View Full Version : How Much To Throw Out?
After twenty-something years being in The Lord's Recovery (TLR) I think I'm on my way out, but don't know how much to leave behind. TLR helped revive and restore my love of The Lord that I first had at my conversion. It did this by bringing my attention back to Christ and Him alone. I hope my restored love is genuine and not some type of fakery. I will also miss what we call The Lord's Table Meeting (TLTM) where I could express and pour out my love to Him by singing and prayers. For those of you who have left TLR how were you able to continue this type of corporate worship? Also, for those of you who had the same experience of recovering your first love for The Lord do you feel it was genuine and how did you continue to cultivate this after leaving TLR?
Unregistered
07-23-2014, 11:33 AM
I am still just a guest here but was intrigued by your post and felt compelled to answer. I would say to "throw out" whatever it was that drove you out and "keep" whatever it was that you loved--including the focus on Christ Himself and the realization of His Body expressed in His members. That which drove you out is the very thing that, by leaving, you will remove. Try hard to continue fellowship with those who remain behind that love you. Remember that Christ is not limited in any way--that He loves the other parts of His Body as much as the LC (and He DOES love them!), and that you, with prayer, will find another place to worship and grow. It will take time because one thing the LC is right about is that so much of Christianity today has gone to a "lite gospel". However, many of my friends in the "denominations" decry that also. You will just have to pray and visit and go and "taste" until you find what you are looking for. BUT: first step is defining what is making you leave after 20 years. By the very number, you were not unhappy most of the time. Figure out what made you unhappy and shed that.
Just my thoughts...hope they help.
I am still just a guest here but was intrigued by your post and felt compelled to answer. I would say to "throw out" whatever it was that drove you out and "keep" whatever it was that you loved--including the focus on Christ Himself and the realization of His Body expressed in His members. That which drove you out is the very thing that, by leaving, you will remove. .
This is a wise and healthy suggestion.
Remember that the LC's are steeped in leaven. The Lord instructed the disciples to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees." We surely must reiterate that word, "beware of the leaven of Lee and the Blendeds."
Please be aware that many former members could not discern the wheat from the chaff and have shipwrecked their faith. In an effort to purge themselves of all LC teachings, they thrust off both the good and the worthless.
UntoHim
07-23-2014, 08:54 PM
After twenty-something years being in The Lord's Recovery (TLR) I think I'm on my way out, but don't know how much to leave behind. TLR helped revive and restore my love of The Lord that I first had at my conversion. It did this by bringing my attention back to Christ and Him alone. I hope my restored love is genuine and not some type of fakery. I will also miss what we call The Lord's Table Meeting (TLTM) where I could express and pour out my love to Him by singing and prayers. For those of you who have left TLR how were you able to continue this type of corporate worship? Also, for those of you who had the same experience of recovering your first love for The Lord do you feel it was genuine and how did you continue to cultivate this after leaving TLR?
HERn,
Thank you and BLESS you for having the courage to come out and post what you have written here. This forum was created for, and has been maintained in large part for, a venue for brothers and sisters like yourself to have a place for fellowship, advise and prayer requests. Despite what it may seem at first appearance, this place is much more than just a place where former Local Church members come to bash Witness Lee and the Local Church movement (of course, lot's of that goes on here....but what can I say....I just rent the meeting hall...it's open to anybody who want's to stay on topic :rolleyes:)
I was in the Local Church for about 20 years as well. Much of it right there in the hotbed of Orange County California back in the 1970s and early 1980s. My first "brother's houses" were lead by several of what are now known as "Blended Brothers" and Full Time Co-workers. I would not trade any of those years for anything. God is sovereign and God is GOOD. Maybe some of what we experienced was indeed "fakery" (God knows) but God does not look at the outward, but at the inner man - at our hearts.
As far as the Lord's Table is concerned, If you seek a place that holds a weekly Table I assure you the Lord will lead you to such a place. It may not be in the same format as you are used to in TLR, but the bread and the wine will be there, and it will still signify what our Lord declared it to be “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”.
As far as coming out and finding a good place to worship, you are very much ahead of the game from some of us who left so many years ago. We were on our own, with nobody to talk to or commiserate with. Please...take advantage of us! You don't have to make some of the mistakes that many of us did when we left.
Remember that Christ is not limited in any way--that He loves the other parts of His Body as much as the LC (and He DOES love them!), and that you, with prayer, will find another place to worship and grow.
AMEN!
It will take time because one thing the LC is right about is that so much of Christianity today has gone to a "lite gospel".
Amen to this too. HOWEVER, please keep in mind that a "lite gospel" is better - infinitely better - than a false gospel.
HERn Only you can answer for yourself what to throw out and what to keep. Those choices will be based on your own values.
Since you love Jesus, you may find that you are able to see him afresh as if with new eyes. I was reading the book of Matthew today and I noticed that Jesus said "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Did Witness Lee or his followers teach you that? Because it seems like it was important to Jesus. He summarized the Hebrew scriptures by asking us to do one simple thing: treat others as we would have them treat us.
Jesus went further"... Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. ..."
Later in the same book Jesus expanded on the same principle when he said " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Jesus was saying that the entire Law is at its core a commandment to love God and to love other people. He didn't limit it to loving church people either, I notice. He said love was the true intent of the entire Old Testament and it was to be fulfilled in the New. We must love in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Now I recall many things that Witness Lee and his followers taught me but I don't recall that they taught me how important loving people was to Jesus. Maybe it was just too simple for them. It's not a mysterious high peak teaching that had to recovered to shock the Christian world. But, if you learned anything about how to love others while you were in the church, I would hang on to and practice that. Because, based on what he said, it seems like Jesus would appreciate it if you did.
awareness
07-24-2014, 09:10 AM
If you found God keep that. Then human institutions don't matter; especially personality cult leaders.
TLFisher
07-24-2014, 10:50 AM
Remember that the LC's are steeped in leaven. The Lord instructed the disciples to "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees." We surely must reiterate that word, "beware of the leaven of Lee and the Blendeds."
That has been my sense also. There is leaven, but we must be careful not to generalize.
As it is whenever the Holy Word for Morning Revival is read, the ministry text is received as canonized scripture and may not double check and verify what scripture says in respect to the ministry text. As a result the leaven is accepted without question.
InChristAlone
07-24-2014, 12:43 PM
HERn, thank you for your post. Could you please share your experience? What made you come up with the idea to leave the Local Church?
As for your question, "How much to throw out?" Read the Gospels and you will get the answer. Christ's message is never lite.
May the Lord bless you.
That has been my sense also. There is leaven, but we must be careful not to generalize.
As it is whenever the Holy Word for Morning Revival is read, the ministry text is received as canonized scripture and may not double check and verify what scripture says in respect to the ministry text. As a result the leaven is accepted without question.
I have many close friends and family who have left the Recovery, yet still feel that Lee and Nee are mostly worth reading, and most of what we were taught is worth hanging on to. None of them has a clue what really happened when Ingalls and others were quarantined, and they basically don't want to know either.
awareness
07-24-2014, 03:38 PM
As for your question, "How much to throw out?" Read the Gospels and you will get the answer. Christ's message is never lite.
May the Lord bless you.
Yes bless you.
And don't throw out what Zeek presented in post #5.
Hold to love ... that is what Jesus clearly prescribed.
TLFisher
07-24-2014, 11:49 PM
I have many close friends and family who have left the Recovery, yet still feel that Lee and Nee are mostly worth reading, and most of what we were taught is worth hanging on to. None of them has a clue what really happened when Ingalls and others were quarantined, and they basically don't want to know either.
Of course. Many probably prefer early Lee over later Lee. Although later Lee can come across as sectarian.
awareness
07-25-2014, 06:31 AM
Of course. Many probably prefer early Lee over later Lee. Although later Lee can come across as sectarian.
Yeah, the early Lee was a better liar.
Unregistered
07-25-2014, 06:36 AM
I feel very strongly that I must come back in and ask forgiveness for quoting the phrase "lite gospel" and even agreeing with it to an extent. I have been strongly convicted since writing this that it is NEVER a "lite gospel" that turns a lost person away from an unending eternity in Hell to an unending JOYFUL eternity with Christ! Everything else we have in Christ, no matter how "deep", revolves around and exists through this precious, infinitely "deep" and never "lite" gospel. I was also reminded that for Our Lord, who was crucified before the foundation of the world for this message of salvation, it was NEVER "lite". It took a life of complete obedience to the Father, a life of rejection and sorrow, and a horrific death on the Cross to achieve what I so foolishly referred to as "lite". I sincerely repent and am deeply sorry.
And He has also reminded me that in EVERY church, no matter how "lite" we perceive their message to be, there are those who seek Him and overcome. I stand fully corrected--and gladly so.
HERn Only you can answer for yourself what to throw out and what to keep. Those choices will be based on your own values.
Since you love Jesus, you may find that you are able to see him afresh as if with new eyes. I was reading the book of Matthew today and I noticed that Jesus said "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Did Witness Lee or his followers teach you that? Because it seems like it was important to Jesus. He summarized the Hebrew scriptures by asking us to do one simple thing: treat others as we would have them treat us.
Jesus went further"... Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you ..."
Later in the same book Jesus expanded on the same principle when he said "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Jesus was saying that the entire Law is at its core a commandment to love God and to love other people. He didn't limit it to loving church people either, I notice. He said love was the true intent of the entire Old Testament and it was to be fulfilled in the New. We must love in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Now I recall many things that Witness Lee and his followers taught me but I don't recall that they taught me how important loving people was to Jesus....
I liked this point: zeek showed us the values that he used to extract a coherent message, and mission, from the text of the Jesus story. Love your neighbor. Treat others as you'd be treated. Etc. Nothing about "building the Body" etc. Just take care of the person next to you, arguably put there by God Himself.
I'd like to share my experience of leaving, not that my many failures should be a model for anyone. But it might be somewhat of interest. I was as rabid, as hard-core for "the church" as I could possibly be. Anything inside, I thought, was purified by "the ground", anything outside was hopelessly corrupted "Babylon". The ministry of a certain brother from Chefoo China I wasn't as rabid about, because I felt that his language was somewhat contrived, and stilted, and I was put off by his antagonism toward anyone who didn't agree with him over obscure points of the trinity (see e.g. his contretemps with the Bible Answer Man - a seemingly lifeless quarrel). I also didn't like the near-idolization of Witness Lee by the rank-and-file and the emerging "blended brothers", nor how the poor, the sick and weak were ignored or even rejected in the rush to get supposedly good building materials. But I'd seen a vision of "the church" and I was all in.
So imagine my surprise when one day, out of the blue, the Holy Spirit told me to leave. Just pack it up and go. I was truly shocked. Leave here? After tearfully pledging obedience to the cause, and never to return to Babylon again? After all the trainings, conferences, meetings, trips and blending hospitalities? Well, I got clear marching orders, and I recognized the voice of my Shepherd, so I went, but I went out with a big chip on my shoulder. I went into the denominations with the supposed truths of the Recovery in my hands; I went in there and proselytized, and passed out LSM literature. I tried to show them what they were missing.
So here's what happened. First, I realized that God loves these poor slobs just as much as the "saints" in the "local churches". You look in their eyes and you realize that God loves them. Eventually I began to preach less and listen more. I realized that the Father wants to meet these people, even if it's not "on the ground of oneness".... shock of shocks! God meets people where they are!! That one completely blew me away.
Remember that song, "Just as I am, without one plea, but that Thy blood was shed for me"? Well if the Spirit of Jesus came to me just as I am, shouldn't I also come to others just as they are? Or, should I set up some requirements before presenting them with the truth of God's saving love? We'd been told not to cast our pearls before swine, but at the same time if God was willing to humble Himself in the person of Jesus Christ to reach lepers, sinners, and Gentile dogs, shouldn't I also try to minister on whatever ground I found myself? I quit looking for "the right church" and began to minister. The right person is the one next to you. The right group is wherever you find yourself. Stop being a snob. Stop judging.
Second, as I slooowly began to open myself up to other voices I began to see an entirely different Bible. The idea of "one oracle per age" is absolute nonsense. Of course there is a lot of crap out there. But we'd been told that Nee read everything worth reading, and filtered it, and gave us the pure kernel of truth. And then he and Lee gave us nothing but the pure word thenceforth: the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Again, that's self-serving nonsense. Nee was a bright guy, and a diligent reader, but he was just like us. He put his pants on one leg at a time, and his voice needs to be balanced with other voices. Nee's 1950s writings on relations vis-a-vis the emerging Communist government in China show us that the "later Nee" was as whacked out as the later Lee.
Everyone needs to be adjusted, and balanced. And that especially goes for the people who claim that they need no balancing or adjustment, that through some process of rugged transformation they've entered the rarefied air of pure Spirit, and now only God can adjust them...cult alert...cult alert! Ooogah... ooogah!
I kept a lot, and use it today, but now I treat them as I would any of the Christian faith. Though I occasionally get vitriolic against Lee (that he lorded it over the flock, divided the flock for his own personal empire, and repressed parts of the Bible which didn't fit his vision), I still use what I heard when I was there. I still quote their footnotes, outlines and maxims when I minister to people, and don't have a problem doing that. True, Nee & Lee ministered inside an unbalanced system that wrongly elevated them, but we can still use what we learned and experienced. God is a businessman and wants a return on his investment, and so am I -- I invested part of my life in the Local Church system and now I want a return on my investment. Lee did the same, using Wescott, Vincent, Alford and others. Why can't I also with Lee?
We had a false "all or nothing" paradigm for Lee's ministry, that temporarily trapped and paralyzed us. I'm here to testify that you can leave that group, and you can still use what you learned there, and minister to your neighbor. Notice Jesus saying, "I will build my church": if you take care of your neighbor by testifying to them of Jesus Christ, God will "consummate the New Jerusalem" and all that. Just take care of your neighbor. They are already on the proper ground, waiting for you to come and help them.
awareness
07-25-2014, 08:51 AM
Just take care of your neighbor. They are already on the proper ground, waiting for you to come and help them.
Or them help you.
Nee's 1950s writings on relations vis-a-vis the emerging Communist government in China show us that the "later Nee" was as whacked out as the later Lee.
Everyone needs to be adjusted, and balanced. And that especially goes for the people who claim that they need no balancing or adjustment, that through some process of rugged transformation they've entered the rarefied air of pure Spirit, and now only God can adjust them...cult alert...cult alert! Ooogah... ooogah!
Since I'm feeling loquacious today, I'll add a further point. Nee's instructions to his flock on receiving the new reality of Communist rule unmistakably showed his church arrangement to be of men, by men, and for men. But, and this is a big but, would I have done any better? Probably not. Probably I'd have done much worse in 1950s China than Nee did. So this is not about judging Nee or somehow pretending I'm capable of doing better.
Nee & Lee arguably gave their lives for the Lord's kingdom, and it would be pretty dumb for some wanna-be johnny-come-lately like myself to sit in my easy chair and say that I know better and could do better. If your civilization and all you've ever known is collapsing in front of your eyes, what will you do? It's not easy to say and I don't pretend to be a better Christian than Nee was.
But Nee's model was terribly, terribly flawed, and when the Commies showed up it exposed his system for what it was: of men. And as a Christian reader of history I do have the right, even the responsibility, to say that. And it's important to say that, in the face of a scheme which basically told us that Nee could do no wrong, and it was only the quisling local church elders in Shanghai that deserted him, etc. etc. That history which we were fed by LSM was biased, distorted, and self-serving.
So we shouldn't be afraid to say what we see in history, or in our Local Church experience, even knowing that we ourselves may be the least in the kingdom. "Least" or "most" is not important when we are dealing with spiritual truths. The Bible is its own animal, and we should simply testify, and not be cowed by someone's insistence that we take it, and subsequent Christian history, as "just so." The church system built by Nee et al was far from Jesus Christ in both spirit and letter, and was revealed as such during the Communist takeover.
Nee's writings on dealing with the new political realities in China show him to be an organizational man, not a spiritual man. There were a few spiritual aphorisms to cover his instructions to the flock, but he was grappling with something way over his head. He had built his system and now he had to live with it.
If you leave that Nee & Lee system, and critique it, that doesn't mean that you are being disrespectful of their sacrifices, nor of those who followed. It just means that they get the same unbiased critique that everyone else gets. Don't set anyone or anything aside for special treatment before the Lord shows up, or you may be unpleasantly surprised in that day.
Or them help you.
Right. Well the operative point is that God will show mercy to you as you show mercy to others. If you just sit in your chair and read fancy books and congratulate yourself on your truths, what will the coming fire do to all of that?
No, salvation is found out on the street: as you do to the least of these your neighbors God will do to you. The way for God to help you is for you to help others.
I went into the denominations with all my LSM truths firmly lodged in my brain, and yet I found new truths there. Remember what John said about Jesus? All the books in the world couldn't fully express this guy. Lee might have been afraid of the divisions, and taught us to be, but Jesus ain't. I'm telling you, if you begin to serve, Jesus will meet you there. It is awesome. Don't wait for a "better church model" to show up. Just serve.
UntoHim
07-25-2014, 09:26 AM
I feel very strongly that I must come back in and ask forgiveness for quoting the phrase "lite gospel" and even agreeing with it to an extent. I have been strongly convicted since writing this that it is NEVER a "lite gospel" that turns a lost person away from an unending eternity in Hell to an unending JOYFUL eternity with Christ!...
No need to ask for forgiveness my friend. Just keep posting away, and don't forget to give others the grace and understanding to do as well, and eventually we'll all "arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God".
PS: I think you've brought a good perspective to the forum, please consider joining as a member when you get a chance. Simply send a request, along with your desired UserName to LocalChurchDiscussions@Gmail.Com.
I feel very strongly that I must come back in and ask forgiveness for quoting the phrase "lite gospel" and even agreeing with it to an extent. I have been strongly convicted since writing this that it is NEVER a "lite gospel" that turns a lost person away from an unending eternity in Hell to an unending JOYFUL eternity with Christ!
I have heard similar comments such as yours from those who have spent time in the Recovery. It is just amazing how quickly we Christians get carried off by "impressive messages and high-peak displays of wisdom." (I Cor. 2.1) We love our arousing displays of esoteric doctrines, even when they are dismally void of love and assault the greater body of Christ with ignoble stereotypes and condemnations.
Reminds me of the wife of an aging married couple, after years of therapy and with any vestige of love long forgotten, chiding her weary husband with "counselese" talk such as, "when you continue to violate these long established boundaries, I have no choice but to express how you make me feel when you do that thing you do ... " When love was present, a simple "I'm sorry" would have been more than sufficient.
Likewise with the leadership in the Recovery. I have always been amazed by the brilliant insights from Old Testament shadows which got resurrected and recovered by the LSM wordsmiths just in time to inoculate the saints during their latest round of quarantines. Afaithfulworddotcom is filled with such endless displays of fleshly wisdom totally void of love.
Since leaving the Recovery, I am definitely more attuned to the anointed word rather than the so-called interpreted word. The anointed word, even the simplest message of God's saving love, has the reality of the Spirit of God. That's what this world needs. And that's what builds up. Excellent words of knowledge, however, only puff up.
TLFisher
07-25-2014, 11:53 AM
Since leaving the Recovery, I am definitely more attuned to the anointed word rather than the so-called interpreted word. The anointed word, even the simplest message of God's saving love, has the reality of the Spirit of God. That's what this world needs. And that's what builds up. Excellent words of knowledge, however, only puff up.
Amen Ohio. I would also add the anointed words convict and sensitize our spirit (aka causing us to be inwardly disturbed).
Lisbon
07-26-2014, 09:32 AM
There is quite a bit of speaking about keeping the good and discarding the evil. Thru the years how much did we hear about a ton of leaven and a spoon full of fine flour. But that's what we got. We got the ton of leaven and for my part it is difficult to glean the fine flour. Seriously I have strong doubts about the way our campus workers try for months to convince the young that we are right. Is that what we are after. I think the Mormons and many others are doing the same thing. What happened to speaking to those who have a known need. Remember, the Lord came to heal those who were sick. The "healthy" ones could not receive.
Even though I've been here for over 40 years, I'm not that sure when WL clearly left the Bible and went on his own. I well remember in the mid 80's when he started hatcheting the Psalms and the Psalms were not the only Bible he hatcheted. It really reveals how drugged we were when we didn't stand up and scream. The Christian faith is heavily bound in the Bible and our oracle, apostle, MOTA, dictator spent many years discrediting it while he continued to use the words "pure word of God."
Whether he was a wolf in 1949, I don't know. By the late 80's he was. He lost his conscience and without a conscience you are through with the Lord's work. From some who have posted about his last conference, it would seem his conscience was somewhat working but his BBs covered that up as they covered up all the misery of about 25 years. They too are partakers of his deceptions.
After 18 months "out" I attend a Bible church and the gentleman there is a very well taught man of God and speaks from his heart. I cannot remember when I ever heard WL or any of the BBs or elders speak from their heart. WL just spoke what he had figured out and mostly it was not the Bible but him.
Lisbon
I don't think you need to go on a witch hunt for leaven. Begin by learning to just love God, love people, and receive all believers. Learn to not judge beliefs or practices. Then, read. Read all kinds of Christian authors and sources. Be open to God's speaking in everything. Read, read, read. Read light books on Christian living, read some deep theology, read devotionals, especially read the Bible (with no footnotes). Visit a lot of different churches. Listen to the messages with an open mind. Be humble and appreciative of the many ways God works. Be open to everything but make nothing the final word (obviously the Bible is, but even it must be interpreted).
After some time, you will begin to notice a common thread. The thread will be about loving God, loving people, obeying his Word, being holy, serving others and witnessing for Him. It will be a pure, simple and life-sized thread. Focus on that thread, make it your life path.
You will also notice there will be very little about "building the Church." This is because we can't build the Church, only Christ can. The best we can do is help build up one another, which is the overflow of a life in the thread.
Certain things will fall away, some you will throw away. Some will come back and you will realize they are okay. But the main thing is to open yourself to many sources and let the Spirit tell you what is real.
HERn, thank you for your post. Could you please share your experience? What made you come up with the idea to leave the Local Church?
As for your question, "How much to throw out?" Read the Gospels and you will get the answer. Christ's message is never lite.
May the Lord bless you.
HERn, thank you for your post. Could you please share your experience? What made you come up with the idea to leave the Local Church?
As for your question, "How much to throw out?" Read the Gospels and you will get the answer. Christ's message is never lite.
May the Lord bless you.
Why am I on my way out? Two words; cognitive dissonance.
