hearing in 1997, that "The age of spiritual giants is over; it is the age of small potatos now", which directly implied that the recently deceased Witness Lee was the last of the spiritual giants.
In the NT there are characterizations of multitalented (5- or 10-talents, for example) servants, who are especially useful in the Master's hand. But "giants" in Biblical usage are those who raise themselves up against the Most High God. I'm surprised Lee and Company talked themselves into thinking this term could be applied positively, in the way they used it. That's why I said that they indicted themselves with their own words.
Freedom
03-10-2016, 05:52 PM
“Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
“And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’ Matthew 25:22-25
I like this parable because it emphasizes individual responsibility/accountability. This is a concept that is foreign to most LCers, because everything happens at the group level. In the LC, someone cannot trod far down the path of individual spiritual growth without being viewed suspiciously.
As I started to become concerned about the LC, there was an interesting phenomena that I noticed. The elders would regularly criticize the rank and file for failing to take initiative in an activity, to attend a conference/training or even something like preach the gospel. They usually call this being "lukewarm". At the same time, the minute anyone took any amount of initiative, they quickly got "corrected". It's no wonder that so many of the rank and file choose to live in the shadows, waiting until they are called upon to do anything at all. The elders know this and are frustrated by this, but at the same time they also know that they can't encourage anyone to take initiative. It's just one of those things that I'm sure drives members crazy and they probably can't ever put their finger on what the real problem is.
But I used it in the way the OT uses it, pejoratively. The giants (Gk: grigori) were the unholy offspring of disobedient "sons of God" and the daughters of men. "There were giants on the earth in those days..." Gen 6:4.I understand.
And in that sense, you make a point by a little equivocation. But unlike some equivocation, this one may actually be relevant since the only kind of giants that act in the manner of Lee and many other somewhat megalomaniacs are the ones that were unholy offspring. So maybe it is they who misused the word to imply something that was not what was true.
TLFisher
03-11-2016, 12:58 PM
In spiritual, Christian affairs, Jesus allowed for checks and balances: i.e. "tell it to the church"; as did Paul's "receiving accusations against elders". There should be covering of the inadequacy and frailty of human psyche and flesh; nonetheless there isn't and shouldn't be covering for evil. Darkness should be uprooted, exposed and expelled. The light shines and the darkness cannot overcome it. The church and its citizens should be holy, just as our God is holy.
Obviously the system set up by Nee and Lee has no checks and balances, no accountability. The Leaders of the Lord's Recovery demand unquestioning submission, and absolute silence from the proletariat... Indiana's crime was his unwillingness to silence and hide what wasn't convenient to LSM's 'official' narrative.
The whole LSM/LC system is predicated on men being cowards. As soon as a brother like Indiana won't cater to bullies, they just can't have that. The expectation is for Indiana "just submit to the brothers" (i.e. be a coward).
As I emphasized from Aron's post, "In spiritual, Christian affairs, Jesus allowed for checks and balances: i.e. "tell it to the church"; as did Paul's "receiving accusations against elders"."
The system LSM/LC operate in have negated all checks and balances in favor of the deputy authority doctrine. As much as they claim in their self-proclaimed theocracy that they are God's government, all I see is a cesspool of unrighteousness, deception, and misdirection. Far from being God's government.
TLFisher
03-11-2016, 01:07 PM
As I started to become concerned about the LC, there was an interesting phenomena that I noticed. The elders would regularly criticize the rank and file for failing to take initiative in an activity, to attend a conference/training or even something like preach the gospel. They usually call this being "lukewarm". At the same time, the minute anyone took any amount of initiative, they quickly got "corrected". It's no wonder that so many of the rank and file choose to live in the shadows, waiting until they are called upon to do anything at all. The elders know this and are frustrated by this, but at the same time they also know that they can't encourage anyone to take initiative. It's just one of those things that I'm sure drives members crazy and they probably can't ever put their finger on what the real problem is.
Problem here is initiative is likened to ambition. As soon as someone exercises the initiative to preach the gospel or go door knocking, he/she may be labeled as "ambitious to have a following". It becomes church culture to bury your extra talents and be one-talented members just like everyone else. Don't exercise initiative and certain don't share from the Bible apart from the ministry.
Freedom
03-11-2016, 04:19 PM
Problem here is initiative is likened to ambition. As soon as someone exercises the initiative to preach the gospel or go door knocking, he/she may be labeled as "ambitious to have a following". It becomes church culture to bury your extra talents and be one-talented members just like everyone else. Don't exercise initiative and certain don't share from the Bible apart from the ministry.
I think if LC leaders were to self-reflect, they would realized that the path to leadership happened through their own initiative and ambitions. Benson is the prime example of this. This is not to say that initiative is bad or that ambition is bad, but there is a double standard. The rank and file are commonly corrected for being too ambitious or for taking their own initiative.
The reality of the situation is that outside the LC, few people are truly content with sitting around and wasting away, setting aside all their usefulness, goals, etc. I believe that this is one of the things that really has make the LC unappealing on a broad scale. People don't want to be dumbed down to parroting a dead man's words. Of course LC members are willing to do this, but they really a minority.
As long as there is this kind of mindset in the LC, it can never amount to anything. When the LC started, all kinds of people came in. Members then took initiative to invite friends and tell people about the LC. If someone were to do the same thing today, it's as Terry says, they might be labeled as being independent, seeking a following, or I have even heard implications that people who are successful in the gospel can become too "proud".
TLFisher
03-12-2016, 07:22 PM
As long as there is this kind of mindset in the LC, it can never amount to anything. When the LC started, all kinds of people came in. Members then took initiative to invite friends and tell people about the LC. If someone were to do the same thing today, it's as Terry says, they might be labeled as being independent, seeking a following, or I have even heard implications that people who are successful in the gospel can become too "proud".
At one time you would want to invite your friends, but this was at a time local churches had more of a local church atmosphere. The lead elder would give a message. Now there's just the unspoken sense this is a ministry church and not a local church. When you're reading from a booklet, you don't feel to comfortable inviting friends. It's just not an atmosphere that is for the basic believer. Even for children raised in this environment, many may feel they don't conform to the cookie cutter mold and would be best served meeting somewhere else.
TLFisher
04-26-2016, 12:45 PM
As critical as I am of Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, my criticism for the blended brothers (collectively) surpasses. It isn't about doctrines or orthodoxy, but normal Christian behavior.
1. They are brothers in Christ
2. How could they be supportive of an unrighteous, unethical, and immoral man like Philip Lee AND
3. Smear brothers who are under the headship of Christ?
4. Their speaking and their subsequent actions are very subversive. Creating and causing problems when there is no need for it.
As critical as I am of Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, my criticism for the blended brothers (collectively) surpasses. It isn't about doctrines or orthodoxy, but normal Christian behavior.
1. They are brothers in Christ
2. How could they be supportive of an unrighteous, unethical, and immoral man like Philip Lee AND
3. Smear brothers who are under the headship of Christ?
4. Their speaking and their subsequent actions are very subversive. Creating and causing problems when there is no need for it.
When they play politics, they are all the same.
Indiana
06-06-2016, 07:58 PM
“As soon as the churches are brought under any ministry, they cease to be local and become sectarian….” (The Normal Christian Church Life, pp138-139, Nee).
Ministry Churches (revised)
www.twoturmoils.com/ministrychurches.pdf
Excerpt
Deep into the movement for his ministry, Brother Lee spoke a consummating word concerning the producing of the Body, in a banner high peak book, Living the Life of a God-Man According to the High Peak of the Divine Revelation (1994): “Since we have seen such a high peak of the divine revelation, we need to put into practice what we have seen. Our practice will have a success, and that success will be a new revival—the highest revival, and probably the last revival before the Lord’s coming back….”
Controversial High Peak Teaching
This statement was made on the pathway Brother Lee had begun in 1974 and led eventually to the controversial “high peak of the vision given to us by God”. He stated “that it is only by God’s becoming man to make man God that the Body of Christ can be produced.” (The High Peak of the Vision and the Reality of the Body, 1994)
Remarkable Buildup of a Minister of the Age
This buildup of a minister of the age from 1974 to 1994 was remarkable, and so was its path of deviation and the problems brought into the church life in the Lord’s recovery.
“The greater our gift is, the greater is the danger that we will take over the church and keep it in our hands. This will greatly damage the church life. (The Vision of God’s Building, W. L., 1964) Although this is exactly what took place, responsibility was denied and books of evil speaking arose published by LSM.
“The late eighties turmoil rose up mainly to put me down”, says Brother Lee. “Certain ones decided not only to put me down, but also to put me out. They did much in this turmoil, but I did not do anything.” (The Problems Causing the Turmoils in the Churches, pp34-35, 1993, W.L.) This quote is from one of those evil books displacing blame.
The leadership has not recognized the damage they have caused and that they themselves are the source of the problems that came into the church life. Accordingly, our brothers in Christ in their movement exhibit no compunction for their litany of sins and offenses.