To me the local churches are like a large extended family living in a large house where all but the infants are aware that a "crazy aunt" lives in the attic, but no one is willing to acknowledge or discuss the "crazy aunt". The "crazy aunt" is not a real person, but a nagging feeling of not being able to discuss the questionable teachings within Nee's and Lee's otherwise healthy ministry, or the shame of the alleged Daystar business investment debacle, or the alleged immorality of a past manager of the ministry, or the rude treatment of the saints by certain brothers using deputy authority. Because (in my opinion) the living of the brothers and the practices of the ministry were not congruent (to me) with the teaching of the bible (as I understand it) I found myself spending an enormous amount of mental and emotional energy trying to manage this cognitive dissonance. I finally gave up.
I get the feeling from some of the brothers that it is best to avoid negative things like those mentioned above because it does no good to know, understand or discuss them. But this does not agree with how I manage the more intimate aspects of my life. For example, if my spouse was being unfaithful I suppose you could say I would suffer less and be happier not knowing of his/her unfaithfulness. But, what about STDs to which I might be exposed? And, if s/he is unfaithful in one area what could s/he be doing in other areas like children, savings, retirement and our plans for the future? So, in the intimate areas of life I really do need to know about negative things in order to protect myself, family and future. I believe my church life and those that I allow to be spiritual leaders over me are also intimate areas of life where I need to be aware of negative things and not feel like I need to remain ignorant. My legitimate need to know and then feeling I'm being negative and divisive for asking or discussing these things with saints is another area of cognitive dissonance that bothers me. We are warned not to read the negative comments because it could poison or deceive us, but I have an intuition that I think I can trust or at least to which I should listen. Having lived with my spouse for a number of years I have an intuition that I can trust him/her. If someone tells me some negative things about him/her or points me to a source of information then I probably need to hear or read it. If when I try to talk to him/her about it and I'm given the impression that I'm being negative or divisive in my marriage, that to me is a huge red flag (and another area of cognitive dissonance). I think I have read that prolonged cognitive dissonance can lead to mental illness. If none of this is your experience, then please ignore all I have written, for I could be deceived.
I think I have read that prolonged cognitive dissonance can lead to mental illness. If none of this is your experience, then please ignore all I have written, for I could be deceived.
My experience of cognitive dissonance within the Lord's Recovery/Local Church movement, a subject touched upon often in these threads, was highlighted in the fact that members were allowed and even encouraged to criticize "Christianity", meaning all those outside the group, but not permitted to be "negative" or "questioning" regarding anything within the group itself.
Second, group leadership could excoriate rank-and-file members for faults and failures, and even drag up imaginary ones, and do it quite publicly (which I witnessed in trainings and conferences), to show who was situated where in the leadership & social pecking order. But any return questioning of the upper tiers by lower members would immediately be branded as "leprosy" and "rebellion". Criticizing higher-ups was simply not tolerated in any way.
So you got this weird combination of outspokenness and silence, depending on where the attention was focused. To me it is a classic example of cognitive dissonance, and it reminds me nothing so much as the slave in the parable in Matthew 18:23-35, who was hyper aware of the slights of others, and yet wanted his own to be ignored.
When an individual behaves this way, he is probably mentally unbalanced; when a group is persuaded to take this as its preferred social arrangement, what do we call it? Socially unbalanced? Certainly it seems to be cognitive dissonance on a larger scale. Members have to adopt this repressed and unbalanced thinking as their own, in order to flourish within the social structures of the group.
Of course it is done widely among "fallen humankind"; we demonize other races, groups and cultures whom we oppose. Those who are alien are considered as inferior. Politics feeds on this distortion of reality to highlight the opponent's faults while masking one's own. And families maintain cohesion, at least somewhat, by drawing borders, and making "us" and "them" judgments, which of course are biased.
In Witness Lee's church, we presumed ourselves beyond all of that. Fallen humankind's social arrangements never touched us! So we never questioned, and never considered, even when things got weirder and weirder, as gaps between individual perception and social consensus widened themselves.
awareness
07-31-2014, 08:41 AM
Of course it is done widely among "fallen humankind"; we demonize other races, groups and cultures whom we oppose. Those who are alien are considered as inferior.
This is pure tribalism, like even the monkeys and great apes, that also have an alpha-male leader.
Paul, or a follower of Paul, says, in Colossians, we put off the old man. Well not entirely. Our tribalism is still hanging around, in Lee's local church movement, with Lee as the alpha-male, condemning all other tribes.
So what's the new man:
"Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all ... bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
And above all these things put on charity..."
But Lee's tribe never reached the new man.
Lees' group is like the tribe of Navajo native Americans. Who called their tribe "The Real People." And all other tribes were not real people. Same thing ; we're it, you're not. Tribalism, pure and simple, is the local church system. Old man stuff - not of regeneration at all ... purely a tribal system of man/monkey ... monkey holiness ... monkey shines ... and monkey tribalism ... that's Lee, and Nee's system: of the old man, and animal nature. Not "Christ is all, and in all." (Col 3:9-13)
Why am I on my way out? Two words; cognitive dissonance.
HERn, I think your post is spot on, as is your analogy of the "crazy aunt in the attic." Any system that is so fragile that it cannot stand up to reasonable scrutiny isn't worth investing your future in. Any church is going to be imperfect. But any church that depends on everyone playing dumb is doomed.
InChristAlone
07-31-2014, 01:59 PM
HERn, thanks. Your story reminds me of my experience. When I found this forum and started reading about WL, I had this verse as a conclusion: "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit." Then I started to explore WL's doctrines and came to the conclusion that Witness Lee's message and Christ's message are not the same. Christ says, "But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." And: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength... Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”
WL's message is different: "But study first my doctrines and attend the Local Church meetings and the kingdom of God will be given to you as well. There is no commandment greater than this.” WL never said these words, but this maxim became the model of spiritual life of his followers.
awareness
07-31-2014, 07:49 PM
HERn, thanks. Your story reminds me of my experience. When I found this forum and started reading about WL, I had this verse as a conclusion: "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit." Then I started to explore WL's doctrines and came to the conclusion that Witness Lee's message and Christ's message are not the same. Christ says, "But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." And: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength... Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”
WL's message is different: "But study first my doctrines and attend the Local Church meetings and the kingdom of God will be given to you as well. There is no commandment greater than this.” WL never said these words, but this maxim became the model of spiritual life of his followers.
And when you step back, and stop to think about it, surely the local church life was not what Jesus pictured for the life of his followers. Just the constant obsessive calling on the Lord, if they're still doing that, can't be imagined as what Jesus expected of his disciples and followers. It's clownish.
I remember it. I look back now and wonder how I could get caught up in something so clownish; I wore a Penguin suit; white shirt, black pants, wingtip shoes, polished, skinny tie and all - (monkey holiness) - so clownish. No wonder the outside world thought we were loony. (Who could blame them if they thought: if that's what Jesus does to people, I'm running the other way.) Which, if I had any sense, I should have done.
So I have to admit, the conclusion from it all is, if I were you guys, I wouldn't listen to anything I say. It's been proven. Even UntoHim can't disagree. My judgment can't be trusted. The LC proved that. I'm most certainly out of whack. One more proof is: the more I learn, the more ignorant I feel. What's up with that?
countmeworthy
08-01-2014, 10:10 AM
And when you step back, and stop to think about it, surely the local church life was not what Jesus pictured for the life of his followers. .......
We wanted and still do wanted Jesus and real lovers of Jesus. I for one having been raised Catholic was tired of the hypocrisy.
I remember it. I look back now and wonder how I could get caught up in something so clownish; I wore a Penguin suit; white shirt, black pants, wingtip shoes, polished, skinny tie and all - (monkey holiness) - so clownish.
LOL.... I have a hard time picturing you in a penguin suit Harold !! We were gullible because we wanted to hang out with people who were 'real' lovers Of Jesus, learn from and become real friends with and people who would teach me how to read a bible because I did not know how. I did not grow up with one. At least that was what I wanted.We were 'loved' bombed and thought it was genuine.
No wonder the outside world thought we were loony. (Who could blame them if they thought: if that's what Jesus does to people, I'm running the other way.) Which, if I had any sense, I should have done.
Suck it up as a learning experience! God used you through that experience to help and encourage a whole lot of other people not to give up on God! Daddy God is very pleased with you even if not everyone on this forum is happy with you! :- )
So I have to admit, the conclusion from it all is, if I were you guys, I wouldn't listen to anything I say. It's been proven. Even UntoHim can't disagree. My judgment can't be trusted. The LC proved that. I'm most certainly out of whack. One more proof is: the more I learn, the more ignorant I feel. What's up with that?
B:DL (barrel of laughter) The LAMB just wants you to follow HIM wherever He goes. Do you remember the jack ass Jesus rode on when He entered Jerusalem the week of His Crucifixion? Jesus was sitting on top of the jack ass and the jack ass was honored to have the KING of kings sitting on him. The jack ass was simply led by Jesus. He didn't give a crap if people made fun of him. He was CHOSEN to carry the KING into Jerusalem. Not a magnificent stallion. (Now when HE returns with the saints at the battle of Armageddon JESUS comes on a White Horse.. maybe you will be changed from a jackass to a white Stallion Harold! :D
Love YA!
Carol
countmeworthy
08-01-2014, 10:47 AM
My experience of cognitive dissonance within the Lord's Recovery/Local Church movement, a subject touched upon often in these threads, was highlighted in the fact that members were allowed and even encouraged to criticize "Christianity", meaning all those outside the group, but not permitted to be "negative" or "questioning" regarding anything within the group itself.
Hi Aron,
Long time I don't drop in... thought I'd come by and see how everyone is doing. I see there are a couple of newbies. How very COOL! JESUS IS SOOO GOOD ! Y'ALL are doing a GREAT SERVICE unto the Lord. I hope my time here will be counted worthy by our Awesome God too.
So... yeah.. as much as the LR/LC movement insists on denying they are not religious :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: they are just as bad as the Mormons, JW and of course the Roman C church...probably worst! I do want to add something here though. The LC is no different than any other club, organization, political or religious. No member of a 'church' is allowed to criticize the 'pastor'. If they do, they are 'quarantined', 'suspended' or excommunicated.
Criticizing higher-ups was simply not tolerated in any way.
Again, this is true in almost every 'church' or club where there is a board of directors.
Members have to adopt this repressed and unbalanced thinking as their own, in order to flourish within the social structures of the group.
And there in lies the problem ! Most 'Christians' have forgotten or have no Spirit revelation that we are members of the BODY of Jesus Christ. He is our Head. HE is our LEADER. HE is our Pastor... our SHEPHERD. The LORD is MY Shepherd. I shall not lack. Remember?
But churchers have subjected themselves to an earthly 'pastor'. And if the 'pastor' says so. Then it be because 'he hears from God'. For years we heard no one had the revelation from God like Witness Lee..and to a lesser or equal extent, Watchman Nee.
Well... guess what? The Mormons feel the same way about Joseph Smith. And most churchers feel the same way about their 'pastor'. - My my! Pastor said this. And pastor said that.' OH...and pastor is now a 'doctor'. He graduated with honors at Bible college.
The FTT is the LC's version of bible college.
Of course it is done widely among "fallen humankind"; we demonize other races, groups and cultures whom we oppose. Those who are alien are considered as inferior. Politics feeds on this distortion of reality to highlight the opponent's faults while masking one's own. And families maintain cohesion, at least somewhat, by drawing borders, and making "us" and "them" judgments, which of course are biased.
Well said. And May God have Mercy on us all!
In Witness Lee's church, we presumed ourselves beyond all of that. Fallen humankind's social arrangements never touched us! So we never questioned, and never considered, even when things got weirder and weirder, as gaps between individual perception and social consensus widened themselves.
Yeah... well... Lee and cohorts attempted to have The 'LIFE GIVING SPIRIT' got sucked right out of us! But God would not have it ! He knows HIS Own! He calls them by Name. His sheep follow THE Shepherd Jesus by His Spirit in them. Jesus truly came to set the captives FREE! And that would be us! Praise His Holy and Beautiful Name. :)
Love YA!
Carol
countmeworthy
08-01-2014, 11:26 AM
Even though I've been here for over 40 years, I'm not that sure when WL clearly left the Bible and went on his own. I well remember in the mid 80's when he started hatcheting the Psalms and the Psalms were not the only Bible he hatcheted. It really reveals how drugged we were when we didn't stand up and scream. The Christian faith is heavily bound in the Bible and our oracle, apostle, MOTA, dictator spent many years discrediting it while he continued to use the words "pure word of God."
Hi Lisbon..
I'm an oldie but goodie :D who hasn't been here in a while. I've been 'circling the globe'...the Christian globe. hee hee
I was in the LC from 1975 -1978/79. Fortunately for me, I was in a pretty healthy church life compared to a lot of them. I got saved straight out of the world and was immersed heavily into the Word of God. In 1975, Lee was still using the KJ and the NASB. Those are the translations I was raised in. There was no RcV. But he did start the Genesis messages then and while there was a lot of great stuff I learned from the bible and messages, I did not know any better as I had never picked up a bible in my life. So I had nothing to compare notes with.
I will say that in 1977, there was a HUGE shift to adulating Lee. He was the 'Paul' of this age, etc... and there was overkill emphasis on 'the church'. So it became The church and Christ. And by 1978, it was Lee and the church'. How 'bout that ??? :rolleyes2:
I also noticed the same record was playing over and over and over. :crazy: You know why? Because the Holy Spirit left. All that was there was NOISE. 'o Lord Jeeeeeeeesus'. His Name... His Precious Name became a sounding cymbal. No heart. No Love. No Anointing. Just dead repetitive Noise.
Back then, I did not know how I was going to leave the LC... so I moved to a different 'locality' which fell apart and I GOT set Free. But while I was out of 'the church', the 'church' was not out of me.
If I'd read my bible and didn't understand something, I would look for a WL or WN book to clarify. DUH !!!!!!!!! :jester::whack:
After 18 months "out" I attend a Bible church and the gentleman there is a very well taught man of God and speaks from his heart. I cannot remember when I ever heard WL or any of the BBs or elders speak from their heart. WL just spoke what he had figured out and mostly it was not the Bible but him.
Cool. I personally think the LCrs are in such a weird predicament..due to the brain washing that it is necessary to go meet other believers and listen to 'pastors'.
Many here attend 'church'. I did for several years. I also watched a lot of Christian TV. All this helped get the LC out of me.
But I'm FREE from going to 'church' now. That was my final step OUT to follow the LAMB wherever HE goes. I don't even like labeling myself as a 'Christian'. I wholeheartedly believe and follow Father God by His Word and through His Spirit leading me, guiding me and enlightening me.
I do fellowship with like minded believers. No one I know had the LC experience I had / we had-have, but there are quite a few people out there that were kicked out of their 'church' and one friend of mine was called 'JEZEBEL' not Rebellious or leprous but JEZEBEL !! B:DL LOL !!
A couple of friends reminded me that God hates the deeds and the doctrine of the Nicolatians. (Clergy lording over the Laity).
Look up... cause we going up ! Jesus is coming ! :party: Come KING Jesus! We LOVE YOU !! I LOVE YOU LORD JESUS ! I REALLY REALLY DO! :D
Invisible HUGS AND BLESSINGS!
Carol
countmeworthy
08-01-2014, 11:34 AM
anointed[/I] word rather than the so-called interpreted word. The anointed word, even the simplest message of God's saving love, has the reality of the Spirit of God. That's what this world needs. And that's what builds up. Excellent words of knowledge, however, only puff up.
Hi Ohio !
Yeppers! Nothing like the Anointed Word and the Anointed Spirit in us and on us!
Hope you are doing well my friend ! Hey... HOW 'BOUT THEM SPURS!!!!
WOO HOO !! :party: :woohoo: :D
LOVE YOU OHIO!!!
Carol
awareness
08-01-2014, 01:57 PM
We wanted and still do wanted Jesus and real lovers of Jesus. I for one having been raised Catholic was tired of the hypocrisy.
I came up with Bible-thumpers. Before the LC I had read the Bible from cover to cover more than 3 times. I didn't need the LC for that.
We were 'loved' bombed and thought it was genuine.
Ya got that right. It was the love that captured me.
Suck it up as a learning experience! God used you through that experience to help and encourage a whole lot of other people not to give up on God! Daddy God is very pleased with you even if not everyone on this forum is happy with you! :- )
LOL
B:DL (barrel of laughter) The LAMB just wants you to follow HIM wherever He goes. Do you remember the jack ass Jesus rode on when He entered Jerusalem the week of His Crucifixion?
Are you calling me a jackass? I'm an :angel3:
Now when HE returns with the saints at the battle of W]Armageddon JESUS comes on a White Horse..
You mean when He's no more Mr. Nice guy? Like in the gospels?
. . . maybe you will be changed from a jackass to a white Stallion Harold! :D
You mean this jackass still has a chance?
Love YA!
Carol
Love ya too Carol ... you know that.
! Hey... HOW 'BOUT THEM SPURS!!!!l
They got lucky is all.
Thanx as always, for your enthusiasm.
They got lucky is all.
Yeah, fifteen years of luck. Go figure.
Hi Ohio !
Yeppers! Nothing like the Anointed Word and the Anointed Spirit in us and on us!
Hope you are doing well my friend ! Hey... HOW 'BOUT THEM SPURS!!!!
WOO HOO !! :party: :woohoo: :D
LOVE YOU OHIO!!!
Carol
Yo Carol, I been missing all those smilie faces of yours.
I was loving every Spurs game! How can you not love the way they play? Six passes and a three point swoosh!
Then ... True to form ... Spurs win the series by a record point differential, and all the Sports world talks about all summer is LaBronto. Go figure!
No headline news, but the whole team, coaching staff, and front office is intact for next year.
They got lucky is all.
Luck is what the Heat had last year.
After twenty-something years being in The Lord's Recovery (TLR) I think I'm on my way out, but don't know how much to leave behind.
In the paraphrazed words of apostle Paul, leave what is behind and push forward. )))
Actually, the process of reevaluating and reexamining your past experience when you decide what to drop and what to keep is rewarding in itself. You will have to reexamine everything, what you decide to keep is yet to be seen. It is different for everyone :)
countmeworthy
08-02-2014, 09:08 AM
They got lucky is all.
Thanx as always, for your enthusiasm.
They got LUCKY?????????? :eek2:
LET'S see here. 1, 2 , 3, 4, 5 NBA championships. (should have won last year too. But they didn't. :mad: oh well )
62 WINS VS 20 losses - not too shabby
6 conference titles
Greg Popavich coach of the year 3 times tied w/Pat Riley
Coyote Mascot - Mascot of the year :D
If that's "LUCK"? I want some of that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:
And if I was 50 yrs younger, as smart as I am now... as mature as I am now :hysterical: I would snatch up Patty (Patrick Mills) in a heart beat ! :D
He is just too cute !! hee hee
Pray and hope they ALL make it to the Holy City New Jerusalem !:)
Love YOU Aron !
Carol
countmeworthy
08-02-2014, 09:18 AM
Yo Carol, I been missing all those smilie faces of yours.
I was loving every Spurs game! How can you not love the way they play? Six passes and a three point swoosh!
Then ... True to form ... Spurs win the series by a record point differential, and all the Sports world talks about all summer is LaBronto. Go figure!
No headline news, but the whole team, coaching staff, and front office is intact for next year.
:highfive: :woohoo: :iagree:
Lebronte the Nephalim ! :hysterical: that's what my friend calls him ! big cry baby!! (and he's "matured" so he wrote in his homecoming letter. uh huh :scratchhead:
Hey... but like everyone else out there... Lebron needs Jesus to be his KING!
SAVE HIM LORD ! TO THE GLORY AND PRAISE OF YOUR NAME!
Don't know if we are going to be around to see NBA next year... (I am a rapture centric jack ass :D believing Jesus is just right around the corner!)
Can't wait to see King Jesus, face to Face! I love HIM sooo very much! He's da MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
LOVE YOU MY SPURS BUDDY !!! woo hoo!!!
Carol
countmeworthy
08-02-2014, 09:22 AM
In the paraphrazed words of apostle Paul, leave what is behind and push forward. )))
Actually, the process of reevaluating and reexamining your past experience when you decide what to drop and what to keep is rewarding in itself. You will have to reexamine everything, what you decide to keep is yet to be seen. It is different for everyone :)
HEY HUGS TO YOU KSA!!
little happy family reunion here !!! Is it a sign of things to come ? :watchout: :sFun_abduct: :D :grouphug:
Carol
Hey, Carol, it is nice to see that you kept your exuberant spirit :)
I'm feeling more free to speak. My spouse and I touched the church through a relative. We had seen that when we come together everyone has a portion to contribute. The first meeting we attended demonstrated a mutual functioning and a sincere love for The Lord at the table meetings. So, we ignored the strange (to us) concepts and doctrines we heard and figured we would understand it some day. The saints took care of us and were genuine (I think) so we ignored some red flags. I was willing to see WL and WN as mature brothers with significant contributions to make regarding maintaining a vital relationship with Christ, but I don't consider him the minister of the age, god's oracle, or even an apostle on the same level as Paul. I think they made significant contributions, but I would not rank them as being equal to Luther. The issues with Daystar, an immoral manager of LSM, strange ideas about deputy authority, bringing oriental sociology/culture into the church, and the exclusive view that The Lord Spirit is only working through the LSM-LR-LC are examples of bad fruit (at least to me).
My spouse and I touched the church through a relative. We had seen that when we come together everyone has a portion to contribute.
Initially you will be "free" to indulge whatever contribution you feel led. Eventually you will be expected to be "one" with everyone else, which means that your contribution is limited to repeating, verbatim if possible, the words of God's oracle, Mssrs Nee & Lee. Those who get their speaking from the Lord and from the still, small voice within, and not through the intermediary of "the interpreted word", will be encouraged not to contribute.
And if you stubbornly decide to contribute something not attributable to the supposed ministry of the age, you will be labeled as "independent", and eventually "rebellious" and "leprous". It is group think, pure and simple. If you are not subsumed in the Hive Mind, you're relegated to the fringes of this movement, and won't contribute much. And all the while, of course, you're encouraged to get in the "center lane", which you're told is no longer you but Christ. But actually it is the Collective: the Hive, fronting the ministry, has now replaced Christ. They will dress it up with spiritual terminology, of course, like "the Church" and "the Body" and so forth, but when push comes to shove you will see what is clear: they are not for Christ, nor the Spirit, nor the Word, nor for weaker members, the widows and orphans. They are for the ministry.