They also seem to consider that running roughshod over people and churches is part of God’s move on the earth, but John So and brothers with him in Europe did not think so.
www.unfaithfulwitness.org/EuropeanChurchesDepart1989.pdf
Neither do the concerned brothers in the Great Lakes region. www.concernedbrothers.com
Perhaps the only way a revival might come is by the blending co-workers fulfilling the pre-requisite to have a deep and comprehensive repentance. But they claim instead, “All the local churches are the one unique Body of Christ in the universe (Eph. 4:4). Every local church is a part of this universal Body, a local expression of this unique Body….” (Practicality of the Body, p17, DCP, 2007)
“As soon as the churches are brought under any ministry, they cease to be local and become sectarian….” (The Normal Christian Church Life, pp138-139, Nee).
Ministry Churches (revised)
www.twoturmoils.com/ministrychurches.pdf
Freedom
06-12-2016, 02:18 PM
There is a statement made by Lee found in Indiana’s post, which I think provides some insight into why the local churches slowly but surely became “ministry churches.” Along with re-posting that quote, I want to also provide a strikingly similar statement made by Nee:
Since we have seen such a high peak of the divine revelation, we need to put into practice what we have seen. Our practice will have a success, and that success will be a new revival—the highest revival, and probably the last revival before the Lord’s coming back….”
Living the Life of a God-Man According to the High Peak of the Divine Revelation (1994)
With each step that the Lord has taken in His recovery, the content of His recovery has become richer and richer. Today, it seems as if there is nothing more to be recovered. The recovery today has reached the stage of the Body. Perhaps this will be the last recovery. There may be other items of recovery, but as far as we know, when we reach the recovery of the coordination of the Body and the manifestation of authority, we have reached the final recovery.
(Messages Given During the Resumption of Watchman Nee's Ministry, Chapter 43
As is evident from both of these statements, both Nee and Lee believed in this notion of there being a “final recovery/revival,” and of course, each man attributed this supposed event to something from his own ministry. For Nee, he thought this event would be characterized by two things he taught: 1) the coordination of the Body and 2) the manifestation of authority. Lee though that it would happen due to something that he had taught – the high peak of the divine revelation.
From an objective standpoint, it seems like the common denominator in all of this is the notion of recovery. While I believe the notion of recovery to be highly erroneous, that’s a different discussion. The point I want to make here is that because all LC members believe that they are part of a recovery, and because this recovery is believed to be ongoing and characterized exclusively by teachings from Nee/Lee, LC members have been inadvertently placed in the position where they feel obligated to receive “the ministry.”
The fact that WL was exclusively speaking everything that was deemed to have been "recovered," created an inherent conflict of interest, and there was no such thing as objectivity. Things got to the point where any of Lee’s actions could and would be rationalized by members. The dependency on Lee as the one who was "fueling" the supposed recovery is what produced “ministry churches” over time. Unless people were severely disillusioned with Lee, there was really no way to escape that. The reason that I say that, is because if a member were to question basic things like the promotion of LSM material or control over the churches, it would quickly become apparent that to draw the line with LSM is not enough. A disillusionment should really lead to other questions, especially the more difficult ones.
TLFisher
06-15-2016, 01:40 PM
From an objective standpoint, it seems like the common denominator in all of this is the notion of recovery. While I believe the notion of recovery to be highly erroneous, that’s a different discussion. The point I want to make here is that because all LC members believe that they are part of a recovery, and because this recovery is believed to be ongoing and characterized exclusively by teachings from Nee/Lee, LC members have been inadvertently placed in the position where they feel obligated to receive “the ministry.”
The fact that WL was exclusively speaking everything that was deemed to have been "recovered," created an inherent conflict of interest, and there was no such thing as objectivity. Things got to the point where any of Lee’s actions could and would be rationalized by members. The dependency on Lee as the one who was "fueling" the supposed recovery is what produced “ministry churches” over time. Unless people were severely disillusioned with Lee, there was really no way to escape that. The reason that I say that, is because if a member were to question basic things like the promotion of LSM material or control over the churches, it would quickly become apparent that to draw the line with LSM is not enough. A disillusionment should really lead to other questions, especially the more difficult ones.
The bottom line is LSM=Lord's Recovery. Some might say churches that receive LSM is "the practical expression of the church", the "local expression", and that "there is no other way".
I call it as I see it and that's ministry churches. When you as a church restrict your fellowship to a specific ministry, you are not a local church, but a ministry church.
Indiana
06-23-2016, 06:09 PM
WITNESS LEE: Both the ministry and many churches in the recovery made a decision to quarantine certain divisive ones. Some did not accept this decision and have even joined these divisive ones. They have disregarded the feeling of the Body. How we behave ourselves depends upon the degree of our seeing of the Body.” (The Problems Causing the Turmoils in the Church Life)
The members of the Body have to first recognize the Head – it is not Brother Lee. He was the head of a movement to bring all the churches under his ministry, which effectively displaced Christ, our Lord of glory, as the Head of His Body.
Ministry Churches, p. 9
www.twoturmoils.com/MinistryChurchesEffectontheBodyofChrist.pdf
www.twoturmoils.com/ministrychurches.pdf
Indiana
06-26-2016, 02:42 PM
This was a little report sent today to a few friends, all members of the household of God.
Dear brother Tony, and brothers and sisters,
I think it is good to note that Jesus is surely Lord and lives in us, and in me. I have been doing well in the will of God, with a profound sense of peace in what I do - speak the truth. I am certainly not in the business of deceiving anyone, but quite the opposite.
So anointing within me continues as does the Lord's smile, and mine. I have no opposition to righteous behavior, only to unrighteous and that without "bitterness" or "vendetta" toward anyone, as those who know me understand.
Over the last 15 years my heart has only been enlarged in appealing to leaders, and to others, for reconciliation among members in the Body.
And, I believe all of our hearts ought to be enlarged, that we might receive all who God receives.
Tony, we ought to know our church history! and become accountable.
www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf
Betsy
07-06-2016, 11:39 AM
Tony, we ought to know our church history! and become accountable.
www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf
This reminds me of the words of Jesus: “And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” In Matthew 10:15, Jesus clarifies His meaning: “Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town”
I'm not sure why anyone would continue to beg for fellowship from those who are not interested and furthermore have told lies about them?
This reminds me of the words of Jesus: “And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” In Matthew 10:15, Jesus clarifies His meaning: “Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town”
I'm not sure why anyone would continue to beg for fellowship from those who are not interested and furthermore have told lies about them?
Indiana confuses me. If the blinded brothers would accept his argument and throw their arms around his neck it seems he would kiss and make up. I don't think he believes that WL is a false teacher.
Indiana confuses me. If the blinded brothers would accept his argument and throw their arms around his neck it seems he would kiss and make up. I don't think he believes that WL is a false teacher.
I would like to state that I was not kind in making this statement. I realize that Indiana is seeking reconciliation within the body of Christ, just as Christ would want. His patience and love of the brothers far exceeds mine. I need to learn to be less hostile and more loving. Please forgive my anger and rudeness.
HERn
I would like to state that I was not kind in making this statement. I realize that Indiana is seeking reconciliation within the body of Christ, just as Christ would want. His patience and love of the brothers far exceeds mine. I need to learn to be less hostile and more loving. Please forgive my anger and rudeness.
HERn
Indiana would also like the right to fellowship with whomever he chooses. This has been repeatedly denied him. His reputation was besmirched for simply attempting to evaluate our history, in his ground-breaking article, "In The Wake of the New Way."
I find it more than a little ironic that Indiana finds much of his inspiration for action in the words of WL himself.
Betsy
07-08-2016, 09:19 AM
I would like to state that I was not kind in making this statement. I realize that Indiana is seeking reconciliation within the body of Christ, just as Christ would want. His patience and love of the brothers far exceeds mine. I need to learn to be less hostile and more loving. Please forgive my anger and rudeness.
Most certainly I don't want to be unkind to anybody, even though I'm confused too. But if Indiana does not want to talk about something, that is his right and I would never dream of trying to force a response.
Indiana
07-08-2016, 05:05 PM
“If we introduce these manmade distinctions into the church, the relationship among the brothers and sisters will be shifted to the wrong ground.” (W. Nee, New Believers Series)
www.twoturmoils.com/ShiftingtotheWrongGround.pdf
Betsy
07-09-2016, 08:54 PM
“If we introduce these manmade distinctions into the church, the relationship among the brothers and sisters will be shifted to the wrong ground.” (W. Nee, New Believers Series)
www.twoturmoils.com/ShiftingtotheWrongGround.pdf
Thanks for responding with the links. Those should answer my questions hopefully.
Indiana
07-10-2016, 09:18 PM
Thanks for responding with the links. Those should answer my questions hopefully.
The following was added yesterday to Shifting to the Wrong Ground.
Their high appreciation of Witness Lee and his ministry caused leaders to uplift him and eventually crown him as “the minister of the age” with the “ministry of the age” in ministry churches claimed to be the recovery of the New Testament church. These are their distinctions and their ground. They do have their oneness, as ministry churches, and receive people accordingly.
“If we introduce these manmade distinctions into the church, the relationship among the brothers and sisters will be shifted to the wrong ground.” (W. Nee, New Believers Series)
Addressing Division
2001
www.twoturmoils.com/IntheWakeoftheNewWay.pdf
2007
makingstraightthewayofthelord.com/DeviatingfromthePathintheLordsRecovery.pdf
2015
www.twoturmoils.com/ministrychurches.pdf
We are called to be one. This is why I address division.
UntoHim
07-12-2016, 07:37 AM
“If we introduce these manmade distinctions into the church, the relationship among the brothers and sisters will be shifted to the wrong ground.” (W. Nee, New Believers Series)
Actually, as a matter of fact, there have always been manmade distinctions in the Church. The earliest apostles, teachers, evangelists and disciples all had to make distinctions (or distinguish themselves as it were) among the Body of Christ. This was Paul's point to the Corinthians in writing "for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized." (1 Cor 11:19)
Ironically, Watchman Nee introduced a manmade distinction into the Church in pressing his "ground of the Church" dogma. Unwittingly (or maybe not), Nee shifted the relationship among the brothers and sisters from one unbiblical ground (Denominationalism) to another unbiblical ground (Sectarian oneness) Both of these "grounds" have great potential to short circuit the God-given, biblical dynamic of leadership and direction within the Church being organically recognized or approved.
In hindsight, it is obvious that Witness Lee took Watchman Nee's mistakes and magnified them 100 fold. It wasn't very long before the local churches in Taiwan became The Local Church of Witness Lee with numerous branches on the Island. The same thing repeated itself in North America - the Church in Los Angeles quickly turned into The Local Church of Witness Lee with numerous branches. The denominations had their branch churches in any given locality, and the Local Church had their branch churches in any given locality.
So who is approved, who is deemed genuine, who is closest to the God-given, biblical representation of the Body of Christ in any given locality? Well, we have about 2,000 years of Church history to help decide this for us.
-
Betsy
07-13-2016, 01:00 AM
What is the difference between Denominationalism and Sectarian oneness? It would seem that if the LC shifted to the wrong ground, then it must have been on the proper ground at an earlier time. Apparently this same shift also occurred much earlier in Taiwan. This suggests that this shifting might have been deliberately planned?
UntoHim
07-13-2016, 07:58 AM
Good question Renee. I don't have an easy answer for you.
What I will say is that both denominationalism and sectarian oneness add something to the Gospel. It is the Gospel PLUS other non-essentials. In the case of the Local Church, they have added many things, and most of these are related to the person and work of Witness Lee. The true, biblical Gospel is nothing more, and nothing less, then the Person and work of Jesus Christ. In the Local Church they claim to have a "higher gospel", which is nothing more than the particular teachings and practices established by Witness Lee.
If you ask most Christians "what is the one publication", most would probably say "the Bible of course!" If you ask the members of the Local Church, most would probably say "the Bible PLUS 'The Ministry'". Some might even say only "The Ministry". The Blended brothers have proclaimed that the Local Churches will only accept and follow "The One Publication". So the "oneness" of the Local Church is now based officially on the teachings and practices established by Witness Lee. So they have a oneness of sorts, but it is a kind of sectarian oneness. They claim to be "one with everyone in the Body of Christ", but they will only accept you if you follow the person (authority) and work (ministry) of Witness Lee.
-
What is the difference between Denominationalism and Sectarian oneness? It would seem that if the LC shifted to the wrong ground, then it must have been on the proper ground at an earlier time. Apparently this same shift also occurred much earlier in Taiwan. This suggests that this shifting might have been deliberately planned?
Renee, in my study of church history, I have concluded that distorted oneness is perhaps one of the worst evils to be thrust upon God's children. What i mean by that is a false pretense of Biblical oneness twisted and distorted into a manipulative and destructive tool to control and damage both God's church and His children. I have studied Roman Catholicism, Exclusive Brethrenism, and the the Recovery. Each of them may have had good and noble beginnings, but self-serving power-hungry leaders used Biblical oneness to deceive their flocks and to bring them under subjection. The Pharisees in the Gospels are another example of this.
What happens to Christians when the demands for oneness in their movement (or denomination) exceed the demands for righteousness? What happens when their leaders are no longer accountable because distorted oneness demands silence from all the members? What happens when the voice of God via the prophets He faithfully sends is squashed by an all-powerful leader who is considered either "the vicar of Christ," or "the oracle of God," or "the minister of the age," or some other nonsense.
Acts 20.30 has served to seriously release me from the grip of LSM. Notice how Apostle Paul warns them that leaders from within the church will rise up speaking perverted things to draw away the disciples after themselves. Distorted oneness, with its excessive demands, is perverted. Talking about a so-called "Minister of the Age" is perverted. Elders in LC's around the globe brought under the subjection of a publishing house in Anaheim, CA is perverted. Their "one publication policy" is perverted. I could go on and on here. The goal of all these perverted teachings is to draw away the disciples from their Lord and Savior to become followers of men, who now hide behind the mask of being "Blended."
Betsy
07-13-2016, 08:44 PM
UntoHim & Ohio,
Thank you for the clarification on oneness and how it can lead to division. The oneness is in spirit, oneness in spirit. Yet it is often taught as oneness in the flesh -- I just cringe when large gatherings require everyone to say the same thing at the same time. It is for sure God did not create us so that we could become a group of identical robots according to some man's manipulative demands.
Indiana
07-14-2016, 10:32 AM
What is the difference between Denominationalism and Sectarian oneness? It would seem that if the LC shifted to the wrong ground, then it must have been on the proper ground at an earlier time. Apparently this same shift also occurred much earlier in Taiwan. This suggests that this shifting might have been deliberately planned?
www.twoturmoils.com/DonRutledgeHistory.pdf
A former elder in Dallas wrote about local church history and finished two chapters before being visited by three brothers he knew from their early days in Texas together, and who were now in accord with the blending brothers.
The three brothers felt welcomed to visit, due to the warmth in Don's sharing on matters and people they all knew in the church life; and they were also compelled to visit based on major concerns they had about his transparency regarding the seeds of development in the churches to follow the lead of a man and a ministry.
Don indicated that they had a cordial time together and he was able to share with them about why he left the church life. He spent several hours with them, and heard also what their concerns were about him and his writings on a public internet forum.
We don't know whether or not that visitation effected his course, but, he did not write another chapter - and he did have more that he had planned, and desired, to add. But the two chapters he did provide are insightful to those who seek to understand true local church history.
www.twoturmoils.com/DonRutledgeHistory.pdf
Indiana
07-17-2016, 10:27 PM
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:
In Brother Lee's book "the experience of life" he talks about being right with God and with the body. The main factor is the matter of the proper dealing. THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery. You have most certainly sinned against the entire recovery. The website of your "book" and also the website of your "fellowship" with those such as Don Harding and others is now a VERY BIG PROBLEM FOR YOU. Your thought about the recovery being wrong is your major problem. Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's. Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. What I said in my previous letter is what has to be done. As long as you think that you are right about what you did but that the problem is that the brothers from the local churches are not open, this is a proof that you have no light on this matter. And until you get light, you have no way with the Lord. Without light, you will never be able to come back to the Lord's recovery. Because you just don't know how to handle this situation. You are completely in the dark. Repentance is a mercy that is granted to us only by the Lord. But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
2001 Letter on past page- p3
Betsy
07-17-2016, 10:57 PM
www.twoturmoils.com/DonRutledgeHistory.pdf
A former elder in Dallas wrote about local church history and finished two chapters before being visited by three brothers he knew from their early days in Texas together, and who were now in accord with the blending brothers.
The three brothers felt welcomed to visit, due to the warmth in Don's sharing on matters and people they all knew in the church life; and they were also compelled to visit based on major concerns they had about his transparency regarding the seeds of development in the churches to follow the lead of a man and a ministry.
Don indicated that they had a cordial time together and he was able to share with them about why he left the church life. He spent several hours with them, and heard also what their concerns were about him and his writings on a public internet forum.
We don't know whether or not that visitation effected his course, but, he did not write another chapter - and he did have more that he had planned, and desired, to add. But the two chapters he did provide are insightful to those who seek to understand true local church history.
www.twoturmoils.com/DonRutledgeHistory.pdf
This was a wonderful read, thanks! It's too bad the church lost Don Rutledge. Maybe he decided there was nothing positive he could say after the first 2 chapters? He had a lot of good things to say about Benson Phillips. Whatever happened to him?