So for those who are OK in that system, and being a cheerleader for the ministry of a man, then yes everyone does have a portion to contribute.
Initially you will be "free" to indulge whatever contribution you feel led. Eventually you will be expected to be "one" with everyone else, which means that your contribution is limited to repeating, verbatim if possible, the words of God's oracle, Mssrs Nee & Lee. Those who get their speaking from the Lord and from the still, small voice within, and not through the intermediary of "the interpreted word", will be encouraged not to contribute.
Initially, back in the 60's and early 70's, there was much more freedom to share acc. to the leading of the Spirit, but not any more. Why "waste" their time with personal testimonies when you can speak "high peak" regurgitations from Lee's vast online ministry.
A friend of mine relocated to a "blended" LC out west and bucked the system by just sharing from the word of God. The saints really loved the freshness of the anointing, like a oasis in a desert. Things were peaceful until some sister spoke in the meeting about how refreshing his sharing was. His heart sunk. He thought, why mention my name in the meeting? Shortly afterwards the "elders" called him in privately and shut him down.
In reality, their liberty of the Spirit is only the "liberty of Lee."
Years later he returned to Ohio. The elders in Cleveland heard about his story and laughed at him for what he tried to do. They had been "freed" from the liberty of Lee into the liberty of Titus.
In less than 40 posts we have moved somewhat from the original question of the thread. And I refrained from my typical "everything — and let what was true to the word come back to you from another source." That does seem to irritate some because they think that I am suggesting that there is nothing ultimately worthy of keeping.
(If the real question was intended to be "how to get out of the LRC when there is family involved" then don't bother reading on. If it was an honest query about what is wrong with the LRC teachings and what should be dumped, read on.)
I have been observing and it seems (to me) that the things that are stated as ultimately worthy of keeping concern the aspects of the people (the mutuality) and general attitudes toward Christ. It is seldom stated as anything about the teachings.
And what I am being told is that if I were too long on remembering the ways of the old days, I would not be enjoying the ways of the recent times.
But I will provide a variant on my typical perspective on what to keep and what to throw out.
First, if you leave, despite the rhetoric you may have heard that there is nowhere else to go, there are really many places to go. And they run a spectrum of types of assembly and types of people. Most of them violate some aspect of what you have heard for however many years you have been in the LRC. They sit in pews. There is only one speaker (in a particular meeting). They may have what some would call a rock band for worship. They call what they do "going to church" and say that it is Sunday.
Get over it quickly. Wherever you find people and a theology and practice that is in any way appealing, try to get over the fact that there are things they do that you were taught were signs of being in daughters of the Whore of Babylon. The fact is that there is generally nothing spiritually or scripturally wrong with any of it. But we constantly heard (and believed) how poor it all was.
When you talk with the people, remember that they are not working with the same dictionary/lexicon. They actually believe all the things that actually matter, but they don't say it the same way. They especially do not use so many strings of adjectives that read like training banners. They don't consider the way you say it as important as the truth that is conveyed.
And when it comes to so much of the teachings that you have come to think on as simply true and helpful, be careful in pushing them. Some of them may be just fine — just buried in funny language (back to that dictionary/lexicon thing). But some of it is really not as good or wholesome as we were taught to believe. In hindsight, I think that just "going with the flow" in your new environment is the best course of action. When you feel the urge to bring something up from "the ministry," count to ten. What I have found is that the things that are actually worthwhile from the LRC's ministry are found in the rest of Christianity. Just less hyperbole in the rhetoric. And more straightforward in the language. It is probably worthwhile to get used to the idea that saying it with more pizzazz does not make it any better — just misunderstood.
When you have a brief thought about joining the choir and then suddenly remember that choirs are from the pit of hell, its time to consider where that thought came from. Maybe it is the complaint against choirs that came from the pit of hell. It was a device used by a divisive person to widen the divide between us and them. There was actually no cause for division. That was the error.
As for teachings. My typical mantra is that if it was truly worth retaining, it will be found again from respected sources. So being willing to dump it all is not so bad. If it is true, it will return. Probably wrapped in different terminology. But those are just words. It is what the words mean that is important, not the emotional impact of the words.
Why do I suggest that everything from the LRC is suspect? Because as I read back through any part of it, I find that highly questionable things are consistently peppered into everything. Even something as simple as salvation. Not saying that their understanding of salvation is wrong, but it was typically part of a larger discussion that included questionable things. You may be able to separate them. But then again, maybe not. My experience was that as long as I started with even normal teachings from an LRC perspective, there was too often something stuck in it that did not belong. And because I was conditioned to simply accept it, I did not see it. But that little bit of extra too often resulted in a slightly skewed version of what was really true.
I know this seems harsh. And it may not be the best way for everyone. But I only started taking this path after many years of just tolerating the differences and thinking that the LRC version was at least slightly better. Until my eyes were opened to the constant word tricks played on us to make us buy the nonsense as if actually included in the Bible.
Am I free of it? Probably not entirely.
Am I talking about preferences for how to have meetings? No. But even that is just a practice. A tradition. And as traditions go, the LRC's table meeting was really pretty good. At least in the earlier days. I've heard that more recently it has been shortened significantly so that they can get to ministry station stuff and the result is a pretty controlled environment.
But I have become quite happy with little plastic cups and broken crackers. Or Styrofoam-like wafers dipped in a small bowl of grape juice. They are forms with which we do what was commanded, and that was to remember. The form is not the remembrance. The form is not the command. The command is to remember.
And that is something we all do.
awareness
08-08-2014, 07:35 AM
They had been "freed" from the liberty of Lee into the liberty of Titus.
What an odd coincidence. They're both from China.
When you have a brief thought about joining the choir and then suddenly remember that choirs are from the pit of hell, its time to consider where that thought came from. Maybe it is the complaint against choirs that came from the pit of hell. It was a device used by a divisive person to widen the divide between us and them. There was actually no cause for division. That was the error.
Thanks for the levity OBW! I needed that! I'm fortunate in that I had a long history in Protestant evangelical Christianity before I came into the "recovery", so I know there is life, reality and even God's move "out there". I think it must be much harder for those who are saved into the "recovery" and have no baseline to use for comparison. I appreciate all the comments and "fellowship".
In less than 40 posts we have moved somewhat from the original question of the thread. And I refrained from my typical "everything — and let what was true to the word come back to you from another source." That does seem to irritate some because they think that I am suggesting that there is nothing ultimately worthy of keeping.
The reason is simple.
I have watched and heard about too many precious saints go off the deep end after leaving the LC.
awareness
08-08-2014, 08:36 AM
The reason is simple.
I have watched and heard about too many precious saints go off the deep end after leaving the LC.
I'll say. I've seen some leave and become Buddhists. And one dear friend, who was an elder in the LC, is now a native American shaman. And they seem happier. They dumped all of it.
And I've seen some go into the different sects of Christianity who end up making everyone around them miserable. They didn't dump everything, but didn't find happiness.
After the LC. there's all kinds. I can list more.
Thanks for the levity OBW! I needed that! I'm fortunate in that I had a long history in Protestant evangelical Christianity before I came into the "recovery", so I know there is life, reality and even God's move "out there". I think it must be much harder for those who are saved into the "recovery" and have no baseline to use for comparison. I appreciate all the comments and "fellowship".I was just a month or so short of 18 when we entered the "recovery." I had already spent a year singing in the adult choir of a somewhat large AOG. And then a little over a year after leaving, I again considered joining the choir and eventually did just that. Now 27 years later, my voice is not consistent enough to really do it regularly, so no more choir.
I wasn't saved in the LRC, or raised there. But I learned more of my core theology there. And despite what I said in my rather lengthy post, there is a lot of solid base. It is just peppered with nonsense.
Now in response to Ohio's comment about people going off the deep end, I am not saying to dump everything while in some unsettled place —like just staying home on your own and in a blue funk over leaving (and wondering whether all those stories about calamity will fall on you). I did start with (and suggest others start with) an intentional association with some substantial Christian group. While there are many independents that are probably fine, I have no way to endorse or suggest to avoid those. But for the most part, the primary evangelical denominations are good — and a lot of others. Baptists, Bible churches, Presbyterian, Reformed, Methodists (sometimes that is almost assembly-by-assembly), substantial Pentecostal or charismatic groups (if you are prone that way), evangelical Lutheran, and others. I am not necessarily saying to avoid anyone I did not name. But in some cases, you probably need to use discretion. Or at least think about it hard.
Some of those places that do a lot of recitations, standing, sitting, kneeling, etc., according to a script are not so poor. Consider what they are actually saying. I've only been to one RCC mass in my life and while I would not make a regular thing of it, I found the content and experience to be totally different from my expectations. Yes, they did do their "Hail Mary" a couple of times. But the priest made a fairly clear homily concerning the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ. Surely some surrounding practices to be leery of. But still a church. And one that was preaching the gospel. And when the time for communion came, the priest again reiterated that Christ was not sacrificed again, but that the sacrifice was made available "today" (in so many words).
But if you start within some existing group and then willfully ignore those "but we learned _____ in the LRC" moments and let the truth reestablish itself within you, it should be a good experience. I'm not saying it will be easy. But it should be good.
OBW has caught a lot of flack for suggesting that everything from the LC should be dumped. Although I too have thought he was a little too insistent on this, I think his point is that, in a way, it might be better to relearn all Christian doctrine, including the stuff the LC got right, rather than clinging tightly to it because you like it so much.
In other words, I think his point is that there is nothing in the LC that you cannot get outside the LC and probably in a healthier manner. He is saying that in some cases it's just better to start from scratch, or act as if your are starting from scratch, when starting over post-LC. So his point isn't that everything in the LC is wrong. His point is you have to relearn everything to get it right anyway so you might as well get started as soon as possible.
I used to object to him more on this. But my experience has told me that he is more right that I first suspected. I had to basically start over with everything to gain a healthier perspective. Clinging to pet LC doctrines just slowed the process of real growth. This was especially true with that which you might see as an LC strength--the matter of inner life. But stuff like "the law of life," "the element of God", "mingling," "God's nature being wrought into us," "the divine dispensing," and a host of others just had to go. Ironically, they got in the way of my relationship with God.
In general, though, we should always have a loose grip on all our supposed understanding of things, pre and post-LC. Someone once said that wisdom is strong opinions loosely held. I think that applies here.
countmeworthy
08-11-2014, 01:02 PM
OBW has caught a lot of flack for suggesting that everything from the LC should be dumped. Although I too have thought he was a little too insistent on this, I think his point is that, in a way, it might be better to relearn all Christian doctrine, including the stuff the LC got right, rather than clinging tightly to it because you like it so much.
I think I've pretty much dumped everything of the LC except my love for the saints. :D Of course, I've been out a lot longer than most of you and my time there was a lot shorter than most of you. However, I was pretty 'consecrated to Christ and the church', until it became
'the church AND Christ' and from there
to "LEE and the Lord's recovery".
Isn't that the way it went? :rolleyes2:
So his point isn't that everything in the LC is wrong. His point is you have to relearn everything to get it right anyway so you might as well get started as soon as possible.
Yeppers! :yep: And remember... it's all about getting to know the LORD all over again for yourself. Don't rely on others for you to get to know Father GOD, Lord and King Jesus, His Son and Word and Holy Spirit, God's Voice and Counselor. Otherwise, it becomes the same story in a different setting.
Get to Know HIM in you and outside of you. He is omnipresent after all.
I had to basically start over with everything to gain a healthier perspective.
Me too. First thing I did was throw away all the Nee and Lee books. Since then I bought one or 2 Nee books but not from LSM. :lol: LOL! That was early on. (Currently, I have pretty much stopped reading spiritual books by anyone!!)
Then I had to stop checking with my RcV to see what Lee had to say about a particular topic. :whoisright: It was then I realized 30 yrs after I had left the LC, how much my soul was attached to it. Then I started going to 'church'. I tried very hard to fit in. after 5 yrs, I didn't. Some of you have and that's great! Maybe that is where YOU are being used MIGHTILY by GOD. OR, where He is teaching you a thing or two !:lol: Like he did me. :DAs for me, I am free from the church organizations now. Took a long time but by the Wonderful Grace of God, He set this captive free!
Some of my friends who were never part of the LC and have left the church organization reminded me how God hates the works of the Nicolaetians. WOW!... That's right, I thought!!!!!!!!!!! So, going back and studying history and being around strong followers and lovers of Lord Jesus Christ has helped me put things into perspective.
Clinging to pet LC doctrines just slowed the process of real growth.
Indeed it did ! Just getting the LC lingo out of your system is a BEAR! Then realizing nobody understands what it was like to be an LCr...especially for those of you who are / have been it for a gazillion years will make you feel like a fish out of water!
But God is Good. And He will help you put it all behind you because God is a REAL PERSON and HE created YOU in His image and likeness. He LOVES US. HE LOVES YOU AND HE LOVES ME! NEVER EVER FORGET THAT!!! He did not create us in the image and likeness of Lee and the LRC !! JESUS is our Deliverer and our Rescuer ! Behold. He makes ALL things new!! Never forget that either!!!!!!!
This was especially true with that which you might see as an LC strength--the matter of inner life. But stuff like "the law of life," "the element of God", "mingling," "God's nature being wrought into us," "the divine dispensing," and a host of others just had to go. Ironically, they got in the way of my relationship with God.
Yes siree re-bob!!! Knowledge doesn't get us close to the LORD.. talking to HIM..being REAL with Him and asking Him to help us change our stinking thinking. Asking Him to help us to see things as He sees things. To Love what He loves and hate what He hates..and to help us in our weaknesses.
LOVE YOU ALL !!
Carol
One thing I'm working to throw out is the concept that all division in the body of Christ is bad. This is not polished and I came to it today when I read something in the discussion on another blog re: The Great Schism. A couple of commentators were lamenting the fact that although they believed in The sovereignty of God, what possible benefit could have come from the Great Schism (why did God allow it). This reminded me of an even earlier "schism" that our sovereign God apparently allowed (and even planned for?), which was the temptation and fall of man. I think we all know the wisdom/love/mercy of God in that "fouled-up plan". So, even though perfect unity in the church was God's goal could His allowing of the Great Schism followed by the umpteen other divisions simply be another venue whereby God could show His wisdom/love/mercy in the living out of the lives of the "peacemakers" who live in the reality of the unity even among the divisions? I don't know theology so all this is speculation on my part...I'm feeling more comfortable living with the thought of "going to the divisions".
Yes siree re-bob!!! Knowledge doesn't get us close to the LORD.. talking to HIM..being REAL with Him and asking Him to help us change our stinking thinking. Asking Him to help us to see things as He sees things. To Love what He loves and hate what He hates..and to help us in our weaknesses.
LOVE YOU ALL !!
Carol
You too, Carol!
In general, though, we should always have a loose grip on all our supposed understanding of things, pre and post-LC. Someone once said that wisdom is strong opinions loosely held. I think that applies here.And that is the key to successful living within the broader community of believers. The less important the mental gymnastics are and the more important our personal living and sanctification are, the better we do. And when we do that, it is a lot less important to dwell on "God's eternal purpose" or "the sevenfold intensified Spirit." Whatever those actually mean is what they mean. If it is important to us, it is in terms of the landscape of our real life, not the head-scape of our mental gymnastics.
Therefore, the whole point of knowing it as we were taught in the LRC is suspect. They knew the stuff for the purpose of having the "best knowledge." But what we know about anything that is not changing our actual lives here on earth on this very day is mostly unimportant. And if it is only changing our ability to have great meetings where we impress each other as we say magical words over and over to each other, then it is equally unimportant.
One thing I'm working to throw out is the concept that all division in the body of Christ is bad. This is not polished and I came to it today when I read something in the discussion on another blog re: The Great Schism. A couple of commentators were lamenting the fact that although they believed in The sovereignty of God, what possible benefit could have come from the Great Schism (why did God allow it). This reminded me of an even earlier "schism" that our sovereign God apparently allowed (and even planned for?), which was the temptation and fall of man. I think we all know the wisdom/love/mercy of God in that "fouled-up plan". So, even though perfect unity in the church was God's goal could His allowing of the Great Schism followed by the umpteen other divisions simply be another venue whereby God could show His wisdom/love/mercy in the living out of the lives of the "peacemakers" who live in the reality of the unity even among the divisions? I don't know theology so all this is speculation on my part...I'm feeling more comfortable living with the thought of "going to the divisions".
Even the call for unity can be used in a divisive manner. The LC majored in this error. They want unity on their terms, defined by submission to their leaders, their vision and their doctrines. Simply calling yourself "the church in such-in-place" doesn't make you for genuine unity any more than calling yourself a Big Mac makes you a hamburger.
The bottom line is no group has the right to claim to be the one that everyone else needs to join. For conscience's sake we need to reserve the right to part ways with groups which we feel led to part ways with. Many community churches these days do a much better job of keeping the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace than the LC ever did.
Unity is important. But unity as practiced by the LC is bogus unity. It's the unity of a movement, not the Spirit. It's unity meant to validate them while discrediting everyone else.
OBW has caught a lot of flack for suggesting that everything from the LC should be dumped. Although I too have thought he was a little too insistent on this, I think his point is that, in a way, it might be better to relearn all Christian doctrine, including the stuff the LC got right, rather than clinging tightly to it because you like it so much.
In other words, I think his point is that there is nothing in the LC that you cannot get outside the LC and probably in a healthier manner. He is saying that in some cases it's just better to start from scratch, or act as if your are starting from scratch, when starting over post-LC. So his point isn't that everything in the LC is wrong. His point is you have to relearn everything to get it right anyway so you might as well get started as soon as possible.
I cannot accept this approach by OBW because I have seen too many in their "relearning" process mess the whole thing up. They rejected all they had in their LC tenure, entered the vast marketplace of Christian and pseudo-Christian products, and ended up far worse. Since they had learned to critique "all things Christian" thru the ministry of Lee, they were frankly unable to join healthy evangelical congregations, to "relearn" the common faith, that which is healthy for our growth in life and relationship with the Lord Jesus. What has worked for OBW may not work for others.
I think the better way is to to expose, in the light of scriptures, those areas in the LC which imprison them holding them in fear. This is how I was delivered. Through careful examination, with healthy feedback from other posters, errant teachings can be exposed one by one. It's a slower process, but I think a safer one. That's how we learn, we unlearn, and we relearn in every area of our life.
One thing I'm working to throw out is the concept that all division in the body of Christ is bad.
You are correct. Here is a verse to help you.
I Cor. 11.19, "For there must be sects (or factions) among you, that those who are approved may become manifest among you."
It is interesting to note that every man of God in the history of the so-called Recovery (whether Darby, Zinzendorf, Luther, or Nee) was esteemed by Lee for separating from their existing churches, starting a new division, and thus "faithfully" following the Lord and His truth. When faithful men of God within the Recovery did the same thing, Lee and his successors condemned them mercilessly, publicly slandered their reputations, and libeled them in writing.
Hypocrites!
Even the call for unity can be used in a divisive manner. The LC majored in this error. They want unity on their terms, defined by submission to their leaders, their vision and their doctrines. Simply calling yourself "the church in such-in-place" doesn't make you for genuine unity any more than calling yourself a Big Mac makes you a hamburger.
Today's laugh.
My recommendation for featured quote.
TLFisher
08-11-2014, 06:16 PM
Even the call for unity can be used in a divisive manner. The LC majored in this error. They want unity on their terms, defined by submission to their leaders, their vision and their doctrines.
Within this last month my family and I met with a local church during vacation. The morning revival taken by this locality had its content based on Lee's Conclusion of the New Testament. How fellowship is defined and taught is interchangeable with Igzy's post. Call it unity or call it fellowship, LSM wants it on their terms. If anyone as a Christian does not fellowship according to their ministry, you are considered outside the Body of Christ. Not only is this a sectarian teaching, it is also in error.
I cannot accept this approach by OBW because I have seen too many in their "relearning" process mess the whole thing up. They rejected all they had in their LC tenure, entered the vast marketplace of Christian and pseudo-Christian products, and ended up far worse.While I am not sure that it is the relearning process that is the problem, I do understand your concerns.
One thing I will say about it all is that more important than pure doctrines — or even more loosely held doctrines — is the problem with the notion that "we have the best ones and everyone else is a pathetic mooing cow (if not the whore of Babylon)." That is the most dangerous part of the LRC teachings — all of them — and the thing that needs dumping more rapidly than the septic system on a motor home after a long vacation in the mountains. The problem is that we have a two edged sword that can divide soul from spirit and joints from marrow, but can't divide truth from hyperbole. And if you can't parse-out the hyperbole, then the teaching underneath is questionable.
(I think that the problem with people who go of the deep end is that they feel that they were just too sure about all the LRC stuff to think that it was just plain wrong. And rather than just admit that we bought a bill of goods, we determine that it was really right in theory, but wrong as practiced, so either give up as personal failures, or blame God for letting it happen.
But we don't blame God for the Anglicans, RCC, Methodists, etc. we blame people who dupe other people. But we weren't duped. we just had bad leaders trying to run the perfect system.)
We were taught for years that the "better" that you can know it and say it, the better it actually is. That was the excuse for the peculiar lexicon. It was our way of saying it better.
And when your goal is to have normal Christian fellowship and everything that comes out of your mouth is "Oh, the wonderful processed triune God burning through my human spirit with the sevenfold intensified spirit," or some other hyperbolic gushing, just sort of leaves everyone else either rolling their eyes or slowly backing away and looking for the door.
True fellowship is a matter of mutuality. It is hard to have mutuality when there is a zealot in the midst. They tend to "bah humbug" at the mutuality and push for fanaticism. The point of mutuality is the "ones" in Ephesians — and mainly Christ. Too much other stuff and mutuality becomes strained. It is true among those who are not following a MOTA.
And holding LRC teachings generally means holding the position of a sort of zealot because of the hyperbole that is wrapped into so much of it. Even the way we talked about otherwise normal stuff was full of hyperbole. Everything had too many adjectives. Constantly.
We have no idea what normal is. And while The Normal Christian Life may have had some good stuff in it, most of it was not really very normal. It wasn't really about life while being a Christian, but about being a Christian in spiritual things in a better way, but not very much about normal daily living as the image of God.
InChristAlone
08-12-2014, 12:00 AM
One thing I'm working to throw out is the concept that all division in the body of Christ is bad.
You are correct. Here is a verse to help you.
I Cor. 11.19, "For there must be sects (or factions) among you, that those who are approved may become manifest among you."
I am sorry, I might be wrong, but I can't agree that all division in the body of Christ is good.
Jesus said "I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you." (John 17:19-21)
So I believe the Lord didn't want us, i.e. His Church, His Body, to be divided.