Betsy
07-17-2016, 11:22 PM
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:
In Brother Lee's book "the experience of life" he talks about being right with God and with the body. The main factor is the matter of the proper dealing. THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery. You have most certainly sinned against the entire recovery. The website of your "book" and also the website of your "fellowship" with those such as Don Harding and others is now a VERY BIG PROBLEM FOR YOU. Your thought about the recovery being wrong is your major problem. Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's. Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. What I said in my previous letter is what has to be done. As long as you think that you are right about what you did but that the problem is that the brothers from the local churches are not open, this is a proof that you have no light on this matter. And until you get light, you have no way with the Lord. Without light, you will never be able to come back to the Lord's recovery. Because you just don't know how to handle this situation. You are completely in the dark. Repentance is a mercy that is granted to us only by the Lord. But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
2001 Letter on past page- p3
Oh my, what a dreadful letter! LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.
This was a wonderful read, thanks! It's too bad the church lost Don Rutledge. Maybe he decided there was nothing positive he could say after the first 2 chapters? He had a lot of good things to say about Benson Phillips. Whatever happened to him?
Benson is now President of LSM.
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:
When I read letters like that one my first thought is "shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them." There is really no negotiating with these people and I'm not sure why anyone would want to. The best thing to do is just shrug your shoulders and say "Okay. Fine. Have a nice life."
The problem former members run into is continuing to think these people, this group, this movement, still have some spiritual authority or special standing over them. I could say they don't, and I believe that, but each person has to come to that conclusion for his or her own self.
At some point you just have to say, "Sorry, I disagree," and move on. If I was living in Seattle or Bellevue, I would simply ignore these guys. I would write them off, as it says in Matthew 18, and regard them as heathens. They don't have anything I need or anything I can't get anywhere else. They cannot restrict my access to Christ, nor suspend my enjoyment of the Church, the Kingdom, or any other blessing promised by God. And their implication that they can, their use of hubris, fear and intimidation to control others, is the pure work of Satan. I wouldn't hate them, but I do pity them.
Now if you are concerned for those they are still deceiving, or those they might deceive, those saints you love and want to see set free, that's one thing. That's why I post here. But one need never seek the approval or acceptance of these darkened leaders. Life's too short, and it's a mistake to think they hold the keys to anything you need.
Indiana
07-20-2016, 11:50 AM
Oh my, what a dreadful letter! LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.
This word from Renee is perfect - post#470 Bellevue letter
I just sent this revised Seattle letter this morning.
"Dear brother Martin, (and Jim Bundy) _ I knew you both,
Your names are on a letter addressed to me that indicated an undefined problem that several men of God had with me.
Is there really a problem, brothers?"
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
TLFisher
07-20-2016, 12:56 PM
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:
In Brother Lee's book "the experience of life" he talks about being right with God and with the body. The main factor is the matter of the proper dealing. THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery. You have most certainly sinned against the entire recovery. The website of your "book" and also the website of your "fellowship" with those such as Don Harding and others is now a VERY BIG PROBLEM FOR YOU. Your thought about the recovery being wrong is your major problem. Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's. Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. What I said in my previous letter is what has to be done. As long as you think that you are right about what you did but that the problem is that the brothers from the local churches are not open, this is a proof that you have no light on this matter. And until you get light, you have no way with the Lord. Without light, you will never be able to come back to the Lord's recovery. Because you just don't know how to handle this situation. You are completely in the dark. Repentance is a mercy that is granted to us only by the Lord. But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
2001 Letter on past page- p3
This prior Bellevue elder was so sure of himself. So sure of Witness Lee and so sure of the Blended brothers. The problem is when one believes you cannot be wrong, you may very well be deceived. The deception is due in part having lost all humility.
Over the years so much faith is put into Witness Lee that the brother said in absoluteness "Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. " Because faith in man leads others astray. That's how I feel has happened to the brother who wrote the email to Indiana.
Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.
Psalms 146:3
Stop regarding man in whose nostrils is breath, for of what account is he? Isaiah 2:22
It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man. Psalms 118:8
Freedom
07-20-2016, 04:33 PM
This prior Bellevue elder was so sure of himself. So sure of Witness Lee and so sure of the Blended brothers. The problem is when one believes you cannot be wrong, you may very well be deceived. The deception is due in part having lost all humility.
These were my thoughts exactly. The letter implies that Steve is too sure of himself. But that's exactly what this Bellevue elder is guilty of, not Steve. With respect to how LCers view Lee, there is only one view that they hold, that being "even when he's wrong, he's right."
UntoHim
07-20-2016, 04:46 PM
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:
Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do.
Of course brother Lee was a different person than Phillip Lee...HE WAS HIS FATHER AND HIS EMPLOYER...Which made him DOUBLY responsible before God AND man, especially when it became very clear that Phillip was a raging alcoholic and sexual predator. Instead of being behind the lead desk of a Christian ministry and publishing company, he should of been behind bars. Every time Phillip Lee's improprieties and criminal behavior were exposed, Witness Lee blamed, attacked and defamed the whistle blowers. In the case of the sisters he abused, instead dealing with his criminal son, he had the victim and her family relocated to another state. Despicable, and something one might expect from a godless, immoral businessman, and not a so call "God-man".
And Local Churchers wonder why people call them a personality cult. Most other legitimate Christian leaders would have been publicly exposed, sued by the victims and removed from public ministry for an extended period of time. But of course this would of required the leadership of the Local Church to be transparent and accountable, like what is clearly taught in the New Testament. Instead everyone, from top to bottom, was/is only accountable to the person and work of Witness Lee.
-
TLFisher
07-20-2016, 05:32 PM
These were my thoughts exactly. The letter implies that Steve is too sure of himself. But that's exactly what this Bellevue elder is guilty of, not Steve. With respect to how LCers view Lee, there is only one view that they hold, that being "even when he's wrong, he's right."
Like Witness Lee and maybe some other coworkers, this prior Bellevue elder (last I knew was in Sao Paulo), was equally strong and absolute in his speaking. So certain was his speaking in the letter that Steve Isitt was the one in error. There is not the consideration "what if"? What if the blendeds are the ones in error? What if the elder writing the letter had been fed half-truths and misrepresentations?
This is what I believe has happened to many a local church elder. They have been deceived and in turn lead many a local church into deception. Not once has there been any indication there's another possibility to consider. Completely closed. To consider anything different than the reality LSM presents would indicate brothers who are not quite "absolute for the ministry" as claiming to be.
TLFisher
07-20-2016, 05:49 PM
THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery.......... But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.
www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
With the letter having been written in 2001, I wonder if the elder has learned anything since? Having been sued along with Ron Kangas in 2011 for defamation, did he take anytime to reconsider what was said that would be grounds for defamation? As many of us know, the lawsuit was not pursued and dropped. Unfortunately, I perceive most of us disagree with lawsuits, but in regard to blended brothers that is the only recourse to get any response.
This prior Bellevue elder was so sure of himself. So sure of Witness Lee and so sure of the Blended brothers. The problem is when one believes you cannot be wrong, you may very well be deceived. The deception is due in part having lost all humility.
Over the years so much faith is put into Witness Lee that the brother said in absoluteness "Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. " Because faith in man leads others astray. That's how I feel has happened to the brother who wrote the email to Indiana.
Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.
Psalms 146:3
Stop regarding man in whose nostrils is breath, for of what account is he? Isaiah 2:22
It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man. Psalms 118:8
Here's another verse for the LSM loyalists: "Not so! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, "THAT YOU MAY BE JUSTIFIED IN YOUR WORDS, AND PREVAIL WHEN YOU ARE JUDGED." (Romans 3.4)
Jesus Christ alone can be thoroughly examined, and His words will be true every time. Jesus Christ alone can be exhaustively judged, and He will prevail as righteous every time.
Witness Lee, however, was found to be a liar during the entire scandalous affair which resulted in his slanderous account, The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion, LSM 1990.
TLFisher
07-21-2016, 10:16 AM
Witness Lee, however, was found to be a liar during the entire scandalous affair which resulted in his slanderous account, The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion, LSM 1990.
How funny in a sad way, Witness Lee had no peer review and as he said in Taipei 1991,
"The book The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion includes my spoken messages, but its content was edited afterward by me personally. I have carefully checked all the facts and have tried my best to be accurate, to be without any mistakes. In addition to an account of the beginning and development of the whole period of the rebellion, the content of that book includes personal testimonies from over thirty brothers. Therefore, concerning this storm, I have spoken the clarifying and concluding word that I needed to speak. I have absolutely no more interest in talking about this matter. This matter now stops here. I hope that you brothers who have come to attend this conference will not mention it anymore. It does not deserve any more mentioning."
Lies passed off to stand as fact.
Indiana
07-21-2016, 07:19 PM
Of course brother Lee was a different person than Phillip Lee...HE WAS HIS FATHER AND HIS EMPLOYER...Which made him DOUBLY responsible before God AND man, especially when it became very clear that Phillip was a raging alcoholic and sexual predator. Instead of being behind the lead desk of a Christian ministry and publishing company, he should of been behind bars. Every time Phillip Lee's improprieties and criminal behavior were exposed, Witness Lee blamed, attacked and defamed the whistle blowers. In the case of the sisters he abused, instead dealing with his criminal son, he had the victim and her family relocated to another state. Despicable, and something one might expect from a godless, immoral businessman, and not a so call "God-man".
And Local Churchers wonder why people call them a personality cult. Most other legitimate Christian leaders would have been publicly exposed, sued by the victims and removed from public ministry for an extended period of time. But of course this would of required the leadership of the Local Church to be transparent and accountable, like what is clearly taught in the New Testament. Instead everyone, from top to bottom, was/is only accountable to the person and work of Witness Lee.
-
www.twoturmoils.com/TheocracyintheLocalChurches.pdf
“One basic item of the change in nature in the Lord’s recovery is that it appears the Lord’s work has become Brother Lee’s work; the churches have become Brother Lee’s churches; and the Lord’s workers have become Brother Lee’s workers”
“We are at a critical juncture. We cannot be silent regarding the change of nature in the Lord’s recovery. We should have no part in it. This is a day for further recovery. We need a new beginning to recover us back from the change of nature to the Lord’s original intention. We must discard all the changes of nature and come out of the system; it cannot change.” (Two Senior Coworkers from Taiwan 1988)
Betsy
07-21-2016, 08:39 PM
From "Appealing to Ron Kangas" from his talk in Ecuador (link provided by Indiana)
"So some may decide that this person is right. Others will say that person is wrong. That will lead to argument, dissension, division, and confusion. Who has all the information? There is a statement made about Brother Lee; you can’t ask Brother Lee about it.
“If you try to discern this way, you will be brought into death. This is serious. You read through this thing, you listen to this thing, you exercise your mind, you try to discern what is right, what is wrong, and all the while you are eating of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, and you will be the first one to be killed."
These words of RK are quite frightening to me. They show the ruthless strategy he is prepared to use to silence all dissent and silence all questions about the LSM that do not glorify it. This is how marriages and families are destroyed when all members do not hold the same opinion about the LSM Church, and find it difficult to say nothing when danger is perceived. Of course it is a convenient tool for those who have much to hide.
I remember listening to a talk by RK when he was talking about a friend of his, a non-believer, who was saved shortly before he died. RK said it was nice and all that he was saved, but it was too late, it was too late to help build the body of Christ. Here RK was setting himself up to judge as God in the Godhead, not merely in life and nature.
Indiana
07-22-2016, 11:06 AM
Of course brother Lee was a different person than Phillip Lee...HE WAS HIS FATHER AND HIS EMPLOYER...Which made him DOUBLY responsible before God AND man, especially when it became very clear that Phillip was a raging alcoholic and sexual predator. Instead of being behind the lead desk of a Christian ministry and publishing company, he should of been behind bars. Every time Phillip Lee's improprieties and criminal behavior were exposed, Witness Lee blamed, attacked and defamed the whistle blowers. In the case of the sisters he abused, instead dealing with his criminal son, he had the victim and her family relocated to another state. Despicable, and something one might expect from a godless, immoral businessman, and not a so call "God-man".
And Local Churchers wonder why people call them a personality cult. Most other legitimate Christian leaders would have been publicly exposed, sued by the victims and removed from public ministry for an extended period of time. But of course this would of required the leadership of the Local Church to be transparent and accountable, like what is clearly taught in the New Testament. Instead everyone, from top to bottom, was/is only accountable to the person and work of Witness Lee.
-
Renee, our brother Ron Kangas is under serious delusion and proved it in Ecuador, and with no repentance for his display of false witness and hardheartedness. He spent much time under his mentor and learned from him, both the good, and the evil.
Aron posted this a few days ago
Right after the meeting James informed John So and I that WL was very upset. Francis had tipped off James. WL did not want to have a quiet private talk but chose to dress the two of us down in the meeting hall for all to see. As soon as the meeting was over, we two were marched to the front. Chairs were rearranged. John and I set by ourselves facing WL and about 50 brothers including James Barber who set behind WL in support of him. Scores of those in attendance milled around the little court room and became an audience. WL never asked us to open our concerns but immediately launched into a tirade against us and issued a general warning that if we continued to question what the office and the ministry was doing we would cause a lot of damage to the saints and we would damage ourselves.
I can never forget the glare of despising we got from Ron Kangas as WL continued for about 10 minutes with the rebuke. Then he dismissed the meeting and we all went home. Was I ever in shock!!! So was John So. I was taking hospitality with Ned. On the ride home he laughed and laughed. He said this regularly happened to the elders in Orange County California.
Indiana
07-22-2016, 04:24 PM
LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.
posts stored in 2013
IGZY
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=27548&postcount=38
TERRY
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=27556&postcount=40
OHIO
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=27558&postcount=41
ALWAYS LEARNING
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showpost.php?p=27565&postcount=42
Freedom
07-22-2016, 08:59 PM
I think it's interesting that Kangas chose to call Steve Isitt a "man of death." Why didn't he call him a "man of sin?" Because if he did that he'd have to specify his sin, and he can't do it because there is none.
When Ron publicly defamed Steve, he did so using vague terminology and accusations. And by that I mean language that is elusive to outsiders. His intended message, however, is crystal clear to those within the LC. As Igzy pointed out, it is significant that Ron was not willing to convey a definitive position that he could subsequently stand behind. He didn’t even initiate a public ‘quarantine’ letter like has been done for others.
As it turns out, what Ron spoke is only a modern example of a pattern that has long existed within the LC. The pattern which I am referring to is a large amount of vagueness in conveying accusations presented as cause for church discipline. Just look at what WL had to say on the subject:
We must see, however, that to make a public announcement of a kind of excommunication involves a person’s name, position, and status in today’s society. This is serious and very risky. This involves families and human relationships. In this matter we have been under the influence of the tradition of Christianity, but in my experiences over the past fifty years I have surely learned that to make a public announcement, especially in a matter concerning immorality, is not so safe and profitable. If we announce a certain person’s being excommunicated in a public meeting, he could appeal to a court of law and say that we are spoiling his name. He would claim that since you said he committed immorality, you must provide the evidence in a court of law. This would cause much trouble. This one may have committed that sin, but according to law you must present the evidence. This sinning one may not have that much growth in the Lord, but he may bold a high position in society. He would vindicate himself by bringing this case to the law court to clear up his name. This shows us the turmoil that such a public announcement could cause…
According to our present knowledge of the New Testament, I do not believe there is the need of making a public announcement…
Witness Lee, Elders’ Training, Book 4, Ch 7
WL was not hesitant in making “public announcements,” but he had a different way of doing it, one that had the end effect of absolving himself of all accountability. The notion of ‘quarantine’ that he set forth is very deceptive. To the naďve, it seemingly represents a ‘gentle’ approach to correct those in err. In the LC, the true purpose of quarantine is that it serves as an effective excommunication without having to present real facts and evidence to support the action.
Quarantine implies someone is sick and there is no choice to but to set that person aside. To go along with the analogy, being sick or leprous is the sole accusation, so what exactly does that mean? That is what Lee refused to define. He didn't want to justify his actions. He wouldn't stand behind things that he did. That's not the pattern the Apostle Paul set. Paul made a case and then said to "deliver such a one to Satan." If LCers aren't willing to stand behind their statements or actions in the same way that Paul did, then they shouldn't be making them.
TLFisher
07-22-2016, 09:54 PM
I remember listening to a talk by RK when he was talking about a friend of his, a non-believer, who was saved shortly before he died. RK said it was nice and all that he was saved, but it was too late, it was too late to help build the body of Christ.
Not that I am completely surprised, but shocking to a degree admitting to such a low view of salvation.
Knowing how evangelists like a Billy Graham are besmirched by ones in the local churches.
It makes one wonder why do they even bother with gospel work if there's the attitude "it's too late"?
Indiana
07-23-2016, 10:12 PM
Brother Lee often stated that he followed brother Nee. Perhaps his priority should have been to follow the Lord. We are encouraged to imitate those believers that persue Christ, but we must always have the eyes of our heart fixed on the Lord. As we know all to well, and as WL has stated himself: "people can change". Now we see the blendeds following a man - making the same mistakes.
I find it interesting and extremely pervasive throughout brother Lee's writings that it is we who must see the vision as presented by a minister and his vision, being himself of course; Implying that God does not reveal His heart to all His devout servants but has this unique minister of the age with a unique vision.
Now if this unique minister should make a mistake and perhaps deviate from this unique vision, then God would have a real problem since he has only one unique minister for each unique age having its own unique vision.
Does this sound strange? Of course it does. But even worse it is extra-biblical and the fruit of this kind of thinking has resulted in a great deal of unrepented sin and division. The history posted by our brother speaks for itself.