As for 1 Cor. 11:19, in the original Greek, Paul didn't say "sects" (factions or differences). He used the word αἱρέσεις (haireseis). King James Bible used the right translation: "For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."
Does Paul approve of dissensions among Christians or recognize them as necessary or desirable? Is he making them the rule? If so, then how can this be compatible with the numerous places in his epistles where he so forcefully and persistently calls Christians to full agreement and unanimity?
Be of the same mind one toward another (Rom. 12:16), or Fulfill ye my joy, that ye be like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord of mind (Phil. 2:2).
Furthermore, not only the Apostle Paul, but also other apostles exhorted Christians to be of one mind. Thus the Apostle Peter directly writes to Christians in his first epistle, Be ye all of one mind! (I Peter 3:8).
Not only does the Apostle Paul call Christians to oneness of mind, he even warns them of such people who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which they have learned (Rom. 16:17) and urges them to avoid them, saying that they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple (Rom. 16:18).
What kinds of "heresies" can there be among true Christians when the Lord Jesus Christ Himself prayed for them to God the Father in His prayer as the high priest: That they all may be one; as thou Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us (John 17:21). See what unity must exist among true Christians: unity according to the image of the oneness of Persons of the Most Holy Trinity! Can you imagine that among the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity there would be dissension?
An Orthodox theologian, Bishop Theophan the Recluse wrote a commentary on the epistles of the Apostle Paul. Here is how he explains these words [quoting Saint John Chrysostom]: "By the word 'heresies' he [Saint Paul] understands here not errors concerning dogmas, but actual (and similar) quarrels. If he were speaking of errors concerning dogmas, however, he would not have given occasion for offense (with the words, for there must be). For Christ said, It must needs be that offenses come (Mat. 18:7), but at the same time He did not violate our free will and establish this as a necessity and inevitability for us. He foretold the future which happens from the evil will of mankind, not as a result of His prediction but from the arbitrariness of depraved people. Offenses occurred not because He foretold them, but rather He foretold them because they were going to occur. For if offenses occurred out of necessity and not according to the will of those who caused them, then in vain would He have said, Woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.
"That the Apostle actually called these disturbances and divisions during meals 'heresies' we see clearly expressed by him in the previous sentence. For he said, I hear that there be divisions among you. He did not stop here however. Desiring to explain what divisions he is referring to, he then says, For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper (11:21). It is evident that he is speaking of these disturbances; but do not be surprised that he calls them divisions (schisms). As I said, he desired to have a greater effect on them by using such an expression. If he had meant dogmatical heresies he would not have spoken to them so briefly." (Saint John Chrysostom, Commentary on the first epistle to the Corinthians).
The Apostle Paul could not contradict himself, saying one thing in one circumstance and something else in another. As we saw above, he clearly and unequivocally condemns differences of opinion among Christians and calls all to absolute oneness of mind and soul. Fulfill ye my joy he writes to the Philippians, that ye be like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind (Philip. 2:2).
Such should be the case among all true Christians, for: There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all (Ephes. 4: 4-6).
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/heresies.aspx
While I am not sure that it is the relearning process that is the problem, I do understand your concerns.
Lee taught us to be proud and arrogant, equipping us to judge all other Christians.
This is what I feel is the most dangerous of all.
One reason it is so dangerous is that it prevents the proper "relearning" process for those who leave.
One thing I'm working to throw out is the concept that all division in the body of Christ is bad. ... even though perfect unity in the church was God's goal could His allowing of the Great Schism followed by the umpteen other divisions simply be another venue whereby God could show His wisdom/love/mercy in the living out of the lives of the "peacemakers" who live in the reality of the unity even among the divisions? I don't know theology so all this is speculation on my part...I'm feeling more comfortable living with the thought of "going to the divisions".
Re: "going to the divisions"... remember that this terminology is self-created to perpetuate a myth, the myth of unity, or "oneness", within the "local churches". The idea of divisions, though referenced by Paul's epistles (e.g. 1 Cor 11), typified in the OT (tribes of Judah vs Israel, etc) and contrasted to Jesus' "that they all may be one, Father, even as We are one" prayers and statements, is biased when used in "local church" terminology. So we're now free to look at things outside the "local church" mindset, otherwise your body will leave but your mind, soul, and will could remain imprisoned.
In the "local church" policy they actually allow and encourage multiple gatherings in a city. But they are careful in their terminology, and call them "meetings". So it is okay, they say, and it demonstrates multiplication: college meetings, home meetings, prayer meetings, training meetings, etc. But multiple "churches" - heavens no! That is division! Terrible!
But in the Bible both "meetings" and "gatherings" and "churches" are referred to by the term "ekklesia"! In Rome, for instance, Paul wrote an epistle to the Church in Rome, and in chapter 16 greeted the "ekklesia" (home meeting) in someone's house, there (see v. 5). So is this "division", or "multiplication"? Is the church actually dividing itself, or multiplying, instead?
I believe that the phrase "in the divisions" as it's used in the local churches is a self-serving term created and pushed by their overlords to protect their hegemony. But it is entirely fictitious; unity and divisiveness are matters of the heart, not of organizational practice.
Re: "going to the divisions"... remember that this terminology is self-created to perpetuate a myth, the myth of unity, or "oneness", within the "local churches". The idea of divisions, though referenced by Paul's epistles (e.g. 1 Cor 11), typified in the OT (tribes of Judah vs Israel, etc) and contrasted to Jesus' "that they all may be one, Father, even as We are one" prayers and statements, is biased when used in "local church" terminology. So we're now free to look at things outside the "local church" mindset, otherwise your body will leave but your mind, soul, and will could remain imprisoned.
In the "local church" policy they actually allow and encourage multiple gatherings in a city. But they are careful in their terminology, and call them "meetings". So it is okay, they say, and it demonstrates multiplication: college meetings, home meetings, prayer meetings, training meetings, etc. But multiple "churches" - heavens no! That is division! Terrible!
But in the Bible both "meetings" and "gatherings" and "churches" are referred to by the term "ekklesia"! In Rome, for instance, Paul wrote an epistle to the Church in Rome, and in chapter 16 greeted the "ekklesia" (home meeting) in someone's house, there (see v. 5). So is this "division", or "multiplication"? Is the church actually dividing itself, or multiplying, instead?
I believe that the phrase "in the divisions" as it's used in the local churches is a self-serving term created and pushed by their overlords to protect their hegemony. But it is entirely fictitious; unity and divisiveness are matters of the heart, not of organizational practice.
The LRC tended to reduce their oneness to semantics -- just maintain the proper terminology, and you automatically keep the oneness of the Spirit. They created a bogeyman out of church names, eg they would automatically condemn "The First Lutheran Church in Murray," yet would love the "Church in Murray, hall number one," which is of Lee, out of Lee, and for Lee.
That is the leaven of the Pharisees. That by definition is hypocrisy.
I think the better way is to to expose, in the light of scriptures, those areas in the LC which imprison them holding them in fear. This is how I was delivered. Through careful examination, with healthy feedback from other posters, errant teachings can be exposed one by one. It's a slower process, but I think a safer one. That's how we learn, we unlearn, and we relearn in every area of our life.
I'm not for simply throwing stuff out and starting over. I'm not for a scorched earth policy. That's fanatical. What I am for is being willing to put everything on the table.
So I think the question "how much to throw out" is the wrong one. I think the question is "what should be our general approach to what we think we know." And I think the answer is we should be willing to re-examine everything. Now obviously we must respect the faith, Christ's person and work. But I would include our understanding of what we think that faith means in what's on the table.
For me, once I realized the Christian life is about a relationship with a Person, who is God, Lord and Savior, things came into focus. A lot of stuff became superfluous bling--like divine dispensing, mingling, law of life, etc. I just don't even think about them anymore, and my experience keeps getting better. So much of our view of what's important depends on our focus, and when that changes everything changes.
Today's laugh.
My recommendation for featured quote.
My fifteen minutes of fame was over in a hurry. :frown5:
My fifteen minutes of fame was over in a hurry. :frown5:
Got bumped by a godless comedian? :rollingeyesfrown:
I'm not for simply throwing stuff out and starting over. I'm not for a scorched earth policy. That's fanatical. What I am for is being willing to put everything on the table.
So I think the question "how much to throw out" is the wrong one. I think the question is "what should be our general approach to what we think we know." And I think the answer is we should be willing to re-examine everything. Now obviously we must respect the faith, Christ's person and work. But I would include our understanding of what we think that faith means in what's on the table.
For me, once I realized the Christian life is about a relationship with a Person, who is God, Lord and Savior, things came into focus. A lot of stuff became superfluous bling--like divine dispensing, mingling, law of life, etc. I just don't even think about them anymore, and my experience keeps getting better. So much of our view of what's important depends on our focus, and when that changes everything changes.
Life was simpler in the Recovery. Kind of like being in prison -- there are no tough decisions to make.
Paul's timeless maxim is fitting here -- "Test everything. Hold on to what is good."
awareness
08-12-2014, 10:53 AM
The LRC tended to reduce their oneness to semantics -- just maintain the proper terminology, and you automatically keep the oneness of the Spirit. They created a bogeyman out of church names, eg they would automatically condemn "The First Lutheran Church in Murray," yet would love the "Church in Murray, hall number one," which is of Lee, out of Lee, and for Lee.
That is the leaven of the Pharisees. That by definition is hypocrisy.
That would be: Bold rhetoric divorced from reality.
Ohio,
I know that I keep talking that nearly scorched-earth policy on dumping LRC teaching. But in reality, my position is more like saying that we should love God and hate money. Hate is not really the point. It is getting it in perspective.
And what I probably really mean is that we need to be of a mindset that recognizes potential conflicts of understanding and willfully sets aside the default presumption that what we have been taught in the past is right. Be humble and listen and consider what is being said by others. Accept that we are probably seeing things through a funny set of coke-bottle glasses with strange tinting.
Don't just take what others say. But neither just reject it because we learned it differently in the past.
And last, be willing to take on a new lexicon.
Maybe that will help make my somewhat harsh-sounding rhetoric a little easier to swallow.
Ohio,
I know that I keep talking that nearly scorched-earth policy on dumping LRC teaching. But in reality, my position is more like saying that we should love God and hate money. Hate is not really the point. It is getting it in perspective.
And what I probably really mean is that we need to be of a mindset that recognizes potential conflicts of understanding and willfully sets aside the default presumption that what we have been taught in the past is right. Be humble and listen and consider what is being said by others. Accept that we are probably seeing things through a funny set of coke-bottle glasses with strange tinting.
Don't just take what others say. But neither just reject it because we learned it differently in the past.
And last, be willing to take on a new lexicon.
Maybe that will help make my somewhat harsh-sounding rhetoric a little easier to swallow.
OK OBW, if it seems that I am too wishy-washy for your liking, it is only because some I know and love have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.
awareness
08-12-2014, 01:39 PM
OK OBW, if it seems that I am too wishy-washy for your liking, it is only because some I know and love have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.
For me the baby was dead, and beginning to stink. So I threw the bathwater out with the baby.
I suppose it's different for everybody, but I found that after leaving, I had to go thru a process if deprogramming. And that deprogramming was intense for about three years. And oddly, that deprogramming is still going on. I fact, I'm still working on clearing out indoctrination from my diaper religion.
For me the baby was dead, and beginning to stink. So I threw the bathwater out with the baby.
The "baby" was your faith and love, Christ in you the hope of glory.
awareness
08-12-2014, 09:02 PM
The "baby" was your faith and love, Christ in you the hope of glory.
But my brain, after leaving, was all akimbo. What was my standing with God's Eternal Purpose? Was I out?
It was very confusing. I couldn't hang onto it all, and not be in it. I couldn't be in it, so I had to let go of it all. I had to let go of it all, for the sake of my sanity, to find some cognitive harmony, balance, and peace, faced with living outside of the local church, and living back into the world.
Others I know closely, that have left, had to take similar actions, of letting go of all of the local church mindset/imprints.
But maybe not everyone needs to go thru the same exit strategy we've gone thru.
Still, from what I've seen, those that exit the LC, and still hang onto to the LC paradigm, have the hardest time. Cuz they constantly carry an overload of cognitive dissonance ... enough to break the brain ... burn the brain wires ... and blow a fifty amp fuse.
But my brain, after leaving, was all akimbo. What was my standing with God's Eternal Purpose? Was I out?
It was very confusing. I couldn't hang onto it all, and not be in it. I couldn't be in it, so I had to let go of it all. I had to let go of it all, for the sake of my sanity, to find some cognitive harmony, balance, and peace, faced with living outside of the local church, and living back into the world.
Others I know closely, that have left, had to take similar actions, of letting go of all of the local church mindset/imprints.
But maybe not everyone needs to go thru the same exit strategy we've gone thru.
Still, from what I've seen, those that exit the LC, and still hang onto to the LC paradigm, have the hardest time. Cuz they constantly carry an overload of cognitive dissonance ... enough to break the brain ... burn the brain wires ... and blow a fifty amp fuse.
I understand.
The first things I examined, upon leaving the LC, were all of their exclusive claims. Next I checked into the character of the leaders by reading the accounts of those who left. When all the hypocrisy, all the abuses, and all the unrighteousness of LC leaders finally got exposed, it helped to liberate me from their outrageous claims. Without access to insider information, such as provided by this forum, there was no way I could have been set at large.
Unfortunately this information was not available to you when you were cast out. You had to go it alone. You were like the first round of Jewish believers in the gospels who got put out of the synagogue for believing Jesus was the Messiah. Eventually you paved the way for many more to follow.
Why am I on my way out? Two words; cognitive dissonance.
To me the local churches are like a large extended family living in a large house where all but the infants are aware that a "crazy aunt" lives in the attic, but no one is willing to acknowledge or discuss the "crazy aunt". The "crazy aunt" is not a real person, but a nagging feeling of not being able to discuss the questionable teachings within Nee's and Lee's otherwise healthy ministry, or the shame of the alleged Daystar business investment debacle, or the alleged immorality of a past manager of the ministry, or the rude treatment of the saints by certain brothers using deputy authority. Because (in my opinion) the living of the brothers and the practices of the ministry were not congruent (to me) with the teaching of the bible (as I understand it) I found myself spending an enormous amount of mental and emotional energy trying to manage this cognitive dissonance. I finally gave up.
I get the feeling from some of the brothers that it is best to avoid negative things like those mentioned above because it does no good to know, understand or discuss them. But this does not agree with how I manage the more intimate aspects of my life. For example, if my spouse was being unfaithful I suppose you could say I would suffer less and be happier not knowing of his/her unfaithfulness. But, what about STDs to which I might be exposed? And, if s/he is unfaithful in one area what could s/he be doing in other areas like children, savings, retirement and our plans for the future? So, in the intimate areas of life I really do need to know about negative things in order to protect myself, family and future. I believe my church life and those that I allow to be spiritual leaders over me are also intimate areas of life where I need to be aware of negative things and not feel like I need to remain ignorant. My legitimate need to know and then feeling I'm being negative and divisive for asking or discussing these things with saints is another area of cognitive dissonance that bothers me. We are warned not to read the negative comments because it could poison or deceive us, but I have an intuition that I think I can trust or at least to which I should listen. Having lived with my spouse for a number of years I have an intuition that I can trust him/her. If someone tells me some negative things about him/her or points me to a source of information then I probably need to hear or read it. If when I try to talk to him/her about it and I'm given the impression that I'm being negative or divisive in my marriage, that to me is a huge red flag (and another area of cognitive dissonance). I think I have read that prolonged cognitive dissonance can lead to mental illness. If none of this is your experience, then please ignore all I have written, for I could be deceived.
Thank you HERn.
Your post contains some of the greatest insights concerning the LC strongholds of so-called NEGATIVE speaking.
Worth reading again.
first step is defining what is making you leave after 20 years. By the very number, you were not unhappy most of the time. Figure out what made you unhappy and shed that.
I think that everyone has a unique journey. So mine is mine and yours is yours. But I will share something of mine, because I trust that it overlaps somewhat with those of others.
For example, brother Ohio and I have shared that we both formerly engaged in a kind of "primal scream therapy" in the bars, in the concert halls, in the keg parties. We'd engage in some kind of berserk Bacchanalia, an orgy of shouting and arm-waving, throw a few beer bottles and then go home and sleep it off. Then wake up, fumble around for the cigarettes and keep going. Why? Because it was fun.
Then by God's mercy I got sober and soon found myself in the second row (first being the "blended brothers" of Lee) of a meeting, shouting and waving my arms. Fun! Really, I liked it. I liked to have a kind of sober "primal scream therapy" session holding a bible or hymnal. So I did that for a number of years. Like I said elsewhere, there were a lot of things that didn't square with either the word or my conscience, but it was more fun than being a drunkard.
Then one day the Holy Spirit said, "Go, for I send you far away, to the Gentiles!" (Acts 22:21) It certainly was a challenge, and without the constant reinforcement of the movement (meetings 5 days a week, plus constant "fellowship" socially) my faith got battered, occasionally.
But guess what? I can still have fun. Guess why I write on this forum? To convince the world that my ideas are correct? Not really; I just like to write. I like having people like OBW and awareness comment on my ideas. Knock 'em about, see if there's anything there. So that's what I kept. I kept the focus really appreciating each day, each moment. Remember that healed Samaritan that fell on his face, before Jesus, praising God for His mercy? (Luke 17). Surely God deserves our praise and thanks! I don't want to quit that. So I keep going, because it's more fun for me to continue than to quit.
--What I left behind was the adoration and elevation of a man's ministry (I have my favorites, I admit - Eusebius and Origen being a couple examples - but they departed the earth long ago and I don't anticipate joining a cult of personality based on either one).
--What I left behind was letting someone else think for me. I now realize that I am responsible for my own thoughts. It is time for me to be a big boy, to grow up and take responsibility for my own ideas. They are mine; I own them.
--What I left behind was the arrogance of thinking that I knew the Bible better than others, just because I could wave a couple verses around. That is like the 3rd grader sneering at the 1st grader. Pretty dumb.
--What I left behind is the idea that an organization can replace the Holy Spirit.
--What I left behind was the "us" and "them" mentality that so easily pervades mankind, identifies us as strangers from one another, and sets us on antagonistic courses. We are all here together. We are all sinners. Jesus can save us all. Jesus left the 99 and found the lost sheep. Why should we so easily dismiss one another? Can't we at least acknowledge, respect one another? If anyone was qualified to condemn, and ignore, and reject, it was Jesus. But He was moved with compassion, and he stretched out His hand and healed.
--What I left behind is the theology of the museums. Like glass cases to house the mummified animals, like dioramas in the Museum of Natural History, beautiful and leafy, with painted clouds... all fake. Instead I try to let the Word guide me deeper into the reality. Jesus, when He argued with the scribes, continually said, "Have you not read the scriptures?" (e.g. Matt 19:4) and "do you not yet understand the scriptures?" (e.g. Mark 12:24). We have a very shallow and fragmentary awareness of the scriptures. If we think we have created some "high peak" theology we will maul the scriptures just like Nee & Lee did. Lee went through the scriptures like a bulldozer driving through a flower garden. Not a pretty sight.
For all the exasperation I feel at people like awareness and zeek at their seemingly obstinate refusal to believe anything, I would much rather have a conversation with them any day, than a zombie from the LSM or the LDS or the JWs or 7th Day Adventists. I find it literally impossible to talk to such people. You can say, "The sky is blue", to them, and you can see their eyes roll back as they search their cranial circuits for the programmed response.
Theology is good, and it's necessary, but it should never become a cage to imprison us and derail our journey. Anyway, as Unregistered said, Find out what makes you happy and keep doing that. Whatever makes you unhappy, drop it.
You had to go it alone. You were like the first round of Jewish believers in the gospels who got put out of the synagogue for believing Jesus was the Messiah. Eventually you paved the way for many more to follow.
A lot of us were talking at work about the death of Robin Williams the comedian. People were saying, "brilliant", "gifted", and of course "funny." Some people mentioned his work with the USO, charity "Comic Relief" and so forth.
I just mentioned one verse to them. "I would have fainted unless I had believed to see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living." You can have everything, and do everything, but if you can't believe, you have nothing. The only thing in this whole world, worth having, is faith, and my faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ. That is my confession, my hope, my journey, my truth, my aim. That is my life and my living, and hopefully it is my future.
If by declaring my belief, I can pave the way for many more to follow, I will be happy. In the meantime I'm willing to go it alone, as long as I can believe to see the goodness of the LORD, in the land of the living.
Everyone else, when they came to this dark planet, they "fainted"; they dissolved; they came to nothing. Everyone else failed, and that includes you & me & brothers wee & Witness Lee; all got subsumed by death and darkness, and got cut off from the land of the living. No hope, no way, no light in the darkness. There was no way back to the Father's house. You can win an Oscar, earn millions and make the multitude laugh, but if you can't believe, what do you have here? Nothing.
The psalmist's bold declaration presages Jesus Christ, who never fainted, never dissolved, never slipped, never crumbled, never failed. Jesus knew that he had come down from heaven (Jo 3:13). Jesus knew that he had come from God, and was returning to God. (Jo 13:3b). Jesus knew where he came from and where he was going (Jo 8:14). Jesus knew that he came here from God (Jo 8:42). And he told them, "Where I am going, you know the way" (Jo 14:4).
Like the writer of Hebrews, we look at scripture and "see Jesus" (2:9); now we have the way home. Everything else is just a distraction. All of Mr. Williams' movies, television shows, stand-up comedy routines, joke-cracking, were ultimately just traps and snares. But his loss, his "fainting", his dissolution, is not vain if it helps some people see the world for what it is, and the illusions that it spins, and that its end is just failure and emptiness. The alternative is to believe.
awareness
08-13-2014, 11:23 AM
For all the exasperation I feel at people like awareness and zeek at their seemingly obstinate refusal to believe anything,
I can't speak for Zeek (actually I can but won't - he exasperates me as well - he's an equal opportunity exasperater) but it's not a matter of refusing to believe, it's just that I can't prove anything with certitude. Every thread I pull, as I'm going along, when I look up, I find myself in the land of uncertainty.
Sort of like what happened to us on the 15:45 thread.
There's lots in the Bible, and about the Bible, that's like that. I love the book but lots of it can't be pinned down. For example, before the creation of the sun, that a day is based upon, how long was a day in the beginning of Genesis? I couldn't have been 24 hours. There were no hours then. We don't and can't know. So what do we do? We just proclaim we know. And Bible literalist's proclaim it to be 24 hours, like it is today. But I'm not a Bible literalist. I had enough of that. It's a method that has failed me too many times. And from what I've read, down thru history, has failed many times before.