The Father loves the Son exceedingly and has given Him all things: All things are through Him and for Him and to Him; He has the first place in all things and He is the fullness that fills all and in all! He is the head of His Body, the Church. The result of the vision is to sum up all things in Christ both in the heavens and on the earth. This vision has been around for a long time and many have seen it. And because of this God gives us Apostle(s), Prophet(s), Teacher(s) and various ministrie(s) for the perfecting of the saints until we all arrive at a full-grown man in Christ. There is no mention of any unique minister with a unique vision which all must follow or they "are not in it". All this is imaginary conjecture based upon the Old Testament with disasterous results.
Today God speaks to us in His son through His many devoted servants who deny themselves and take up their cross. Those that follow the Lamb - Not a man. The definition of an overcomer is: They overcame him by the Blood of the Lamb, the word of their testimony and they loved not their soul life unto the death.
Come back to the pure Word - be an overcomer!
A Pure Testimony of Jesus - 1983, W. Lee
“The Lord's recovery is really among us, and, although the scale is quite small, the standard of the character is higher than Christianity. In the Lord's recovery the high standard of the character must be kept and maintained. Some have checked with me asking, Do you mean that all the other Christians are rotten and that only the local church people are not rotten? I don't mean that. If any people have become rotten, they are no more in the reality of the Lord's recovery. Whatever and whoever is rotten is not in the recovery. The local churches are people who have been recovered out of their rottenness back to the pure church life. The local church is not a kind of organization or religious group. The local church is the pure church life as a pure testimony of Jesus. If we become rotten, we are no longer in the reality of the Lord's recovery. (Concerning the Lord's Recovery chapter 1 section 4, 1983)
http://www.twoturmoils.com/RecoveringAPureTestimonyofJesus.pdf
Freedom
07-24-2016, 04:08 PM
“The Lord's recovery is really among us, and, although the scale is quite small, the standard of the character is higher than Christianity. In the Lord's recovery the high standard of the character must be kept and maintained. Some have checked with me asking, Do you mean that all the other Christians are rotten and that only the local church people are not rotten? I don't mean that. If any people have become rotten, they are no more in the reality of the Lord's recovery. Whatever and whoever is rotten is not in the recovery. The local churches are people who have been recovered out of their rottenness back to the pure church life. The local church is not a kind of organization or religious group. The local church is the pure church life as a pure testimony of Jesus. If we become rotten, we are no longer in the reality of the Lord's recovery. (Concerning the Lord's Recovery chapter 1 section 4, 1983)
http://www.twoturmoils.com/Recoverin...onyofJesus.pdf (http://www.twoturmoils.com/RecoveringAPureTestimonyofJesus.pdf)
In the local churches, there is a disturbing pattern of excusing bad behavior and purging those with solid character, who are unwilling to compromise their integrity. I don't think Lee intended the LC to turn out this way, but character and integrity had to be sacrificed in order for WL to pursue the larger than life status that he craved. He eliminated all the checks and balances that should have stopped him from going off the deep end. He purged anyone who criticized him in any way.
Those who are part of this system don't realize what they are giving themselves to or who they are following. They think that following Lee absolutely is essential to being a Christian. And it's not that following a leader as an example is wrong, per se, however, the leader that is being followed is a man who insisted on being #1. He insisted submission to his totalitarian regime. He excused sin when he knew that it could harm his ministry. This is the man who so many LC members are following.
Indiana
07-24-2016, 07:58 PM
In the local churches, there is a disturbing pattern of excusing bad behavior and purging those with solid character, who are unwilling to compromise their integrity. I don't think Lee intended the LC to turn out this way, but character and integrity had to be sacrificed in order for WL to pursue the larger than life status that he craved. He eliminated all the checks and balances that should have stopped him from going off the deep end. He purged anyone who criticized him in any way.
Those who are part of this system don't realize what they are giving themselves to or who they are following. They think that following Lee absolutely is essential to being a Christian. And it's not that following a leader as an example is wrong, per se, however, the leader that is being followed is a man who insisted on being #1. He insisted submission to his totalitarian regime. He excused sin when he knew that it could harm his ministry. This is the man who so many LC members are following.
Subject: A reconsideration about my signature on the 1986 elders' letter to Brother Lee
June 29th, 2007
To whom this may concern among the brothers and sisters in the Lord:
On the Internet in recent days a discussion has arisen concerning the perceived inconsistency of the stand of the brothers from the Mid-west. That alleged “inconsistency” relates to the current stand of a number of Midwest local churches and Great Lakes brothers (“GLA Brothers”) viz-a-vi LSM’s “Blended Brothers” and their past position related to Brother Witness Lee. One specific point offered as “evidence” of this alleged “inconsistency” is the inclusion of signatures of brothers from the Mid-West on a February 21st, 1986 letter addressed to brother Witness Lee.
While I believe the allegation of inconsistency is based on non sequitur reasoning, the allegation did cause me to reread the Letter along with Brother Lee's reply. Based on that re-examination, I arrived at the conclusions elaborated below.
Before proceeding, let me emphasize that this letter expresses my own personal convictions and I do not presume to speak for other GLA Brothers, nor the brothers with whom I currently serve in Toronto. However, I do know that some of the GLA Brothers also have regrets about their signature being on the Letter.
I am presently an elder of the community of Christians meeting as the Church in Toronto whose primary meeting place is located at 671 Sheppard Avenue East. In 1986 I was one of the 419 brothers who signed the Letter addressed to Brother Lee, endorsing his leadership.
Hindsight is 20/20. We are now more than 20 years further along in our journey with the Lord. In addition, 10 years have elapsed since Brother Lee went to be with the Lord. We now have the benefit of 20 years history to evaluate the results of that 1986 Letter endorsing Brother Lee’s leadership. Given what I now know and what I have subsequently learned during this 20-year-plus period of time I wish to state that my signing of the Letter at that time, though done with the right heart, was ill-conceived. Were it possible, today, I would remove my signature. Since that is not possible, as a second-best alternative I am writing this letter of retraction. There are many reasons for this decision but the more important ones I have listed below:
· In 1986 I had been functioning as an elder less than 1 year. As a ‘novice’ elder I attended the special 1986 Elders’ Training in Anaheim CA. It was during that training that this Letter was composed, circulated and the attendees’ signatures were solicited. Although I did read the contents of the Letter (at least once), to some extent the contextual peer pressure and imposed time constraints were factors in my decision to sign the Letter. (There were 419 signatures out of a potential 425 who attended the elders’ training).
· The 1986 Elders’ Training was not conducted in a vacuum; neither was the elders’ Letter composed in a void. Brother Lee was concerned about certain situations in the Lord’s recovery, situations of which I and many other attendees were unaware. He addressed some embryonic trends he thought he perceived. Unfortunately Brother Lee did not address those events or persons directly and specifically in his elders’ training messages. Consequently, many brothers (including myself) interpreted his sharing subjectively as applying to ourselves. In retrospect, it seems that was not what Brother Lee intended. Nevertheless these factors “coloured” our understanding and response to Brother Lee’s messages, including the elders’ Letter to Brother Lee.
· I am not aware that Brother Lee solicited or expected any Letter of support from the elders. I now have good reason to believe that Brother Benson Phillips (perhaps along with others) engineered the drafting of the Letter and orchestrated the ground swell of support to obtain the signatures as a way of currying favour with Brother Lee and the LSM Ministry Office. In retrospect, it seems like I (and many others) were perhaps being used as “pawns” in the efforts of others to gain influence and advance their own strategic advantage in the recovery.
· As a 'rookie' elder I was unable to see the potential pitfalls that were contained within the text of the Letter. Brother Lee with the wisdom shown in his response2 was well aware of and warned of these potential pitfalls.
· Also as a 'greenhorn' elder I was unaware that certain terms used in the Letter to Brother Lee such as 'repudiate all differences among the churches' and 'the church in our place be identical with all the local churches' could be and would be later misapplied by the Blended Brothers. For example, based upon this Letter of endorsement for Brother Lee’s leadership, the churches were subsequently strongly encouraged to adopt the “one publication” policy and the uniform use of HWMR. This was in spite of Brother Lee's warning to avoid misapplying terms used in the Letter.
· The Letter contains certain caveats, like 'avoiding leadership as much as possible'. However, it appears that, when it is expedient to the Blended Brothers, their recent actions are the very opposite of the thought contained in 'avoiding leadership as much as possible'. Thus we have subsequently heard teachings regarding a higher authority than the elders emanating from the Blended Brothers on the LSM podium. For example, in the July 2006 issue of the Ministry magazine on pages 212 through 213 we read the following words spoken by brother Ron Kangas: "An elder’s local authority pales in comparison to the authority of the Head expressed through His representatives in the Body." In my view, this looks more like a self-serving asserting of authority, rather than practicing the commitment to 'avoiding leadership as much as possible' (contained in the 1986 Letter).