But I'm still in the Bible every day. I'm a Bible addict. And it's proven to be self-destructive, at times, like addictions usually are (Robin Williams :(). I'm not quite the Bible addict that Professor Bart Ehrman is. (Went to same Theology Seminary as Kangas - totally different conclusion - he's obsessed with getting at the autograph copies, the actual words of God. A fool's errand, methinks, perhaps.
And I love learning about all this stuff. I've really enjoyed ICA's presentations on the EO. I found, for example, that even tho I wasn't raised a Catholic, and was even raise to believe it was/is the whore of Babylon, I still thought Western Christianity was better than Eastern Christianity.
Now I find myself in the land of uncertainty again, concerning the matter. Thanks ICA.
I don't want to leave y'all with the wrong impression. Yes, I threw it all out, even God. Well not all. In the LC I had developed a habit, of always carrying on an inner conversation with God. And I couldn't break the habit (addicted to God too, I suppose, or at least talking to Him).
Even that led to trouble. Eventually I got tired of the dialogue. Of only a dialogue. Of God not talking back. So I went around for quite awhile telling people that God is deaf, dumb, and mute.
Talk about what to throw out. I was totally bonkers (unlike now .. ha ha). I was even into throwing God under the bus.
But, to make an OBW style, already long story short, eventually God came to me. And changed everything. That's another story.
I just had an eye operation, am still groggy, with a patch on one eye. Hope y'all can make sense of this.
There's lots in the Bible, and about the Bible, that's like that. I love the book but lots of it can't be pinned down. For example, before the creation of the sun, that a day is based upon, how long was a day in the beginning of Genesis? I couldn't have been 24 hours. There were no hours then. We don't and can't know. So what do we do? We just proclaim we know. And Bible literalist's proclaim it to be 24 hours, like it is today. But I'm not a Bible literalist. I had enough of that. It's a method that has failed me too many times. And from what I've read, down thru history, has failed many times before.
But I'm still in the Bible every day. I'm a Bible addict. And it's proven to be self-destructive, at times, like addictions usually are (Robin Williams :(). I'm not quite the Bible addict that Professor Bart Ehrman is. (Went to same Theology Seminary as Kangas - totally different conclusion - he's obsessed with getting at the autograph copies, the actual words of God. A fool's errand, methinks, perhaps.
I just had an eye operation, am still groggy, with a patch on one eye. Hope y'all can make sense of this.
Hi awareness. Don't know if you're a reader, but this book had some good chapters in it. The Galileo Connection [Paperback],
Charles E. Hummel (Author)
Well I've visited Baptist, E-free, family, and community churches and have not been hit by a car, lightening or depression, and I can still pray and enjoy The Lord. I can also report that I remained simple and did not bring up any of the high peak truths...although I did enjoy fellowshipping with others re: the life, death and resurrection of our wonderful Lord Jesus Christ!
Well I've visited Baptist, E-free, family, and community churches and have not been hit by a car, lightening or depression, and I can still pray and enjoy The Lord. I can also report that I remained simple and did not bring up any of the high peak truths...although I did enjoy fellowshiping with others re: the life, death and resurrection of our wonderful Lord Jesus Christ!
Loved your sarcasm!
OK OBW, if it seems that I am too wishy-washy for your liking, it is only because some I know and love have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.I was not dissing you in any way. Rather I was giving you a way to understand me as something less than demanding a blank slate. I would agree that is not a good place to be. Probably a lot like Jesus talking about the casting out of the demon where he came back later, and found his old haunt clean and vacant and invited some more demon friends to move in with him.
I know it sounds like I am saying to just dump everything (and that means literally everything if you didn't have anything before the LRC) and just start over. No matter what I say about my own experience, it was never like that. It was instead a slow change in attitude to the place where I didn't start by assuming the LRC stuff was simply right . . . to where I gave the other guys a reasonable read before I said anything . . . to where I generally identify my "that's an old LRC teaching rearing its head in opposition to what I am now hearing" and generally chop its head off without much further thought.
Well, not exactly. I actually consider it all. But I am prone to accept good Dallas Theo kinds of teachings over anything I got in the LRC now. But I've been out for 27 years now. It was not an overnight transition. It wasn't even a rapid transition after joining these forums 18 years after leaving the LRC. For a while I still toyed with the idea that the theory was good while the practice was disastrous. But no more. I really don't even like the theory. I like unity. And I think that it is very important. But what they called unity wasn't. It just had the right sound because of the word "unity." But they weren't talking about unity. Just using (abusing??) the word.
And when it comes to Dallas Theo teaching, I have positions and ideas that makes their professors and students cringe. So I don't necessarily toe their line. But I am satisfied that it is reasonable in a sort of "it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us" kind of way.
But I've been out for 27 years now. It was not an overnight transition. It wasn't even a rapid transition after joining these forums 18 years after leaving the LRC. For a while I still toyed with the idea that the theory was good while the practice was disastrous. But no more.
Mike ... It's too bad we never had a latte together some Saturday morning. Maybe you have a dog we could have walked together. Last week I buried my old hiking companion so I'm looking for a new partner. Whatever conflicts we have had in the past would have perhaps totally dissolved during a nice talk together. I never thought our differences were serious, just a matter of degree.
awareness
08-13-2014, 10:53 PM
Hi awareness. Don't know if you're a reader, but this book had some good chapters in it. The Galileo Connection [Paperback],
Charles E. Hummel (Author)
HERn,
I am a reader. Thanks for the tip. The book strikes me as a Francis Schaeffer type book. Am I right?
HERn,
I am a reader. Thanks for the tip. The book strikes me as a Francis Schaeffer type book. Am I right?
Wow! That's an oldie Goldie! I actually know who that is! Watched some videos of him when I was younger, but never read anything by him. The book deals less with the demise of civilization (if I'm remembering Schaeffer right) and more with science and the bible. I'm gunna Google Francis Schaeffer.
I'm gunna Google Francis Schaeffer.Any time someone suggests that I Google anything, I generally do it. But I use Yahoo.
That makes me part of the group of people that places like Google and Xerox just hate.
I stumbled on "The Unvarnished New Testament" translated by Andy Gaus recently (I hope it's an ok translation) and the way it's written and presented is helping me to read the NT kind of like reading it again for the first time. I think the RcV with footnotes has a place, but using it as the only bible to read is kind of like reading the bible with "LSM blinders" on. The danger (to me) is that I only see what the LSM editors saw (or want me to see). Unless the Spirit has "packed up and gone home" or only speaks to the minister of the age, all the saints should benefit from the fresh Spirit's speaking while reading the bible. I'm not talking about seeing new doctrines or high peak truths. I think when it comes to the Spirit being my comforter He lives in the "here and now" and longs to speak to me about the "here and now" (kind of like Paul learning to live in whatever circumstance the Lord brings his way, or how I treat my spouse, kids, and others?). Maybe my greatest need is having the Spirit speak to me through the word in the "here and now" rather than only enjoying the high peak truths?
Reading the Bible in different translations has the advantage of saying things we have ingrained in our memories differently. Sometimes that gives us pause to consider if we have actually been reading it correctly.
What I mean is that we are so familiar with certain passages because we have heard them over and over — but typically in the same (or basically same) translation. While an alternate translation may or may not be superior to the one we have been using, the fact that they say things differently might highlight where our base understanding may not agree with everyone else. While that is not necessarily a problem, we should be willing to reconsider if there is reason given for it. And the same base words translated to say something different than what we thought was being said is just such a reason to at least think about it.
I read the following this morning in the "Unvarnished New Testament": "That's how you can clearly tell the children of God from the children of the devil: anyone who does't do what's right isn't of God's kind, as well as anyone who doesn't treat his brother with love." 1 John 3:10
This morning the Spirit caused me to consider what I need "to add" as well as throw out, and I learned that for John and Christ the word "love" is a verb not just a noun. In the UNT the word love is translated as "treat his brother with love", so I went to one of my reference books and learned that the word love was in the "present subjunctive active" form meaning a continual or repetitious action. I think I had the idea that love is a thought or a concept, but now I see that love is a verb whose action should never cease. So, one thing I need to add as I transition out is treating the brothers with love.
TLFisher
08-19-2014, 01:02 PM
Likewise with the leadership in the Recovery. I have always been amazed by the brilliant insights from Old Testament shadows which got resurrected and recovered by the LSM wordsmiths just in time to inoculate the saints during their latest round of quarantines. Afaithfulworddotcom is filled with such endless displays of fleshly wisdom totally void of love.
That is the likely explanation why messages given by the blended coworkers tend to resonate as clanging cymbals. Because it's void of love.
If there was love, brothers would seek to reconcile relationships and be sensitive of damaging relationships with fellow brothers and sisters.
HoldFast
08-21-2014, 10:16 AM
If there was love, brothers would seek to reconcile relationships and be sensitive of damaging relationships with fellow brothers and sisters.
This is very true. So many relationships have been damaged, so many hearts broken, so many neglected. How can we be knit together without love?
And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. -1 Corinthians 13:2
For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. -Colossians 2:2
How is it that we were so familiar with these verses but just didn't get what the Lord Jesus was trying to say to us! Our vision was so narrow! O Lord, thank you for opening our eyes and turning our eyes to behold You.
HoldFast
08-21-2014, 10:29 AM
I apologize that this is a bit off topic, but since we are on the subject of "how much to throw out"... :) Over the years I have purchased many LSM and NYCYPCD songs. I already threw out songs that are obviously LC-centric, such as "Splendid Church Life," "Down in Babylon," "God Has Called Us for His Purpose," "God's Eternal Economy," and "Mingle, Mingle Hallelujah." LOL those songs were OH SO catchy. I was absolutely appalled when I analyzed those lyrics from my current perspective. Sadly, these songs are practically ingrained in my mind b/c I have been singing them from youth. There are some "classic" songs that I enjoy, but whenever I listen to them, I can't help but connect those to memories of being in the LRC or LRC people. I can't even pick up my guitar or ukelele anymore! Does anyone else struggle with lingering memories attached to or evoked by certain stimuli? It is actually quite a pity. Well, I guess I answered my own question. However, I do want to point out that over half of the songs I owned were either based on the LRC teachings or exalting the LRC movement, and these types of songs were sung most often in YP/college meetings...almost borderline propaganda. :sad:
countmeworthy
08-21-2014, 11:04 AM
I was absolutely appalled when I analyzed those lyrics from my current perspective. Sadly, these songs are practically ingrained in my mind b/c I have been singing them from youth). There are some "classic" songs that I enjoy, but whenever I listen to them, I can't help but connect those to memories of being in the LRC or LRC people. I can't even pick up my guitar or ukelele anymore! Does anyone else struggle with lingering memories attached to or evoked by certain stimuli? It is actually quite a pity.
Hello HoldFast,
I don't post all that often ANYMORE... but to answer your question... hee hee... I have been out of the LC for more 35 yrs !! And sometimes the songs still stick in my head... It is mostly the Psalms. Back in the 70s..we sang a lot of the Psalms. I learned the Word through singing songs and scriptures. I've learned to throw out the dirty bathwater but not the baby. I still have my hymnal and there are a few hymns I will refer to now and then... mostly on the Precious Blood of the Lamb. Many of the hymns are or were sung by other Christian groups.
Now...to an 'antedote'.... what helped me a lot to get the LC music out of my head was listening to Bob Marley reggae music. :D It is peppy and so what if he was rastafarian and smoked MJ, I used the lyrics to Praise and WORSHIP MY Savior ! Jesus Christ... Father, Son/Word and Holy Spirit.
That was back in the 80s. I haven't listened to Bob Marley's music in years but I still like it a lot. Everyone does... and if they don't...they're old fuddy duddies ! :lol:
That said... just letting you know what worked for me. I also have learned to make up songs to the Lord. Most of the time they really come from the Holy Spirit ! Other times He will use catch tunes so I can make up my own words. I use Christmas carol tunes and change the words. I don't listen to secular music much..and if I do it's mostly from the 80s/90s and before. So I will make up words using those tunes.
In time the Holy Spirit is going to anoint your hands and guitar and ukelele. You tube some Ukelele music. I love that instrument !
Most of all ask and trust the Holy Spirit to anoint your musical talent and gift a fresh... a new. Remember....God makes ALL things new!
Showers of Blessings and Love !
Carol
:hysterical::hysterical:Bob Marley:hysterical::hysterical:
Sarc on-Sorry to sully these sanctified pages...but here goes!-Sarc off
Lyrics from one of Bob Marley's songs.
"Hallelujah"
Hear the children cryin',
but I know they cry not in vain.
Now the times are changin';
love has come to bloom again.
Smelling the air when spring comes by raindrops
reminds us of youthful days.
But now it's not rain that water the cane crops,
but the sweat from man's brow;
the substance from our spine.
We gotta keep on living, living on borrowed time:
Hallelujah time!
Yes, you can hear the children singing: Hallelujah time!
As they go singing by and by: Hallelujah time!
Oh, "hallelujah" singing in the morning.
Hallelujah time! Let them sing; don't let them cry.
Over rocks and mountains
the sheep are scattered all around.
Over hills and valleys,
they are everywhere to be found.
But though we bear our burdens now,
All afflictions got to end somehow:
From swinging the hammer, pulling the plough.
Why won't you let us be, to live in harmony?
We like to be free like birds in a tree.
Hallelujah time! Yes, you can hear the children singing.
Hallelujah time! Yes, as they go singing by and by.
Hallelujah time! Oh "hallelujah" singing in the morning.
Let them sing; never let them cry.
Hallelujah time! "Hallelujah" singin' in the morning.
awareness
08-21-2014, 12:34 PM
I like Bob Marley.
And I love that when a Rastafarian greets you he says "Jah mon," greeting you as a little "g" god man. That pot must do something spiritual for them.:cool:
Hallelujah, Bob ... rest in peace mon .....
H
First time I ever heard the Psalms, I was lost in a haze. Someone put on an LP by Jimmy Cliff, and there were the Melodians, and it was from Psalm 137.
Welcome to planet earth, mon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-5E6_qtXAw
This morning the Spirit caused me to consider what I need "to add" as well as throw out, and I learned that for John and Christ the word "love" is a verb not just a noun. ...So, one thing I need to add as I transition out is treating the brothers with love.
I feel that same as you do. God loves us very much. I find God's love on this forum and I intend to pay it forward. Many posts here are very constructive and healing too. It is difficult to leave everything behind since we were indoctinated. Our brain is a mystery, somehow "re-engining" the brain is not as easy as we thought. "To add" is a great idea. Or I would say to get back all the wonderful things you had before coming to the local church.
First time I ever heard the Psalms, I was lost in a haze. Someone put on an LP by Jimmy Cliff, and there were the Melodians, and it was from Psalm 137.
Welcome to planet earth, mon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-5E6_qtXAw
I didn't realize the song is about the Psalms until now. I heard the melody over and over again when I was kid though I had no idea of its meaning. I was just humming and humming, such a beautiful song.
Here is another beautiful song by
Jeff Buckley Hallelujah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8AWFf7EAc4
... to get back all the wonderful things you had before coming to the local church.
1. Remember that Jesus said that the angels of these little children were always beholding the face of God in heaven? There is a deep connection there, that is lost, over the years, by "the world" and our "soul" and even by "religion".
But the connection is there. You just have to let go of the "junk", the "dross", and trust that this connection will be re-established. God is waiting for you.
2. Remember the parable of the "lost son" who was eating with the pigs. He suddenly "remembered" his Father's house. So trust your ability to come to the Word of God and He will show you the way home. You will see the truth, and "remember" (i.e. recognize) reality, and this will guide you.
Your Lord's Recovery experience was to teach you something. Maybe it was never to trust in man. Only trust in God, in God's Christ. Never trust fallen humans. Including yourself! :)
This should probably be on another thread (maybe admin can advise). In considering what to "throw out" I have been doing a lot of reading and I'm finding some not so nice information about Darby. I also Just read this in Wikipedia re: the concept of the rapture and Darby.
---
As there was no Christian teaching of a "rapture" before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove his bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation.
---
If true, I did not know that the teaching of the rapture was begun by Darby. I always thought that the teaching of the rapture was right up there with "saved by grace". Did Darby just coin the word "rapture" or was he the one that started the concept that The Lord will return to take the believers to Himself away from the earth. The reason I ask is that from what I'm learning about Darby I'm ready to hold anything new that he taught as being suspect until "vetted" by more godly and spiritual teachers. Whom can I trust to be the "vetter"? "Vetter of the age" (VOTA) anyone?
This should probably be on another thread (maybe admin can advise). In considering what to "throw out" I have been doing a lot of reading and I'm finding some not so nice information about Darby. I also Just read this in Wikipedia re: the concept of the rapture and Darby.
---
As there was no Christian teaching of a "rapture" before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove his bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation.
---
If true, I did not know that the teaching of the rapture was begun by Darby. I always thought that the teaching of the rapture was right up there with "saved by grace". Did Darby just coin the word "rapture" or was he the one that started the concept that The Lord will return to take the believers to Himself away from the earth. The reason I ask is that from what I'm learning about Darby I'm ready to hold anything new that he taught as being suspect until "vetted" by more godly and spiritual teachers. Whom can I trust to be the "vetter"? "Vetter of the age" (VOTA) anyone?I think the answer is not so simple. There has always been a belief in the Lord's return. But it was generally accepted as something that would be what it would be. Our task was to live this life according to obedience to our Lord and Savior. But Darby brought so much emphasis on the whole eschatological analysis, focusing strongly on the imagery of those taken.
There may be something to it. And there may not. It is more than evident that the book is a kind of coded message. Not necessarily to figure out in so much detail, but to understand the ideas implied by the imagery. So until Darby, they weren't suddenly tossing the "imagery" idea and saying it was straight up prophecy. I notice that there is a lot of reading of Revelation in that manner. Jumps in and out of metaphors to/from literal, and back again. Without warning. Exactly the way some particular preacher wants us to think and follow.
I believe that Revelation warns of continual turmoil. And it tells that the end will not be simple. But it masks so many details. I think the important part is not to have the best belief about the end times, but to have a solid belief in, and following of, Christ here and now. Do that any you can be a pan tribulationist — it will all pan out in the end. It will happen as it happens.
My belief about it will not change anything. My actions today might (or might not). Don't be caught sleeping. Don't be waiting on another day to get this life right. That is the only thing you have any control over.
Throw out nothing. Throw out everything. Find your own way back. After 9 years actively involved in the LC I finally decided I had enough. By active I mean I brought many people into the LC. Not long ago I received an email from someone I brought to Christ and to the LC from one of the colleges I attended in Santa Cruz where Karl Hammond (editor of the Normal Christian Church Life) and I started a church in Santa Cruz with the two of us, our wives and another couple and in two years built it to 125. I met Karl one Saturday night at the Santa Cruz boardwalk while I was passing out tracts (which I did with a friend every Saturday night---I was attending Bethany College at the time which was nearby).
After two years I left the LC in Santa Cruz in the summer 1971 because WL personally asked me to go to Detroit, I guess because I had influenced numerous relatives to become part of the LC in Detroit. Apparently he felt I would be helpful as well as add to the people there among other reasons I suspect. I continued to attend and work the local colleges and universities to bring in people to the LC while in Detroit but it was more difficult mainly because of the make up of the LC in Detroit. After we moved to Ft. Lauderdale because of the migration and then to Miami, my good friend, Don O’Born tried to talk me out of leaving but I was comfortable leaving. Of course, he became an elder later and ended up leaving himself.
When I left the LC I decided I would try and go back to my former denomination so I went to the AOG in Miami and started praying with 2 brothers every morning at 6am. It was a reasonably large congregation and the Pastor asked if I would be willing to take over an adult class Sunday mornings. I agreed and I built a small tabernacle out of balsam wood, velvet etc and began teaching the spiritual meanings of the various aspects of the tabernacle from the Holiest of all, the holy place to the outer court etc. In the end, I didn’t feel comfortable so I left and felt at that point that I needed a break away from this intense religious exposure. Quite frankly, we can lay a lot of guilt trips on each other and I was tired of doing it to others as well as having others do it to me even if it was an unintended consequence of my actions.
Certainly I have evolved and am evolving in my thoughts and my life but I am very happy where I am at this point in life. I am married to a very active wonderful wife, I have been very active in my church and I could care less what you believe as long as you care about others. For me it is deeds not creeds that is the most important.
awareness
08-30-2014, 05:33 PM
Santa Cruz where Karl Hammond (editor of the Normal Christian Church Life) and I started a church in Santa Cruz
Were you an elder in Santa Cruz? I remember Dennis somebody, and Dave Becker, but don't remember the third. Please fill me in. Were you the third? Hammond wasn't for sure. Hammond was quite a character, as I remember him.
in the summer 1971 because WL personally asked me to go to Detroit . . .
Since you were that close to Lee, did you know about how the Detroit elders were selected, and if Harry Ahlers was picked by Lee? Do you remember who the elders were that Lee replaced? Jim Martin? other Martin's?
I feel like I'm going down memory lane but can't find the memories.
Certainly I have evolved
I'll decide that. Shine on bro, shine on ... please, pretty please.
and am evolving in my thoughts and my life
Evolved or changed, for better or worse?
but I am very happy where I am at this point in life.
I'm glad to hear you're happy.
Blessings ...
Throw out nothing. Throw out everything. Find your own way back. After 9 years actively involved in the LC I finally decided I had enough. By active I mean I brought many people into the LC. Not long ago I received an email from someone I brought to Christ and to the LC from one of the colleges I attended in Santa Cruz where Karl Hammond (editor of the Normal Christian Church Life) and I started a church in Santa Cruz with the two of us, our wives and another couple and in two years built it to 125. I met Karl one Saturday night at the Santa Cruz boardwalk while I was passing out tracts (which I did with a friend every Saturday night---I was attending Bethany College at the time which was nearby).
After two years I left the LC in Santa Cruz in the summer 1971 because WL personally asked me to go to Detroit, I guess because I had influenced numerous relatives to become part of the LC in Detroit. Apparently he felt I would be helpful as well as add to the people there among other reasons I suspect. I continued to attend and work the local colleges and universities to bring in people to the LC while in Detroit but it was more difficult mainly because of the make up of the LC in Detroit. After we moved to Ft. Lauderdale because of the migration and then to Miami, my good friend, Don O’Born tried to talk me out of leaving but I was comfortable leaving. Of course, he became an elder later and ended up leaving himself.
When I left the LC I decided I would try and go back to my former denomination so I went to the AOG in Miami and started praying with 2 brothers every morning at 6am. It was a reasonably large congregation and the Pastor asked if I would be willing to take over an adult class Sunday mornings. I agreed and I built a small tabernacle out of balsam wood, velvet etc and began teaching the spiritual meanings of the various aspects of the tabernacle from the Holiest of all, the holy place to the outer court etc. In the end, I didn’t feel comfortable so I left and felt at that point that I needed a break away from this intense religious exposure. Quite frankly, we can lay a lot of guilt trips on each other and I was tired of doing it to others as well as having others do it to me even if it was an unintended consequence of my actions.
Certainly I have evolved and am evolving in my thoughts and my life but I am very happy where I am at this point in life. I am married to a very active wonderful wife, I have been very active in my church and I could care less what you believe as long as you care about others. For me it is deeds not creeds that is the most important.
You, of course, were the one that recruited me to Lee's local church. Did you use sales techniques you had honed as a Bible salesman to proselytize people for the movement? I remember you would talk for hours to potential converts in informal groups. Was that intended to overwhelm them with information to soften them up for a "flooding" experience when they called on the Lord? I mean, you were obviously good at it as you testified to above, so maybe you can shed some light on the techniques of manipulation that you used. That might provide insight to some of the former members and current members who participate on this website. I also recall when the book Snapping played a pivotal role in your leaving the church, you shared with me about the book at the office where we worked. It gave me a lot to think about, even though I didn't leave right away. Did you recognize some of the techniques that you had used on others in that book?
As far as what to throw out from your experience with the “TLR”. Throw out nothing. Throw out everything. Find your own way back. After 9 years actively involved in the LC I finally decided I had enough. By active I mean I brought many people into the LC. Not long ago I received an email from someone I brought to Christ and to the LC from one of the colleges I attended in Santa Cruz where Karl Hammond (editor of the Normal Christian Church Life) and I started a church in Santa Cruz with the two of us, our wives and another couple and in two years built it to 125. I met Karl one Saturday night at the Santa Cruz boardwalk while I was passing out tracts (which I did with a friend every Saturday night---I was attending Bethany College at the time which was nearby).
After two years I left the LC in Santa Cruz in the summer 1971 because WL personally asked me to go to Detroit since I had influenced numerous relatives to become part of the LC in Detroit. I guess he felt I would be helpful as well as add to the people there among other reasons I suspect. I continued to attend and work the local colleges and universities to bring in people to the LC but it was more difficult mainly because of the make up of the LC in Detroit. After we moved to Ft. Lauderdale because of the migration and then to Miami, my good friend, Don O’Born tried to talk me out of leaving but I was comfortable leaving. Of course, he became an elder later and ended up leaving himself.
When I left the LC I decided I would try and go back to my former denomination so I went to the AOG in Miami and started praying with 2 brothers every morning at 6am. It was a reasonably large congregation and the Pastor asked if I would be willing to take over an adult class Sunday mornings. I agreed and I built a tabernacle out of balsam wood, velvet etc and began teaching the spiritual meanings of the various aspects of the tabernacle from the Holiest of all, the holy place to the outer court etc. In the end, I didn’t feel comfortable so I left and felt at that point that I needed a break away from this intense religious exposure. Quite frankly, we can lay a lot of guilt trips on each other and I was tired of doing it to others as well as having others do it to me.
Certainly I have evolved and am evolving in my thoughts and my life but I am very happy where I am at this point in life. I am married to a very active wonderful wife, I have been very active in my church and I could care less what you believe as long as you care about others. For me it is deeds not creeds that is the most important.
Zeek
Yes, I “recruited” you at college but I wasn’t using a specific technique that I can recall. I think the key for me was …. I was a true believer, all out. (I hope there are no bad feelings) I am sure you realize this wasn’t my first time at this. I was preaching the gospel at 18, in Bible College and worked with Teen Challenge in Detroit even before I was involved with WL and the LC. In Santa Cruz I was very involved in recruitment on campuses. Detroit was different since I was dealing more with believers in other groups whereas in Santa Cruz it was mainly “unbelievers”.
There wasn’t a technique to bring in believers other than I believed we had a better way for all of Christianity. I believed we had this unique insight into the Bible, Christ, the church, reality etc.. When you really believe you have the unique truth that no one else has it can be appealing because it makes people think, maybe. It is not like JWs who are well known and denounced. We were an unknown except we had WN as a backdrop for our credibility. With his books the Normal Christian Life and others I was sold on him and WL being a disciple of his just drew me in. When someone truly believes in something it can be appealing or unappealing depending on where you are in your life. I have followed all the lawsuits etc and I am aware that the very magazine who denounced WL etc has now reversed field and said that are a true Christian Church. Whatever.
The problem with all of this is that when there are cracks in the wall i.e. doubt --- it all starts to come undone. I am not discussing having doubt about Christ at first but doubt about what WL and others in the LC e.g. Mel Porter were doing and saying. You can even believe that the “idea” of a LC is what God wanted but it boils down to humans who are running this stuff. When that happens the floor below begins to shift and you find yourself trying to make sense of it all especially when you have been so dedicated, so involved, so given to it all. You start out by saying well at least WL and LC brought me closer to “Christ”. I don’t know what path anyone takes but for me that statement did not end up being true. However, I had to go through a lot of reflection and assessment to realize that it didn’t work for me.
I don’t think anyone from the LC should accept “Christianity” (I say should because some of my relatives have swallowed it after having been in the LC) because of what was experienced in the LC. I say that not because I want to judge anyone but people are playing church and they have politicized Christianity in the US (btw-there are authentic Christians but I am not sure anyone on this forum would agree with me as to who they are).
When you leave the LC, where is there to go, other than having some home meetings etc and that really doesn’t last over time? I would suggest that if you are going to keep believing in WL or WN or the LC etc stay with the LC…stick it out because I don’t think it will work very well for you outside of that realm. It all has worked for me simply because I have distanced myself from all of it in a way that is positive.
Awareness
No, I was not an elder although supposedly Karl Hammond was “grooming” me to be one when I left for Detroit. I was never interested since I was so active on campuses etc. I actually never understood the “elder” concept in SC and I let Karl handle that stuff. Yes, Dennis became an elder but not sure about Dave…I am sure Karl was the third. Karl and his wife finally split and I had some correspondence with him a few years back. Yes, he was quite the character but he said it like it was. I really liked him.
I wasn’t close to Lee but when I was asked go to Detroit for a conference with Lee I ended up sitting in the back seat of a car with him and Don O’Born. Lee asked me, “When can you come to Detroit?”. I should have answered, “NEVER” but I was under his spell.
No, I don’t remember the elders Lee replaced because by the time I arrived Tim, Ron and Harry were the elders. Not sure what was going on before other than my relatives were very involved after I wrote and called them about WL and the LC and how wonderful it all was. Of course, the LC in Santa Cruz was wonderful -- it was exciting, fun and full of life unlike Detroit for the most part but I attribute that to the elders who made it too heavy.
For better or worse? Are you kidding me? I live comfortably a few blocks from the ocean, I have hiked the Inca trail and hiked down the Grand Canyon a few times, the White Mtns, Appalachian trail etc., caught salmon, rockfish, halibut etc in Alaska, kayaked and dug up claims in Alaska, witnessed the blue whale, sperm whales as far as the eye can see in the Sea of Cortez, swam with sea lions, dolphins, manatees, rented a 100 ft yacht where we were in the middle of a feeding frenzy of humpback whales in the inside passage in Alaska… Life is not just about saying Oh Lord Jesus but enjoying the journey of this life. Sure I have read extensively but I am also an activist for what I believe. I don’t just mouth the words but I do my best to live the life. My wife will be part of 100,000 marchers in September in NY in the People’s Climate March. Anyway, life for me is more than finding out the meaning of the greek word “love” but the experience of life itself.
Zeek
Yes, I “recruited” you at college but I wasn’t using a specific technique that I can recall. I think the key for me was …. I was a true believer, all out. (I hope there are no bad feelings) I am sure you realize this wasn’t my first time at this. I was preaching the gospel at 18, in Bible College and worked with Teen Challenge in Detroit even before I was involved with WL and the LC. In Santa Cruz I was very involved in recruitment on campuses. Detroit was different since I was dealing more with believers in other groups whereas in Santa Cruz it was mainly “unbelievers”.
There wasn’t a technique to bring in believers other than I believed we had a better way for all of Christianity. I believed we had this unique insight into the Bible, Christ, the church, reality etc.. When you really believe you have the unique truth that no one else has it can be appealing because it makes people think, maybe. It is not like JWs who are well known and denounced. We were an unknown except we had WN as a backdrop for our credibility. With his books the Normal Christian Life and others I was sold on him and WL being a disciple of his just drew me in. When someone truly believes in something it can be appealing or unappealing depending on where you are in your life. I have followed all the lawsuits etc and I am aware that the very magazine who denounced WL etc has now reversed field and said that are a true Christian Church. Whatever.
The problem with all of this is that when there are cracks in the wall i.e. doubt --- it all starts to come undone. I am not discussing having doubt about Christ at first but doubt about what WL and others in the LC e.g. Mel Porter were doing and saying. You can even believe that the “idea” of a LC is what God wanted but it boils down to humans who are running this stuff. When that happens the floor below begins to shift and you find yourself trying to make sense of it all especially when you have been so dedicated, so involved, so given to it all. You start out by saying well at least WL and LC brought me closer to “Christ”. I don’t know what path anyone takes but for me that statement did not end up being true. However, I had to go through a lot of reflection and assessment to realize that it didn’t work for me.
I don’t think anyone from the LC should accept “Christianity” (I say should because some of my relatives have swallowed it after having been in the LC) because of what was experienced in the LC. I say that not because I want to judge anyone but people are playing church and they have politicized Christianity in the US (btw-there are authentic Christians but I am not sure anyone on this forum would agree with me as to who they are).
When you leave the LC, where is there to go, other than having some home meetings etc and that really doesn’t last over time? I would suggest that if you are going to keep believing in WL or WN or the LC etc stay with the LC…stick it out because I don’t think it will work very well for you outside of that realm. It all has worked for me simply because I have distanced myself from all of it in a way that is positive.
I think it's a bit amazing that we are talking again after so many years. You were "a true believer." That explains a lot, bro. But, was your ability to convert people to the LC just persistence and dumb luck? You're too humble. You were good at it. And now if you know who the authentic Christians are why be shy about it? This isn't the LC. The moderator is a nice guy. I don't think he would kick you off for expressing yourself honestly. After all, he puts up with me.
One more question: As I recall it, you left the LC right after you read that book, Snapping by Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman whereas I left gradually over a period of several years. Did you snap out of the local church consciousness suddenly upon reading that book? Was there something in the book that served as a catalyst for decisive action with regard to the LC? Experiences like these might help people here that are undecided whether to meet with the church or not or those who are trying to reorient having recently left.
... the LC in Santa Cruz was wonderful -- it was exciting, fun and full of life unlike Detroit for the most part...
Please tell us of your experience in the LC in Santa Cruz. Were you involved in the "Jug Band" that used to travel around on a flat-bed truck? Or was that only in Berkeley? Were you involved in Berkeley as well?
I am interested in that you seem to have kept some experiences yet successfully thrown out some things as well. Especially where you mention that you eventually realized that your LC experience didn't cause within you a deeper love for the Lord Jesus Christ.
My contention is that the LC ultimately distracts us with its group focus, which takes away both our attention and care toward our Father God, and toward our neighbor (the so-called "Great Commandment"). The collective (aka the Church, the Body, the Recovery, the Ministry, the Lord's present move, etc) effectively becomes our new de facto God; this is probably similar to the Marxist idea of the "State". The individual now becomes largely irrelevant, and the collective is the all in all.
... the LC ultimately distracts us with its group focus, which takes away both our attention and care toward our Father God, and toward our neighbor (the so-called "Great Commandment")... The individual now becomes largely irrelevant, and the collective is the all in all.
When I wrote "our attention and care toward our Father God" I meant more precisely "our attention to, care of, and delight in our Father's saving love for us in sending His beloved Son, our Savior." Most readers would probably understand this, but I felt it might be good to be more explicit.
It cannot be overstressed that it is not we who act but our Father in His Son. And my point was that our attention has been taken away from all this to something we call "church".
1. Remember that Jesus said that the angels of these little children were always beholding the face of God in heaven? There is a deep connection there, that is lost, over the years, by "the world" and our "soul" and even by "religion".
But the connection is there. You just have to let go of the "junk", the "dross", and trust that this connection will be re-established. God is waiting for you.
2. Remember the parable of the "lost son" who was eating with the pigs. He suddenly "remembered" his Father's house. So trust your ability to come to the Word of God and He will show you the way home. You will see the truth, and "remember" (i.e. recognize) reality, and this will guide you.
Your Lord's Recovery experience was to teach you something. Maybe it was never to trust in man. Only trust in God, in God's Christ. Never trust fallen humans. Including yourself! :)
Thank you for the words of encouragement. They help me greatly everytime I come back for reviews...
awareness
09-01-2014, 08:27 AM
Were you involved in the "Jug Band" that used to travel around on a flat-bed truck?
In Detroit I remember making a #3 tub single string bass, which was a reaction to hearing about the Jug Band. I could play it, but nothing like one of the ones that were there before Lee sent in his crony elders.
Those were fun times.
I too remember Santa Cruz as very fun and very loving. But Santa Cruz, because Karl Hammond founded it, was considered "out of the flow" by those in L.A. (those were the days before Anaheim). Karl was in some kind of rebellion to Lee. So was Paul Ma. Maybe Dave can shed some light on this matter.
UntoHim
09-01-2014, 09:49 AM
Hey Dave,
When you get a chance please shoot an email to LocalChurchDiscussions.Com requesting membership, then I'll reply with a temporary password. I'm assuming you want to use the UserName Dave.
So far of the things that I'm throwing out this one I'm throwing the furthest because I think it is the most toxic and insidious...and that is that there are two gospels. LSM teaches that there are two gospels...a low gospel and a high gospel. But the genuine minister of the age (Paul) says in two places in the NT (Gal 1:8, and II Cor 11:4) not to accept a gospel different than the one that Paul taught. He uses strong words that anyone teaching a different gospel is under God's curse. I think it grieves my Savior to refer to His suffering, death and resurrection leading to the forgiveness of sins and spiritual rebirth as somehow being the "low" gospel. There is only one gospel that begins with forgiveness of sins and rebirth and continues with sanctification throughout the saved sinner's human life, I think. Who gets to decide what's high and what's low?
So far of the things that I'm throwing out this one I'm throwing the furthest because I think it is the most toxic and insidious...and that is that there are two gospels. LSM teaches that there are two gospels...a low gospel and a high gospel. But the genuine minister of the age (Paul) says in two places in the NT (Gal 1:8, and II Cor 11:4) not to accept a gospel different than the one that Paul taught. He uses strong words that anyone teaching a different gospel is under God's curse. I think it grieves my Savior to refer to His suffering, death and resurrection leading to the forgiveness of sins and spiritual rebirth as somehow being the "low" gospel. There is only one gospel that begins with forgiveness of sins and rebirth and continues with sanctification throughout the saved sinner's human life, I think. Who gets to decide what's high and what's low?
Amen and Amen!
I thought I would give an update. I'm reluctant to share details that might identify me to any LSM folks that probably monitor this site and forward reports to LC elders. I hope that I get to a place (soon) where I don't care. I think I will. We're finally being left alone by the saints...and for good reason because I don't return texts, phone calls or emails. We've not been excommunicated or quarantined probably because I've never spoken anything negative to the other saints. We were dearly beloved and our withdrawal has hurt several of them. I don't know how some of you do it...to believe as you do and still have the emotional capacity to meet with the LC. It looks like we're settling in with an Evangelical Free denomination group, mainly because they're taking care of our child...one of the youth leaders told us that their goal is for the youth to really come to know who Jesus is from the scriptures. Compare this to the topic of the last LSM-LC youth conference topic was something like "what is the recovery?". Is the word "recovery" even in the bible? Come on people! It's Jesus that we should be pointing our young people to, right?
UntoHim
10-28-2014, 09:14 PM
Come on people! It's Jesus that we should be pointing our young people to, right?
Thank you. Bless you. May the Lord honor and bless you and yours. And thank you for coming on our little forum here and letting us all know whats going on with you. This is what this forum is all about. It's a place, it's a refuge, it's a venue for everybody who has had anything to do with the Local Church movement. COME ONE, COME ALL!
Why did WL need to create the "processed triune god" concept? This is another one of those things that I'm throwing out. Why did he need to have this unusual doctrine concerning God...did it allow him to develop the practice of "just turn to your spirit" behavior? I do not believe that the Father was ever crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended. It was the Son that experienced all of this, not the Father. Isn't it a heresy to say that the Father was crucified? Furthermore, the Son did not send the Holy Spirit...the Father sent the Holy Spirit (I think). Thanks for any insight you may offer.
UntoHim
11-24-2014, 05:37 PM
Thank you HERn for chiming back in on such an important subject!
Here's the deal. Witness Lee was right - absolutely right - when it comes to some of the teachings in Western Christianity. I'm not going to get into these right here because you have addressed something else.
Witness Lee was wrong - DEAD WRONG - regarding his teachings of "the processed triune God". You bring up a very good point about the Father not being crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended. Of course the Father was indeed involved with all that happened to his Son, after all He sent Him to this earth to accomplish these very things! But to say that the Father was actually crucified on the cross is not only factually incorrect, it is bordering on abject heresy.
And yes, you are also correct about the Father sending the Holy Spirit. And, by extension, we also know that Witness Lee's teaching that "the Son became the Holy Spirit" is also not biblical, at least it is not biblical for those who would want to stick to the historical Christian faith, which holds to a "Trinitarian" position. Most Christian apologists label Lee's "Processed triune God" teaching as some form of modalism.
Why did WL need to create the "processed triune god" concept? This is another one of those things that I'm throwing out. Why did he need to have this unusual doctrine concerning God...did it allow him to develop the practice of "just turn to your spirit" behavior? I do not believe that the Father was ever crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended. It was the Son that experienced all of this, not the Father. ..... Thanks for any insight you may offer.
An example that could be given is where the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews said, "But we see Jesus, made a little lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor". If the Father was made a little lower than the angels, then who was running the universe?
An example that could be given is where the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews said, "But we see Jesus, made a little lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor". If the Father was made a little lower than the angels, then who was running the universe?
I am sure this has been brought up previously but having read through many of the posts on this forum I reflect back to 1978 when I left the LC. No internet, no email, no discussion groups, no outside info. LC was in denial about any problems and there was no inside info. Isolation was the norm for those who left. I only read about problems with John Ingalls and others on the internet years later. I was shocked to hear that John Ingalls, Bill Mallon and others who I had met at various times were pushed out of the LC. Weren't they trained by WL and the most spiritual?
Now I see there are those who have left the LC and are struggling. It is not an easy road after having been involved in the LC depending on how long one was involved. I am sure it is helpful to see that there are others who have left, doing well and others struggling as well. I guess I wonder if there had been this much info available when I left how it would have impacted my decisions, if at all.
I am sure this has been brought up previously but having read through many of the posts on this forum I reflect back to 1978 when I left the LC. No internet, no email, no discussion groups, no outside info. LC was in denial about any problems and there was no inside info. Isolation was the norm for those who left. I only read about problems with John Ingalls and others on the internet years later. I was shocked to hear that John Ingalls, Bill Mallon and others who I had met at various times were pushed out of the LC. Weren't they trained by WL and the most spiritual?
Now I see there are those who have left the LC and are struggling. It is not an easy road after having been involved in the LC depending on how long one was involved. I am sure it is helpful to see that there are others who have left, doing well and others struggling as well. I guess I wonder if there had been this much info available when I left how it would have impacted my decisions, if at all.
Yes, this site has been a help to me...if you take what the curmudgeons have to say with a grain of salt! :hysterical:
On another note last Sunday we took to lunch an elderly brother (84) (from the E-Free church where we attend) who had retired as a linguist from Wycliffe Associates who worked in South America when James Elliot and others were killed by Huaorani in Ecuador. Although he has a simple faith in and love for The Lord Jesus he's on the 22nd chapter of a book he's writing where he is analyzing the language of a matriarchal Native American tribe to better understand their world view so that the gospel can be better communicated. Our conversation switched between Christ's love for the church and the use of obscure personal pronouns in the Indian language where the word "husband" means "the thing that belongs to the wife" and the word "wife" refers to the woman that runs the home, or something close to that! (I'll check to make sure.) Wow! There sure are some wonderful and amazing dear believers out there with genuine gravitas that seems to far exceed that of any of the blendeds.
Yes, this site has been a help to me...if you take what the curmudgeons have to say with a grain of salt! :hysterical:
On another note last Sunday we took to lunch an elderly brother (84) (from the E-Free church where we attend) who had retired as a linguist from Wycliffe Associates who worked in South America when James Elliot and others were killed by Huaorani in Ecuador. Although he has a simple faith in and love for The Lord Jesus he's on the 22nd chapter of a book he's writing where he is analyzing the language of a matriarchal Native American tribe to better understand their world view so that the gospel can be better communicated. Our conversation switched between Christ's love for the church and the use of obscure personal pronouns in the Indian language where the word "husband" means "the thing that belongs to the wife" and the word "wife" refers to the woman that runs the home, or something close to that! (I'll check to make sure.) Wow! There sure are some wonderful and amazing dear believers out there with genuine gravitas that seems to far exceed that of any of the blendeds.
From one curmudgeon to the others out there (not to include yourself) I think you are on the right track. I especially like the E-Free church's distinctives, most notably: "Affirms the right of each local church to govern its own affairs with a spirit of interdependency with other churches". Wasn't that the death knell for WL...trying to control all of the churches in the world from Taiwan to Europe to the US etc. I am sure those who are left feel as though they are holding the fort but WL's or the BB's efforts are only repressive actions which ultimately minimize growth.
countmeworthy
11-25-2014, 08:50 PM
I am sure this has been brought up previously but having read through many of the posts on this forum I reflect back to 1978 when I left the LC. No internet, no email, no discussion groups, no outside info. LC was in denial about any problems and there was no inside info. Isolation was the norm for those who left. I only read about problems with John Ingalls and others on the internet years later. I was shocked to hear that John Ingalls, Bill Mallon and others who I had met at various times were pushed out of the LC. Weren't they trained by WL and the most spiritual?
yes...that was my impression as well. I once heard a 'leading' brother say there was no other person whose presence of the LORD was so strong as that of JI aside from WL.