· The Letter contains the declaration that “all the preceding points are the clear and definite teaching of the Bible.” In retrospect this caveat has not been applied to the Letter’s contents as stringently as it should. We affirm that “The Bible is our unique standard” for both teaching and practice in our individual Christian life and the corporate church-life. Hence all the statements contained in the Letter should have been interpreted, qualified and applied in the light of Scripture. In recent years, on the contrary, the tendency fostered by the Blended Brothers has been to take selected portions of Witness Lee’s teachings and make them the de facto standard for the local churches in the recovery. We thus hear of practices that Brother Lee endorsed such as PSRP elevated to the extent that it is alleged to be 'the only way to teach the saints.' This type of claim is made even though such a term (PSRP) or practice is not clearly shown in the Scriptures.
· The positive results we hoped would be achieved such as "leading the saints to preach the gospel in every possible way" have not come about. In fact, initiatives such as alternate ways of carrying a gospel burden have been strongly attacked by the presumed engineer of the Letter and by many other signatories of the Letter.
· The 1986 Letter recognized the leadership position to Brother Lee in ‘the work’ and ‘the ministry’. This recognition was based on the realization that Brother Lee had brought the recovery to North America mainly through his rich ministering of the Word. This leadership position was subsequently appropriated by the Blended Brothers when Brother Lee departed in 1997. This appropriation, to my view, was not supported by their own rich ministry. Rather, they sought to elevate Brother Lee's status and in doing so implicitly preserve their leadership role through their association with Brother Lee. Neither I nor most of the elders who signed in 1986 could have foreseen the subsequent development of an elite group of brothers who view themselves as the only legitimate “continuation” of Brother Lee’s ministry. That possibility was surely not contemplated by me or by the vast majority of signatories in 1986. Yet, that Letter opened the door for these (and other related) developments in the subsequent 20-plus years.
Default Reconsidering Signature (cont.)
In Brother Lee's April 11th, 1986 response to this Letter, he evidently foresaw the potential pitfalls of the term "one with the ministry" used in the Letter. Hence in Brother Lee’s response he included the following:
"Its proper definition is not to follow any man, any doctrine or any movement, but is to be one with the Lord’s move today according to the Lord’s vision, without any intrinsic element of exalting any person or promoting any work."
In 1986 the term ‘one with the ministry’ was a new item in the vocabulary of the recovery. Since that time, and especially since Brother Lee’s passing, being ‘one with the ministry’ has been emphasized ad nauseum by the Blended Brothers. This has occurred in spite of the fact that this phrase does not appear in the New Testament! Moreover, under the Blended Brothers’ teaching, the importance of being ‘one with the ministry’ has been enhanced by other non-biblical terms like, the unique “Minister of the Age,’ and the “one wise master-builder who is the acting God.’ Today, I believe, those claiming to closely follow Brother Lee's ministry, rather than avoiding this pitfall, have fallen headlong into it, along with the saints they are leading. I had asked myself, “Over the past decade, since Brother Lee’s passing, what is the fruit of the Blended Brothers' leadership?” But this realization above has been my impetus for no longer considering the unquestioning acceptance of the Blended Brothers’ teaching as “good for building up” and is also what has caused me for making this public declaration.
For my part, by the Lord's mercy, the recent turmoils have caused me (as well as others with whom I serve) to re-consider how to properly relate to the riches Brother Lee left us. One clear conclusion is that we must go directly to Brother Lee’s writings rather than rely on a second-hand, selective, presentation of them by the Blended Brothers. Moreover, we should learn how to selectively receive his ministry with discernment lest we fall into the error of making it a de facto ‘Third Testament’. Furthermore, Brother Lee’s writings ought to be understood, evaluated and tempered by the Scriptures as our unique standard, rather than forcing the Scriptures to fit the mold of Brother Lee’s writings. I believe the Blended Brothers’ uncompromising insistence on the infallibility of every word, phrase and statement of Brother Lee (when selected and interpreted by them) discredits and spoils the riches left to us in our brother’s ministry.
I continue to pray that I can join with the many saints that, in purity and simplicity, are seeking the Lord's will and leading so that the glorious church can be produced as His bride and testimony to the whole universe.
Your brother in Christ
Steve Pritchard
Toronto, Canada
February 21, 1986
Anaheim, California
Dear Brother Lee,
After hearing your fellowship in this elders’ training, we all agree to have a new start in the Lord’s recovery. For this, we all agree to be in one accord and to carry out this new move of the Lord solely through prayer, the Spirit, and the Word. We further agree to practice the recovery one in: teaching, practice, thinking, speaking, essence, appearance, and expression.
We repudiate all differences among the churches, and all indifference toward the ministry, the ministry office, and the other churches. We agree that the church in our place be identical with all the local churches throughout the earth.
We also agree to follow your leading as the one who has brought us God’s New Testament economy and has led us into its practice. We agree that this leading is indispensable to our oneness and acknowledge the one trumpet in the Lord’s ministry and the one wise master builder among us.
We further agree to practice the church life in our locality absolutely in a new way: to build the church in, through, and based upon home meetings; to lead every member to get used to functioning without any idea to depend on any giant speakers; to teach all the saints to know the basic truths in an educational way that they may teach others for the spreading of the truth; to build up the saints in the growth in life that they may minister life to others, shepherd each other, and take care of the backsliding ones; to lead all the saints to preach the gospel in every possible way; to avoid leadership as much as possible; and to have home gatherings for nurturing the saints in life and big meetings for educating the saints in truths.
We agree that all the preceding points are the clear and definite teaching of the Bible according to God’s New Testament economy.
Finally, we agree that the success of this new move is our responsibility and will rise up to labor and endeavor with our whole being, looking to the Lord for His mercy and grace that we would be faithful to the end.
Your brothers for the Lord's recovery
April 11, 1986
The Brothers attending the February 1986
Elders’ Training
Dear Brothers:
Thank you for your letter dated February 21, 1986 with the list of signatures. I feel very sorry that I could not have time to acknowledge, with appreciation, what you have expressed in your letter and through your signatures until now.
Being one with the ministry is a crucial matter, and its effects are exceedingly serious. Its proper definition is not to follow any man, any doctrine or any movement, but is to be one with the Lord’s move today according to the Lord’s vision, without any intrinsic element of exalting any person or promoting any work. May the Lord be merciful and gracious to us, that this action would not be misunderstood or misapplied by anyone in a way that would give the enemy Satan ground for utilization, thus frustrating the Lord’s move today, but rather that this action could be properly used by the Lord to swallow up all the germs of discord which have been existing, even among us, for quite a time in the past. May the Lord remember your kind wishes for me and bless your labors in Him.
Your brother in Christ,
Witness Lee
What is the difference between Denominationalism and Sectarian oneness? It would seem that if the LC shifted to the wrong ground, then it must have been on the proper ground at an earlier time. Apparently this same shift also occurred much earlier in Taiwan. This suggests that this shifting might have been deliberately planned?
Good question Renee. I don't have an easy answer for you.
What I will say is that both denominationalism and sectarian oneness add something to the Gospel. It is the Gospel PLUS other non-essentials. In the case of the Local Church . . . .I would suggest that there may not be a whole lot of difference in general. The differences are in specific.
Denominations are, as Unto mentions, centered around specific understandings of scripture as being important. Those things beyond the very basics of the faith may or may not be correct, important, or even important even if not correct.
The real thing is what they think about the church universal. Do they see themselves as the church, and like a recent pope declare all others "damaged"? Or do they hold to their beliefs while acknowledging others as also part of the church just as they are?
Denominations are primarily bound by details of belief, not names. Each one may or may not be particularly "sectarian." I think that the problem lies in the way the terms are used. If we think of denominations as, by definition, exclusive, we think they are harshly divisive even if they are not. And we tend to use the term "sectarian" to denote those that are (as I called it) harshly divided. Those that think they are the church and others are damaged. The LRC/LCM is a good example. The Church of Christ is (or has been) at least somewhat in this group.
Surely there is a level of "we are right and you are not" in virtually every group. And sometimes the rank-and-file members have a different idea of how harsh that separation is than the leadership does. (Not much difference in the LRC. They pretty much all hold a hard line.) I must say that I prefer to meet with people who believe in those side issues closer to what I believe. It keeps there from being as much controversy in the meetings. I am mostly happy to allow the leaders, theologians, etc., dig deep into the things that divide. For the most part, I think that they view it as important to the church as a whole, but they also have a more realistic view of the totality, and even unity of the church than most of us do. Two different churches on opposite corners is often not as divisive as we were made to believe. They are not at war. Each not declaring the other to be deficient in a serous way.
Until some group like Nee's'/Lee's comes along. Find a novel approach to defining the church such that you are it and others simply are not. Declare the people as automatically members of your group and declare the groups they meet with as harlots.