I guess I wonder if there had been this much info available when I left how it would have impacted my decisions, if at all.
I left the LC around 1978 too. Now I 'migrated' to a start up LC that was moving away from WL and siding with Max Rappaport and Sal ? from Boston.
Everyone was airing out Lee's dirty laundry. Everyone was trying to free themselves from the LC clutches. We met together, prayed and though we TRIED to fellowship, it was mostly venting. Eventually, the small LC 'church' disbanded and everyone went their separate ways. Some went into the world..sex, drugs, rock and roll... others found a 'safe' haven in denominations. Others like me, wandered in the wilderness wondering where I fit in. 30 plus years l'm just fine. Still a work in progress..but fine. Of course, my time in the LC was short lived compared to most people here. But during those short lived years, the LC was everything to me, after the LORD JESUS. I left in part because I saw Lee becoming the focus and center of the LC.
May GOD quickly restore everyone's spiritual, emotional and physical health and heal all our wounds, spiritual, emotional and physical, in the Mighty and Loving Name of Jesus Christ.
Carol
I left the LC around 1978 too. Now I 'migrated' to a start up LC that was moving away from WL and siding with Max Rappaport and Sal [Benoit] from Boston.
Everyone was airing out Lee's dirty laundry. Everyone was trying to free themselves from the LC clutches. We met together, prayed and though we TRIED to fellowship, it was mostly venting. Eventually, the small LC 'church' disbanded and everyone went their separate ways.
Certainly there is a benefit, today, of having the virtual forum on the internet to share one's thoughts hopes & even pain & anger. Sometimes it is frustrating when the collective response to one of my "bright ideas" is silence, or someone saying "I don't get it". Sometimes the level of discourse is not very evolved.
But when you compare it to what Carol went through, it is probably good to have around. Not to mention the fact that more information is available. Over all, it is quite a resource.
Thanks to whoever you are, out there, who put this discussion forum up on the internet! God bless you!
awareness
11-26-2014, 07:28 AM
Certainly there is a benefit, today, of having the virtual forum on the internet to share one's thoughts hopes & even pain & anger. Sometimes it is frustrating when the collective response to one of my "bright ideas" is silence, or someone saying "I don't get it". Sometimes the level of discourse is not very evolved.
But when you compare it to what Carol went through, it is probably good to have around. Not to mention the fact that more information is available. Over all, it is quite a resource.
Thanks to whoever you are, out there, who put this discussion forum up on the internet! God bless you!
Yes! Amen to bro UntoHim ...
Certainly there is a benefit, today, of having the virtual forum on the internet to share one's thoughts hopes & even pain & anger. Sometimes it is frustrating when the collective response to one of my "bright ideas" is silence, or someone saying "I don't get it". Sometimes the level of discourse is not very evolved.
But when you compare it to what Carol went through, it is probably good to have around. Not to mention the fact that more information is available. Over all, it is quite a resource.
Thanks to whoever you are, out there, who put this discussion forum up on the internet! God bless you!
Maybe we need a "Like" button for posts. :) But I understand what you mean. Sometimes I wonder, "did anyone read that?" They do.
I go back to the pioneer days of the old Bereans forum being the only place to discuss the LC. It was run by an odd bunch from the Philippines who thought they were the sun and moon when it came to deciding who was and (especially) who wasn't Orthodox.
UntoHim was a mod there, but had little backing from the owners, and so was like a guard dog on a short leash. He could never really discipline people. We had one poster who annoyed everyone (though he was also appreciated). He would always tap dance at the edge of trolldom, and drove UntoHim crazy. Overall the forum was beneficial, but it was also a zoo.
But I remember UntoHim saying back then that we needed our own site, even our own ministry. No one stepped up until finally he did, and created this site. The Bereans? I haven't gone there since I can remember and have no desire to.
He would never toot his own horn, so we should do it for him occasionally. Well done and thanks, UntoHim!
Certainly there is a benefit, today, of having the virtual forum on the internet to share one's thoughts hopes & even pain & anger. Sometimes it is frustrating when the collective response to one of my "bright ideas" is silence, or someone saying "I don't get it". Sometimes the level of discourse is not very evolved.
I have tried to respond to those "bright ideas" which I have found particularly helpful, which is prolly why I have racked up so many posts. As instructed, keeping my posts "short, quick, living, and to the point." :rolleyes:
Obviously my many posts are not because of my own original thoughts. :rollingeyesfrown:
And btw a very Happy Thanksgiving to all those in LCD-Land. :hurray:
awareness
11-26-2014, 12:43 PM
Maybe we need a "Like" button for posts.
vBulletin supports it ...
rayliotta
11-26-2014, 11:04 PM
From one curmudgeon to the others out there (not to include yourself) I think you are on the right track. I especially like the E-Free church's distinctives, most notably: "Affirms the right of each local church to govern its own affairs with a spirit of interdependency with other churches". Wasn't that the death knell for WL...trying to control all of the churches in the world from Taiwan to Europe to the US etc. I am sure those who are left feel as though they are holding the fort but WL's or the BB's efforts are only repressive actions which ultimately minimize growth.
Or perhaps a "stagnation knell." Still chuggin' 30+ years later...shows no signs of stopping...
TLFisher
11-28-2014, 08:56 PM
I go back to the pioneer days of the old Bereans forum being the only place to discuss the LC. It was run by an odd bunch from the Philippines who thought they were the sun and moon when it came to deciding who was and (especially) who wasn't Orthodox.
UntoHim was a mod there, but had little backing from the owners, and so was like a guard dog on a short leash. He could never really discipline people. We had one poster who annoyed everyone (though he was also appreciated). He would always tap dance at the edge of trolldom, and drove UntoHim crazy. Overall the forum was beneficial, but it was also a zoo.
Would you be talking about Bilbodog? The there was Albert our Filipino brother working abroad in Saudi Arabia. I think he coined the phrase "False Accusations". PaulMiletus who dared not to post without any WN or WL quotes.
I was thankful to MichaelK who showed how the full time trainings really operated.
Or perhaps a "stagnation knell." Still chuggin' 30+ years later...shows no signs of stopping... I'm sure the question is "where do I go"?....just hang on until the end? When you consider the various avenues people have taken after they have left the LC...it's scary...so the ones still involved ....just keep chuggin along...with really no future other than the community of LCer's that are there with them. The Brethren are so splintered...expect the same with the LC...keep chuggin....
The sad part is...so much hope and possibility and it all came to this...what a waste. I guess WL had no other understanding and no other direction to take the LC but it is unfortunate. Whatever happened to the beauty which was found in the Normal Christian Life or Changed into His Likeness? It all went for naught in the LC. It is like we were caught in a vacuum and end up asking, "What just happened?"
I feel that I need to mention that I do not regret having been a member of the LSM-associated local churches. I was fortunate to begin in a healthy LC where the elders were true shepards rather than LSM followers and FTTA recruiters. My love for the Lord was rekindled and is with me even now as I learn to be a fellow believer in another group. So maybe the LSM LC's are beneficial for some for a short time, others for a longer time, some forever(?), and some never. The Spirit speaking with your conscience will let you know when or if it becomes time to leave...at least He did for me!
I feel that I need to mention that I do not regret having been a member of the LSM-associated local churches. I was fortunate to begin in a healthy LC where the elders were true shepards rather than LSM followers and FTTA recruiters. My love for the Lord was rekindled and is with me even now as I learn to be a fellow believer in another group. So maybe the LSM LC's are beneficial for some for a short time, others for a longer time, some forever(?), and some never. The Spirit speaking with your conscience will let you know when or if it becomes time to leave...at least He did for me!
You mentioned a very important point -- not all LC's are created equal. Some do have real elders who labor to shepherd the local flock. The Lord will commend them for their faithful care for the saints, and NOT for their allegiance to a publishing house.
TLFisher
12-05-2014, 01:09 PM
You mentioned a very important point -- not all LC's are created equal. Some do have real elders who labor to shepherd the local flock. The Lord will commend them for their faithful care for the saints, and NOT for their allegiance to a publishing house.
Sometimes elders are tested whether they are shepherds or hirelings. In my own experiences I lived in a locality from ages 11-18 where the elder did shepherd the local flock. However when the elder moved and was tested in another locality, loyalties to the publishing house was exposed.
countmeworthy
12-05-2014, 08:50 PM
I feel that I need to mention that I do not regret having been a member of the LSM-associated local churches. I was fortunate to begin in a healthy LC where the elders were true shepards rather than LSM followers and FTTA recruiters. My love for the Lord was rekindled and is with me even now as I learn to be a fellow believer in another group. So maybe the LSM LC's are beneficial for some for a short time, others for a longer time, some forever(?), and some never. The Spirit speaking with your conscience will let you know when or if it becomes time to leave...at least He did for me!
That was my experience too !! There were 4 elders in my locality and out of the 4, one who left the LC during the turmoil of the 80s, has passed away, the other 2 have left the LC. I know one remains strong in the LORD but must be very advanced in age now. The other one that left... I have no idea what has happened to him. The 4th remained a strong Lee follower. How sad.
We should all be followers of Jesus. But God bless him and his family just the same...and especially those who have left and are struggling spiritually, emotionally, physically and financially.
Carol
Over the holidays an LC relative who knows the suffering I've been going through as I've left the LR asked two times if I was "negative" or "opposed" to the ministry. Why didn't this person ask how my spiritual life was, or it I was happy in the Lord, or if I was still able to pray and read the bible? To me this shows that their emphasis is on the ministry rather than on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Over the holidays an LC relative who knows the suffering I've been going through as I've left the LR asked two times if I was "negative" or "opposed" to the ministry. Why didn't this person ask how my spiritual life was, or it I was happy in the Lord, or if I was still able to pray and read the bible? To me this shows that their emphasis is on the ministry rather than on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Lee could oppose the rest of Christianity, and he did. He could castigate the saints, and he did. But don't you dare to be "negative toward the ministry"!
Lee could oppose the rest of Christianity, and he did. He could castigate the saints, and he did. But don't you dare to be "negative toward the ministry"!
Hypocrisy. That was Jesus chief condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees.
Cliffhanger
01-05-2015, 09:27 AM
Over the holidays an LC relative who knows the suffering I've been going through as I've left the LR asked two times if I was "negative" or "opposed" to the ministry. Why didn't this person ask how my spiritual life was, or it I was happy in the Lord, or if I was still able to pray and read the bible? To me this shows that their emphasis is on the ministry rather than on the Lord Jesus Christ.
I can really relate to this because I went through the same thing. This is how things have always been in the LC despite what some people say, even around here. I was a church kid a long time ago and have family and friends going back to the so called glory days of elden hall and I can tell you that it has always been this way. This was the attitude of brother Lee so naturally those who followed him and his ministry were also cold and hostile towards other christians and even those LCers who left. In fact if there was the internet back in the 60s there would not have been any glory days in elden hall because the saints in Taiwan would have been able to warn people about who and what brother Lee really was.
Paul Cox
01-06-2015, 11:36 AM
I'm just recently checking back with the forum after a long absence. I didn't really have time to read all the responses on this thread, so forgive me if I repeat anything that was already said.
You will be led of the Lord as to what to keep and what to throw out. Everybody is different. My keeps and throws can't possibly be the same as yours. My initial experience of coming out made EVERYTHING about the Local Church repulsive to me. After all, when you know what you see, and you know what the Lord is doing in your life but you've got everybody around you trying to make you think you are either a basket case, or just crazy then...
Your keeps and throws will change over time. I have come to really appreciate our heritage from Watchman Nee, and yes, even Witness Lee. We were taught many things that have kept us. Even though Lee was mostly doctrine and turned out to be far removed from much of his message he taught us, the truth is nevertheless the truth.
Don't worry about it right now. My advise to you would be to find either a thriving home meeting, or a nondenominational bible based church, and run with it. The Lord will grace you along the way and he will not strike you dead if you do something wrong.
Much grace to you. My heart is with you.
I'm just recently checking back with the forum after a long absence. I didn't really have time to read all the responses on this thread, so forgive me if I repeat anything that was already said.
You will be led of the Lord as to what to keep and what to throw out. Everybody is different. My keeps and throws can't possibly be the same as yours. My initial experience of coming out made EVERYTHING about the Local Church repulsive to me. After all, when you know what you see, and you know what the Lord is doing in your life but you've got everybody around you trying to make you think you are either a basket case, or just crazy then...
Your keeps and throws will change over time. I have come to really appreciate our heritage from Watchman Nee, and yes, even Witness Lee. We were taught many things that have kept us. Even though Lee was mostly doctrine and turned out to be far removed from much of his message he taught us, the truth is nevertheless the truth.
Don't worry about it right now. My advise to you would be to find either a thriving home meeting, or a nondenominational bible based church, and run with it. The Lord will grace you along the way and he will not strike you dead if you do something wrong.
Much grace to you. My heart is with you. I generally disagree with most of what you said but this is a world where everyone has an opinion to include mine. You can't undermine how people f e e l about what happened to them under WL..it is real to them... As far as I am concerned Lee taught another gospel and not the gospel of JC.
Your advice for what to do may work for some people but not all...it is not a catch all. There are many avenues but most important, each of us needs to regain our identity as to who we are and what we want in life. Without that we can be led into another WL/WN fiasco.
awareness
01-06-2015, 06:32 PM
The Lord will grace you along the way and he will not strike you dead if you do something wrong.
That's not true. I was told that if you leave the local church the Lord would strike you dead. That was 30 years ago and I'm still expecting it sometime in my future. Seems the Lord takes His time. I suppose that if I hadn't left I'd live beyond a hundred.
UntoHim
01-06-2015, 07:14 PM
Your advice for what to do may work for some people but not all...it is not a catch all.
Paul said no such thing, in fact he said the opposite!
You will be led of the Lord as to what to keep and what to throw out. Everybody is different. My keeps and throws can't possibly be the same as yours.
Very wise advise!
Paul said no such thing, in fact he said the opposite!
Read the book of Romans! and not the Recovery Version!
UntoHim
01-06-2015, 07:24 PM
I'll do the jokes around here.:rolleyes:
I'll do the jokes around here.:rolleyes:Fair enough!
awareness
01-06-2015, 07:35 PM
I'll do the jokes around here.:rolleyes:
I know I know. Boy do I know. :duck:
awareness
01-07-2015, 07:59 AM
Err ... excuse me Dave ... but from all I have read of your posts, I'm not sure if you have a clue what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, or what "another" gospel might me.
While I agree that we should welcome back our brother Paul with open arms I think Dave's gospel of caring for the poor, the sick, the needy, and outcasts is closer to the gospel of Jesus Christ than that of Witness Lee.
countmeworthy
01-07-2015, 12:46 PM
I may have mentioned this elsewhere but I was listening the other day to a sermon from Bill Freeman long after he left the LC and his intonation and talk was so similar to Lee I was very surprised. He is not the only person affected in the same way. What appears to have happened to many who were followers of Lee and close to Lee at one time is that they can't get him out of their heads and until they do they are forever lost in a limbo land. Run, don't just walk away from Lee's teachings.
This is what is known as the 'transfer of spirits'. I have mentioned this in many of my posts. I have also mentioned 'soul ties' and 'strong holds'.
Transfer of spirits does not only occur in the LC but it occurs in all walks of life, secular and religious. Why is it we can recognize a Mormon 'elder' a mile away? Look at the body language of the hip hop crowd. They all talk and express themselves the same way. Why? There has been a transfer of spirits.
The LC under Lee in particular had/has a super bad case of the transfer of spirits! We were ALL infected by it. That's not to say we did not have the LORD GOD, our Creator, Savior, Deliverer and Redeemer in us. It does not mean everything we got from the LC and Lee was evil. I am simply noting that through our zealous desire to be more Christlike, we stopped drinking from the Fountain of Living Waters and drank the kool aid instead. Little by little, that Fountain of Living Waters was replaced with a fountain called Brother Lee, "The Lord's Recovery", 'The New Way' etc....that was the kool aid people started drinking and still do.
Here is an excerpt of an article that speaks of it from the biblical perspective.
TRANSFERENCE OF SPIRITS: Transference of spirits is the transfer of spirits from one person to another. Transference of spirits is part and parcel of every mankind here on planet earth. There are two types of transference of spirits: a. Positive or Holy transference of spirits b. Negative or Unholy transference of spirits A. Positive or Holy Transference of spirits: The passage of positive or Holy transference of spirits started from God. After God created Adam, the first man on planet earth. He breathed into Adam foundation and transferred His Spirit into Adam and Adam became a living being (Gen 2:7).
There are many articles on this subject matter. Here is just one article:
http://www.faithwriters.com/article-details.php?id=37745
Blessings all!
Carol
awareness
01-07-2015, 02:50 PM
This is what is known as the 'transfer of spirits'.
I can buy into this idea of transference of spirits to a point. I agree that we pick up stuff from each other on many levels. I also agree that this so called transference of spirits is intensified to the degree that we invest in the exchange.
And since the local church is an "all in" system, the floodgates of transference juice was wide open.
That's why we've all still got Nee and Lee juice sloshing around in our noggin. There's prolly spirit-transference-juice of all kinds in us. I still got Southern Baptist fundamentalism that I can't shake; a transfer of spirits from diapers.
I think, therefore, that Dave is right. It'd prolly be best for all of us if Nee and Lee were thrown into the dustbin of history.
However, if some get help from their books, more power to them. Thank the Lord we live in a free country. At a very basic level just the entertainment factor has value.
I have contention with this Carol quoted:
TRANSFERENCE OF SPIRITS: Transference of spirits is the transfer of spirits from one person to another. Transference of spirits is part and parcel of every mankind here on planet earth. There are two types of transference of spirits: a. Positive or Holy transference of spirits b. Negative or Unholy transference of spirits A. Positive or Holy Transference of spirits: The passage of positive or Holy transference of spirits started from God. After God created Adam, the first man on planet earth. He breathed into Adam foundation and transferred His Spirit into Adam and Adam became a living being (Gen 2:7).
My contention is that there are more choices then just two types of transference of spirits. A couple of possible other choices could be c. The neutral choice, or, d. Indifference. In many many cases, practiced by all, indifference is commonly used to avoid any transfer of spirits.
Indifference would have prolly been wise when it came to the transference of the spirits of Nee and Lee. But that didn't happened for any of us out here, did it?
Maybe we can draw lines without coming down on each other ... I don't know.
As an update to my saga I've noticed how my conscience has caused me to change the way I pray. When I want to pray specifically for my brothers and sisters in the LSM local churches I can no longer pray "Lord bless the saints in the church in (enter name of the city here)"; I now pray "Lord please bless the saints in the LSM-associated local church in my city". But, when I pray for all my brothers and sisters in the entire city I pray "Lord please bless all the dear saints in my city". So, I think I'm slowly being saved from the spirit of exclusivity.
countmeworthy
01-07-2015, 03:59 PM
I can buy into this idea of transference of spirits to a point. I agree that we pick up stuff from each other on many levels. I also agree that this so called transference of spirits is intensified to the degree that we invest in the exchange.
And since the local church is an "all in" system, the floodgates of transference juice was wide open.
That's why we've all still got Nee and Lee juice sloshing around in our noggin. There's prolly spirit-transference-juice of all kinds in us. I still got Southern Baptist fundamentalism that I can't shake; a transfer of spirits from diapers.
I think, therefore, that Dave is right. It'd prolly be best for all of us if Nee and Lee were thrown into the dustbin of history.
However, if some get help from their books, more power to them. Thank the Lord we live in a free country. At a very basic level just the entertainment factor has value.
I have contention with this Carol quoted:
My contention is that there are more choices then just two types of transference of spirits. A couple of possible other choices could be c. The neutral choice, or, d. Indifference. In many many cases, practiced by all, indifference is commonly used to avoid any transfer of spirits.
Indifference would have prolly been wise when it came to the transference of the spirits of Nee and Lee. But that didn't happened for any of us out here, did it?
Maybe we can draw lines without coming down on each other ... I don't know.
oh YEAH Harold!! being neutral, being indifferent is something we can pick up from other people too. But being indifferent or neutral leans towards the negative side I think. For example, if a kid is raised in a boring family that was neutral or indifferent, either the kid is going to go ballistic to escape that 'spirit' OR fall in line and grow up to be boring, neutral and indifferent.
I have learned some 'positive' stuff from the secular world such as 'hang out with positive people'. Think and speak positive. This type of thinking really does come from God. He is Light. He is Life. He is Love. He is Joy.
Religion is what has painted God in a negative light. Some people think that God was a 'mean, ugly God' especially in the OT. What most people don't understand is He was getting rid of the negative: Idolotry, wickedness, evilness that infected even animals.
Look... the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. They were exposed to idolatry for 400 yrs. When God finally set His people free and they saw and experienced His Blessings: Freedom from slavery, Wealth when they had been slaves, the opening of the red sea, etc.... but while Moses was having a talk with God, out of the gold God blessed them with, they made an idol. Where did they get that idea from? Egypt of course! They were out of Egypt but Egypt was not out of their souls. hmmm....
If we can wrap our puny heads around the fact that God was getting rid of evil, people might see Him in a Positive Light. :)
Love YA Mr A!
Cassidy
01-07-2015, 06:58 PM
That's not true. I was told that if you leave the local church the Lord would strike you dead. That was 30 years ago and I'm still expecting it sometime in my future. Seems the Lord takes His time. I suppose that if I hadn't left I'd live beyond a hundred.
Awareness,
There are different "deaths".
".. for the day that you eat of it you will surely die" and he did eat of it and yet Adam lived another 930 years. Someone died that day in some way.
I do not know what was meant or the context when that was said to you but from your posts over the years it apparently hurt you and affected you. I feel sorrow about that and if I were with you at the time I might have come to your defense and also got the boot.:eek2:
When it gets right down to it the main thing I appreciate from Lee and the LC is this:
"Christ in you, the hope of glory."
Now, I can't say how much those who never touched Lee's ministry appreciate this truth. Maybe they appreciate it some, maybe more than me, in their own way. I don't know for sure. I really don't. So I don't think it is fair to say flatly that they don't appreciate it enough. Perhaps their appreciation of Christ "in heaven" is really an appreciation of Christ in them. I don't know. Jargon gets in the way. It really does.
But everyone who has been in the LC appreciates this truth in a very deep and wonderful way. You can throw out most of what Lee said. But you can't throw that out. He was onto something and he passed it along to us. Of course, as I said, that doesn't mean others don't have it too, and just express it differently.