Freedom
07-25-2016, 07:30 PM
Denominations are primarily bound by details of belief, not names. Each one may or may not be particularly "sectarian." I think that the problem lies in the way the terms are used. If we think of denominations as, by definition, exclusive, we think they are harshly divisive even if they are not. And we tend to use the term "sectarian" to denote those that are (as I called it) harshly divided. Those that think they are the church and others are damaged. The LRC/LCM is a good example. The Church of Christ is (or has been) at least somewhat in this group.
Surely there is a level of "we are right and you are not" in virtually every group. And sometimes the rank-and-file members have a different idea of how harsh that separation is than the leadership does. (Not much difference in the LRC. They pretty much all hold a hard line.) I must say that I prefer to meet with people who believe in those side issues closer to what I believe. It keeps there from being as much controversy in the meetings. I am mostly happy to allow the leaders, theologians, etc., dig deep into the things that divide. For the most part, I think that they view it as important to the church as a whole, but they also have a more realistic view of the totality, and even unity of the church than most of us do. Two different churches on opposite corners is often not as divisive as we were made to believe. They are not at war. Each not declaring the other to be deficient in a serous way.
Until some group like Nee's'/Lee's comes along. Find a novel approach to defining the church such that you are it and others simply are not. Declare the people as automatically members of your group and declare the groups they meet with as harlots.
Agreed. It really does make a difference learning to view things like denominations and sectarianism at face value. What makes the LC seem so compelling and also so hard to escape is that members are convinced that their group is the one and only alternative to denominations. And the LC view of denominations is nothing close to what denominations actually are.
I tend to view sectarianism as denominations taken to the extreme. In other posts, I have stated that I view denominations as benign and I fully stand behind that. And I think this is how most people would view them. It’s unfortunate that Christians divide, but it’s also senseless in trying to overcome an inevitability of human nature.
Much of the problem with what Nee and Lee did was that they took a problem that is generally recognized and understood among Christians (division) and attempted to redefine this denomination ‘problem’, and characterize it as something much worse than it really is.
I don't blame Nee or Lee for being tempted to fix the problem they saw, but what I see as being highly concerning is the likely possibility that the problem was constructed into a bigger issue than it really was solely to give them a straw man to tear apart. The reasons as to why this would be beneficial are not too hard too hard to figure out. Characterizing denominations as a great evil paved the road for claims to be made about the superiority of the LC.
I personally saw this pattern time and time again. LC members stand up and tear apart denominations. Some of these people probably never set foot in a non-LC building before, so how would they know what denominations do? Obviously at least some people have fabricated their characterization of denominations. All for what? So that LC members have a way to claim that they’re better than everyone else. It's really sad actually, and it's blatant sectarianism at work. If LCers truly think that denominations are bad, they should take a hard look at themselves until they realize that the LC represents something much much worse.
When Ron publicly defamed Steve, he did so using vague terminology and accusations. And by that I mean language that is elusive to outsiders. His intended message, however, is crystal clear to those within the LC. As Igzy pointed out, it is significant that Ron was not willing to convey a definitive position that he could subsequently stand behind. He didn’t even initiate a public ‘quarantine’ letter like has been done for others.
Here's Mr. Ronald Kangas taking out time from his busy schedule to explain himself ...
http://i67.tinypic.com/21nmphh.jpg
Freedom
07-28-2016, 10:04 PM
Here's Mr. Ronald Kangas taking out time from his busy schedule to explain himself ...
I lost all respect for Ron when I discovered that he is a man who will not stand behind his words. He goes and calls a fellow brother a "man of death." When called to explain his position, he wouldn't even afford Steve a simple response. That is something that I have no respect for.
NewManLiving
07-29-2016, 08:58 AM
Apparently, Ron and other Blendeds were heavily influenced by Phillip Lee. Instead of looking away unto Jesus they looked away unto Phillip Lee. It does not surprise me that they resemble Phillip more than they resemble Christ.
Freedom
07-29-2016, 10:23 AM
Apparently, Ron and other Blendeds were heavily influenced by Phillip Lee. Instead of looking away unto Jesus they looked away unto Phillip Lee. It does not surprise me that they resemble Phillip more than they resemble Christ.
I used to find it hard to believe that any of the blendeds would have looked up to Philip Lee. I assumed that if anything, he was tolerated for the sake of WL, a past issue that they would be glad to sweep under the rug.
Quite to the contrary, an Anaheim elder, Philip Lin, expressed a great appreciation for Philip Lee. It makes me want to gag:
Recalling the beginnings of the Anaheim LSM Station in 1974, I think about how everything was ragged and rough, without financial support and with a shortage of manpower. It was a very tough start. However, after years of labor, it became a rather big and well-organized publisher. It was the Lord’s blessing. It was also the hard work of Brother Philip Lee and many faithful saints who gave their whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee. It is appropriate to describe the beginning of LSM by quoting Brother Lee’s wife, Sister Lee, as she told me: “this was the result of the father with his son, two men beginning work like a “swap-meet.” It is admirable. It is also the Lord’s doing.
Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Location 1292). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.
It was also the hard work of Brother Philip Lee and many faithful saints who gave their whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee.
The above implies that being a "faithful saint" means giving one's "whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee," even if the motivation is selfish and sullied.
The Blended have learned well from Philip Lee.
I used to find it hard to believe that any of the blendeds would have looked up to Philip Lee. I assumed that if anything, he was tolerated for the sake of WL, a past issue that they would be glad to sweep under the rug.
Quite to the contrary, an Anaheim elder, Philip Lin, expressed a great appreciation for Philip Lee. It makes me want to gag:
You ought to gag, in fact, all the saints would start gaging if they knew the real character of the LSM "Office." :gag:
What a blatant deception inflicted upon all the "faithful saints" of God.
The above implies that being a "faithful saint" means giving one's "whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee," even if the motivation is selfish and sullied.
The Blended have learned well from Philip Lee.
I was a deacon in the LC's for decades, and I never knew the identity of the "Office." I remember WL scolding the elders and the saints in one training for how they treated his beloved "Office." I pictured young volunteers filling book orders, and some inconsiderate brother making demands on the staff. At one point even Dick Taylor made an impassioned public apology for not adequately appreciating the sacrifice these serving ones had made.
The whole distortion by Witness Lee and the Blendeds was "the sleight of men, in craftiness with a view to a system of error," and it makes me sick to my stomach. Here's Phillip Lee, the hot-tempered, licentious bully, who was not even identified by name by his father, portrayed as a faithful Levitical serving one in the LSM office and who needs to be apologized to. What a projection of guilt and shame!
:gag: Let's all gag together. :gag:
The whole distortion by Witness Lee and the Blendeds was "the sleight of men, in craftiness with a view to a system of error," and it makes me sick to my stomach. Here's Phillip Lee, the hot-tempered, licentious bully, who was not even identified by name by his father, portrayed as a faithful Levitical serving one in the LSM office and who needs to be apologized to. What a projection of guilt and shame!
:gag: Let's all gag together. :gag:
If Witness Lee is right even when he's wrong, that implies that whatever you do to further Witness Lee is right even if it's wrong. This explains Philip Lee, the Blendeds and the whole shameful history of lies, deceptions, double-talk, cover-ups, lawsuits, quarantines, property grabs and character assassinations, not to mention the general buffoonery.
Tree of Life?! These people could used a little knowledge of good and evil!
Lord, how long?
:gag:
Tree of Life?! These people could used a little knowledge of good and evil!
:gag:
Ha ha! :hysterical:
If Witness Lee is right even when he's wrong, that implies that whatever you do to further Witness Lee is right even if it's wrong. This explains Philip Lee, the Blendeds and the whole shameful history of lies, deceptions, double-talk, cover-ups, lawsuits, quarantines, property grabs and character assassinations, not to mention the general buffoonery.
Tree of Life?! These people could used a little knowledge of good and evil!
Lord, how long?
:gag:
Looks like Nee and Lee might have got it wrong about the tree of life.
The same words are used in Proverbs 3:18 to represent wisdom.
18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her, and happy is every one that holdest her fast.
It's used in Proverbs 11:30 as a fruit of the righteous.
30 The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that is wise winneth souls.
And in Proverbs 13:12 as like having desire fulfilled.
12 Hope deferred maketh the heart sick; but desire fulfilled is a tree of life.
And Proverbs 15:4 as how good or helpful is good speech.
A soothing tongue is a tree of life; but perverseness therein is a wound to the spirit.
I'll get to the NT next, but it does not look like the tree of life is a principle or command to behave/function by intuition or whatever it is that the blendeds say you touch in your spirit. The word life without a qualifying adjective...like Christ's life, God's life, my dog's life, etc. can be misleading and possibly used by satan (or any other nefarious being/person) to indicate any intuitive feeling that one receives from any source. I wonder if this is a safe practice for Christians? Do the church fathers have any comments on this topic?
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.