As Forest Gump said, that's all I have to say about that.
awareness
01-07-2015, 11:09 PM
As an update to my saga I've noticed how my conscience has caused me to change the way I pray. When I want to pray specifically for my brothers and sisters in the LSM local churches I can no longer pray "Lord bless the saints in the church in (enter name of the city here)"; I now pray "Lord please bless the saints in the LSM-associated local church in my city". But, when I pray for all my brothers and sisters in the entire city I pray "Lord please bless all the dear saints in my city". So, I think I'm slowly being saved from the spirit of exclusivity.This is great HERn. I celebrate the expansion of your heart with you.
awareness
01-07-2015, 11:19 PM
oh YEAH Harold!! being neutral, being indifferent is something we can pick up from other people too. But being indifferent or neutral leans towards the negative side I think. For example, if a kid is raised in a boring family that was neutral or indifferent, either the kid is going to go ballistic to escape that 'spirit' OR fall in line and grow up to be boring, neutral and indifferent.
I have learned some 'positive' stuff from the secular world such as 'hang out with positive people'. Think and speak positive. This type of thinking really does come from God. He is Light. He is Life. He is Love. He is Joy.
Religion is what has painted God in a negative light. Some people think that God was a 'mean, ugly God' especially in the OT. What most people don't understand is He was getting rid of the negative: Idolotry, wickedness, evilness that infected even animals.
Look... the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. They were exposed to idolatry for 400 yrs. When God finally set His people free and they saw and experienced His Blessings: Freedom from slavery, Wealth when they had been slaves, the opening of the red sea, etc.... but while Moses was having a talk with God, out of the gold God blessed them with, they made an idol. Where did they get that idea from? Egypt of course! They were out of Egypt but Egypt was not out of their souls. hmmm....
If we can wrap our puny heads around the fact that God was getting rid of evil, people might see Him in a Positive Light. :)
Love YA Mr A!
LOva Ya 2 Ms C. I've really enjoyed our discussion. I hope that this idea of transfer of spirits has helped HERn. At least maybe she can keep an eye out for it. That might help. Whatever works.
Hi All. Just read this in Ephesians chapter two this morning "In short, you aren't foreigners or resident aliens any more: you live with your fellow citizens, the holy ones, as members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone on which the entire building is constructed and rises into a holy temple in the Lord, in which you are also built into the structure so as to be in spirit a settlement of God."
Any guesses as to what Paul thinks is the ground of the church? I don't think it's locality.
Hi All. Just read this in Ephesians chapter two this morning "In short, you aren't foreigners or resident aliens any more: you live with your fellow citizens, the holy ones, as members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone on which the entire building is constructed and rises into a holy temple in the Lord, in which you are also built into the structure so as to be in spirit a settlement of God."
Any guesses as to what Paul thinks is the ground of the church? I don't think it's locality.
The "ground" of the church was an attempt to find the "missing link" to fix the problem of the church. It is a false construct, bringing forward the OT site of Mt. Moriah where Abraham sacrificed Isaac, and the temple was built. Didn't the Lord make it clear that this mountain location or that mountain location was totally insignificant, but to worship in spirit and reality. (John 4.19-24)
Our oneness is of the Spirit in our hearts. Lee has effectively created divisive hearts in all his adherents by claiming his assemblies alone to be the "standard" for oneness on the local ground.
One thing I'm not going to throw out (because I don't think it's leaven) is my revived love for my Lord Jesus. It may be that there are two extremes of people in what's known as the LSM-associated Lord's Recovery (most are probably somewhere in between). I don't know, but it may be that these two extremes are mutually exclusive. I can't imagine a simple lover of Jesus ever being a legalistic LSM follower, but I can imagine a simple lover of Jesus beginning in the LSM-associated Lord's Recovery leaving their first love and becoming a legalistic LSM follower. I would ask my lurking brothers and sisters first "Where would you place yourself on this imaginary scale?"; and second "Where would you like to be?"
Simple Lovers of Jesus>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Legalistic Followers of LSM
Lee has effectively created divisive hearts in all his adherents by claiming his assemblies alone to be the "standard" for oneness on the local ground.
Look at the "you" addressed in Ephesians 2: "fellow citizens", and "holy ones", and "members of the household of God". It seems as if Nee and then Lee overtly embraced these kind of universalist declarations, but then promptly condemned all of Christianity as hopelessly off the mark, effectively "shunning" or "quarantining" them. Thus they claimed to be completely open and universal, fully within the words of Paul to the Ephesians, and yet act as the most exclusive and divided of all. And their remedy was for all Christianity to "come under the ministry", which ministry being the basis of their proposed oneness, fellowship, and building together.
One thing I'm not going to throw out (because I don't think it's leaven) is my revived love for my Lord Jesus. It may be that there are two extremes of people in what's known as the LSM-associated Lord's Recovery (most are probably somewhere in between). I don't know, but it may be that these two extremes are mutually exclusive. I can't imagine a simple lover of Jesus ever being a legalistic LSM follower, but I can imagine a simple lover of Jesus beginning in the LSM-associated Lord's Recovery leaving their first love and becoming a legalistic LSM follower. I would ask my lurking brothers and sisters first "Where would you place yourself on this imaginary scale?"; and second "Where would you like to be?"
Simple Lovers of Jesus>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Legalistic Followers of LSM It is great that you are a simple lover of Jesus...that is the only way to go from my perspective.... on your scale...Simple Lovers of Jesus> that is where I stand...if we don't love God and our brother then where are we?... Jesus fed the hungry and healed the sick...if we don't follow those precedents I am not sure what our beliefs actually mean... There has to be an outcome to beliefs. Beliefs are not isolated...okay...you believe, but what is the outcome of your beliefs in your life? Paul and other brethren also cared about the poor Gal. 2:10.
Any guesses as to what Paul thinks is the ground of the church? I don't think it's locality.
The ground of the church is not a biblical concept. The idea is foreign to the Bible. So I would assume Paul didn't have a thought on the subject.
Any guesses as to what Paul thinks is the ground of the church? I don't think it's locality.
It is Christ! and Christ alone!
Colossians 2.6-7 Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude.
Christ is "the ground" we have been rooted into.
The ground of the church is not a biblical concept. The idea is foreign to the Bible. So I would assume Paul didn't have a thought on the subject.
As living plants on God's farm, we are rooted in Christ individually, our ground. Col 2.6-7
As the building or house of God, the Bible mentions no "ground" for the church corporately. If we use His words to the Samaritan woman in John 4.24, then the only "place" for true worshipers is "spirit and reality."
countmeworthy
01-12-2015, 09:56 AM
Originally Posted by HERn View Post
Any guesses as to what Paul thinks is the ground of the church? I don't think it's locality.
It is Christ! and Christ alone!
Christ is "the ground" we have been rooted into.
Yeppers...
On Christ the SOLID ROCK I/WE stand... all other GROUND IS SINKING SAND.
The ground of the church is not a biblical concept. The idea is foreign to the Bible. So I would assume Paul didn't have a thought on the subject.
Thanks Igzy; The LSM concept of "the ground" is an extra-biblical concept, I should have used the term "foundation". I think the LSM concept is a mixture of exclusive-Brethren doctrine manipulated and massaged by LSM, right?
Yeppers...
On Christ the SOLID ROCK I/WE stand... all other GROUND IS SINKING SAND.
Great point. I forgot that parable. Once again, the ground is not corporate, but personal, "Every one who hears My words and does them shall be likened to the prudent man, who built his house on the rock."
Great point. I forgot that parable. Once again, the ground is not corporate, but personal, "Every one who hears My words and does them shall be likened to the prudent man, who built his house on the rock."Of course, they probably just do an end-run around the individuality of that passage by stating that the solid ground is the corporate church, therefore it is still not an individual endeavor.
It is amazing what new things you can see and learn when you put on a pair of Lee-colored coke-bottle glasses.
awareness
01-12-2015, 11:15 AM
It is amazing what new things you can see and learn when you put on a pair of Lee-colored coke-bottle glasses.I still have my Lee-colored coke-bottle glasses. And my Southern Baptist glasses as well.
But I don't wear them. They distort reality too much. They're just relics now. I'd sell them on eBay but prolly wouldn't get any bids. LSM hands 'em out for free. So you'll buy their distorted books ... that require their glasses.
Ha ... rold
Unregistered
01-12-2015, 02:36 PM
It is a real miricle that we on this forum are still believers and I believe most of us are. We wrestle not against flesh and blood. It's not hard for me to believe that today. As one poster has often said, how could something that looked so good be so bad? At 84 I have been conned more than once and the feeling is not so good.
I listened to WL for 25 years and to me the worst thing was the bait and switch. And it took me a while to see it was going on. Remember how often he used to speak of the "pure word of God". That was attractive to me. Then later he would hatchet whole chapters of the Bible. He harshly criticized other Christian leaders labeling them as hirelings then charging millions of dollars to hear him speak. but we all said praise The Lord and were so happy. Admittedly some of my trips were fun including Disnay Land an other things.
I have really come to the conclusion that "All the world's a stage" is as true as you can get outside of God and our knowledge Him is not that good. WL was certainly no exception. His act of quiet composure was... I heard him preach the gospel in my locale once in Chinese and it was a riot. Even though it has been over 30 years ago my distinct feeling was , this is the real Lee. Two hours later he had his other facade.
How many elders meetings have we heard of where the real WL spoke when he was venting his wrath. He would boast of himself to us peons but he would only show his wrath to the elders. Strange? It worked for him for 47 years and with the blendeds an additional 18.
Lisbon
Of course, they probably just do an end-run around the individuality of that passage by stating that the solid ground is the corporate church, therefore it is still not an individual endeavor.
It is amazing what new things you can see and learn when you put on a pair of Lee-colored coke-bottle glasses.
Yeah, it does say, "on this rock i wil build My church." Sounds corporate.
Two things that are demonstrably bad ideas:
1) The NFL "Football Move" Rule.
2) The LC "Local Ground" Rule.
Sounded good in theory, but in practice... something else.
Go Dez! http://www.cowboys-forum.com/images/cowboys_smilies/lasso.gif
Remember how often he used to speak of the "pure word of God". That was attractive to me.And me too. But I think that even if they kept saying "pure word of God," it was really meant to be the "interpreted word of God," and the interpretation was always Lee's. No questions asked (unless you want the door).
BTW. Looks like the "Unregistered" here was really Lisbon. Probably had a system problem, or failed to check the " keep me signed no" box.
Two things that are demonstrably bad ideas:
1) The NFL "Football Move" Rule.
2) The LC "Local Ground" Rule.
Sounded good in theory, but in practice... something else.
Go Dez! http://www.cowboys-forum.com/images/cowboys_smilies/lasso.gif
What I would give to be in Jerra's place tonight!
Go Buckeyes.
rayliotta
01-13-2015, 12:16 AM
I have really come to the conclusion that "All the world's a stage" is as true as you can get outside of God and our knowledge Him is not that good. WL was certainly no exception. His act of quiet composure was... I heard him preach the gospel in my locale once in Chinese and it was a riot. Even though it has been over 30 years ago my distinct feeling was , this is the real Lee. Two hours later he had his other facade.
Lisbon, would you mind elaborating on this? I wasn't sure whether you mean he displayed anger in front of the Chinese members, but became calm in English -- or do you mean "riot" in the sense of "hysterical"?
I would like to say to anyone whose conscience is bothering them about following the LSM "Lord's Recovery" that having left I am enjoying the Lord, enjoying His word, and finding dear lovers of Jesus in what LSM has labeled Babylon and the daughters of the harlot. I believe there was only one minister of the age and that was Paul, not Luther, not Calvin and certainly not Nee or Lee.
countmeworthy
01-19-2015, 05:06 PM
I would like to say to anyone whose conscience is bothering them about following the LSM "Lord's Recovery" that having left I am enjoying the Lord, enjoying His word, and finding dear lovers of Jesus in what LSM has labeled Babylon and the daughters of the harlot. I believe there was only one minister of the age and that was Paul, not Luther, not Calvin and certainly not Nee or Lee.
Can anyone tell me where that phrase 'minister of the age' originated from? I checked through various translations if I could find it in the bible. Did not find one. I have never heard anyone use that phrase outside the LSM system.
While he authored much of the NT and was inspired by the Spirit of God, it is not Paul who ministers to me, it is the Holy Spirit who ministers to me.
I have heard people hold apostle Paul in high esteem but have never heard them describe him as the 'minister of the age'.
Just wondering. :)
Carol
Parable of the Good Shepherd (slightly retold from Unvarnished NT)
He, trying to defend himself, said to Jesus, “But who is my neighbor?” By way of answer Jesus said, “Once there was a fellow coming back from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among thieves, who stripped him, gave him a beating, and went off leaving him half dead. Now by chance a blended brother walked by seeing the man but ignored him because he knew that he was not here for those kinds of things. Then a full-time serving one walked by seeing the man but ignored him because he was in a hurry to meet with young scholars on campus who were potentially good building material. But a certain member of one of the daughters of the harlot who was on the road came upon him and felt sorry for him, and went up and bandaged his wounds, poured oil and wine on them, and seating him on his own mount, brought him to the inn and looked after him. The next day he pulled out two drachmas and gave them to the innkeeper saying, ‘Look after him, and whatever you lay out I will repay you on my way back.’ Which of these three would you say turned out to be the neighbor of the one who fell among thieves?” He said, “The one who had mercy on him.” Said Jesus, “Go and do likewise.”
This was prompted by my hearing of a sermon on practical generosity this morning.
I think I'll throw out this LSM mindset on generosity.
Lisbon
01-25-2015, 04:12 PM
Lisbon, would you mind elaborating on this? I wasn't sure whether you mean he displayed anger in front of the Chinese members, but became calm in English -- or do you mean "riot" in the sense of "hysterical"?
I'll have to admit it is not easy for me to describe WL's gospel preaching in Dallas. If you ever heard Max Rapaport preach the gospel, it would be a sound semilar but still louder and feistier. There was hardly a let up in the 30 min talk which was so unlike WL's mode. There was nothing of anger in his speaking.
Lisbon
rayliotta
01-25-2015, 07:40 PM
I'll have to admit it is not easy for me to describe WL's gospel preaching in Dallas. If you ever heard Max Rapaport preach the gospel, it would be a sound semilar but still louder and feistier. There was hardly a let up in the 30 min talk which was so unlike WL's mode. There was nothing of anger in his speaking.
Lisbon
So perhaps this would imply that, to the extent that we were emulating Witness Lee and his particular style, we might really have been emulating Witness Lee's particular "English-speaking style"?
We were at our fourth home meeting at our new E-free church last night. First we ate a meal and fellowshipped, then prayed, and read and talked about Romans 5. We prayed for lots of things. I wish that the members of the Lord's Recovery who have been brainwashed to believe there is nothing of life outside of their little group could have experienced it. The brother who's house we met in is so precious. He owns a small organic produce farm smack in the middle of new apartment complexes that he probably needs to sell and retire because he's got some health issues and is older. But, he houses and employs about 6 needy ones that depend on him for survival. I'm sure he could sell out and move to Florida and retire, but I think he hangs on for them. I think I'm seeing Christ.
This morning in a class we are studying "A Praying Life Contacting God in a Distracting World" and the Spirit is using it to cause me to love and worship my Lord and His Father. The Spirit is exalting the Son even in the so-called denominations! Praise be to our God for being bigger than LSM's recovery God! Maybe the recovery's God is too small (thanks to JP Philips who wrote the book "Your God is too Small").
Maybe the recovery's God is too small.While I do not deny aspects of the premise of what I am about to mention, I do note that the LCM went so far in their "small" theology to sing about "How Small Thou Art." As I said, there is a truth in that. But just maybe the smallness of their God is that He (he?) is unable to be revealed in the lives of all Christians who love Him and actually stand as united in Christ while the LCM's God (god?) can only use the "perfect" theology of their little sect.
Note that one of the significant differences in the two is not the size of the God, but how they are expressed. One is in the lives of the people, the other is in the theology. And for the LCM, theology trumps living (or orthodoxy trumps orthopraxy). How you live is almost irrelevant.
Of course, the average member of the LCM does not really hold to this — at least not at that extreme and not in their personal lives. But they believe it is theologically true because that is what they are taught.
awareness
02-02-2015, 09:23 AM
But just maybe the smallness of their God is that He (he?) is unable to be revealed in the lives of all Christians who love Him and actually stand as united in Christ while the LCM's God (god?) can only use the "perfect" theology of their little sect.
Note that one of the significant differences in the two is not the size of the God, but how they are expressed. One is in the lives of the people, the other is in the theology.That the LCM has their own God is not out of the norm. In a real sense we all imagine our own God.
It's that they think their God is the best one. Based on their allegiance it turns out their God is Witness Lee. They would never admit that. It's not in the Life-Study they're reading.
So, if we're wondering what to throw out I'd say throw out the LCM God. It's like the Jewish God, very exclusive. The real God cares about "the least of these."
I'm not comfortable with OBW's little "g" god or Awareness' "another God" because that implies something I can't agree with. Although LSM may have an exclusive view that the triune God's plan, move, and desire is mainly with their group, I do believe that their God is the same as that of the Apostles'. Are you saying something different?
I'm not comfortable with OBW's little "g" god or Awareness' "another God" because that implies something I can't agree with. Although LSM may have an exclusive view that the triune God's plan, move, and desire is mainly with their group, I do believe that their God is the same as that of the Apostles'. Are you saying something different?
I agree with you here for sure. Even though Lee was excessively lifted up, i and all those we knew, only worshiped God, and His name was Jesus Christ.
Lee's exclusive views did make us proud, but we also excelled in our zeal more than most Christians. That said, i was always in a subset of the movement which mostly kept LSM at arm's length. Although Titus Chu did have his own ambitions to replace Lee, he gained many followers by remaining closer to the text of the Bible.
Sorry. I was not trying to suggest that their God is ultimately not the same God that we all are seeking to serve. But their understanding of what that means is sometimes so out of sync with even the plain words that you have to wonder sometimes if Justyn M (the main moderator on another forum) is not correct to suggest that the trinity in which Jesus is now the Spirit is teaching a "different Jesus."
I do not argue that as a point against them being Christian, but to say that their theology is egregiously flawed. If they were a group that still taught righteousness and sanctification in a way that reflects Peter's "we have all things for godliness" kind of way, then I could overlook more of their theological flaws. But since theology is essentially taught as trumping any kind of practical holiness or works in any way, the theology is laid bare and useless.
In short, are the things they attribute to God really of God? If not, then do they really know who they are talking about? I would agree that they are trying to talk about the same God. But they are horribly mistaken on many issues even though I actually think they are talking about the same God. They have not gone so far astray that what they say would be blaspheme. But you have to wonder if God is scratching his head at times.
As for the zeal that Ohio mentions, was our zeal for Christ what we brought? Was that slowly replaced by a zeal for The Unique Net Testament Ministry, the "church life," the MOTA, and so forth? I get the notion from some of the posts that for the last 15 to 20 years (if not much longer) the takeover of the church by the LSM to make them "ministry station churches" has squeezed the zeal of of so many.
Everything wonderful is not related to living, but to meeting. The only positive thing about someone is how they are so much "for the church and for the saints." (This was the substance of so many testimonies that I heard at a funeral several years ago.)
awareness
02-02-2015, 12:46 PM
I'm not comfortable with OBW's little "g" god or Awareness' "another God" because that implies something I can't agree with. Although LSM may have an exclusive view that the triune God's plan, move, and desire is mainly with their group, I do believe that their God is the same as that of the Apostles'. Are you saying something different?
I'm not saying they actually have a different God. That's not even possible. I'm saying the God they have in their imagination is not the real God. They, for example, imagine that they are the spearhead of what God is doing on the earth. That's a fiction. Therefore, in their imagination their God does not match the real God.
Throw out that God. It's a figment of their imagination.
Sorry. I was not trying to suggest that their God is ultimately not the same God that we all are seeking to serve. But their understanding of what that means is sometimes so out of sync with even the plain words that you have to wonder sometimes if Justyn M (the main moderator on another forum) is not correct to suggest that the trinity in which Jesus is now the Spirit is teaching a "different Jesus."
I can't remember Justyn saying anything useful. Lee sought to be unique by over-emphasizing the oneness side of the Trinity. He had his verses too. His troubles were little related to modalism as the other forum had for so long asserted.
I do not argue that as a point against them being Christian, but to say that their theology is egregiously flawed. If they were a group that still taught righteousness and sanctification in a way that reflects Peter's "we have all things for godliness" kind of way, then I could overlook more of their theological flaws. But since theology is essentially taught as trumping any kind of practical holiness or works in any way, the theology is laid bare and useless.
II Peter does say we have "have all things," yet he stresses the growth and development of these by "adding all diligence." Unfortunately, due to the coverups of unrighteousness, Lee "mechanized" all his practices in order to rally his base. The spiritual reality was the first thing to suffer as a result. During these times who cared about our personal spiritual walk with the Lord? It all came down to "are you one with Lee?"
As for the zeal that Ohio mentions, was our zeal for Christ what we brought? Was that slowly replaced by a zeal for The Unique Net Testament Ministry, the "church life," the MOTA, and so forth? I get the notion from some of the posts that for the last 15 to 20 years (if not much longer) the takeover of the church by the LSM to make them "ministry station churches" has squeezed the zeal of of so many.
This is a good point I have often addressed too. Lee equated "Christ and the church," and directed our zeal towards that entity. Later on (circa ~1985) he again redirected our zeal towards "the ministry," which was his own. Lee's intentions here were altogether self-serving and manipulative.
Once we place "Christ and the church" ahead of our family and our life, we end up with neither Christ nor the church nor our family. We end up with only Lee and LSM.
Everything wonderful is not related to living, but to meeting. The only positive thing about someone is how they are so much "for the church and for the saints." (This was the substance of so many testimonies that I heard at a funeral several years ago.)Definitely agree. He over-emphasized the meeting life, which in itself might be innocuous, but set the stage for other problems which developed.
TLFisher
02-02-2015, 01:13 PM
That said, i was always in a subset of the movement which mostly kept LSM at arm's length. Although Titus Chu did have his own ambitions to replace Lee, he gained many followers by remaining closer to the text of the Bible.
What would be accurate to describe Titus Chu? I never had the sense he wanted to take over the recovery as the accusations were levied against brothers from the late 80's.
I do have a sense, Titus had a burden for China which he felt requires no consent or coordination with the blendeds. The blendeds may feel differently which unfortunately made the Great Lakes area the battleground for battle of wills. In the end, churches are both sides were exposed as ministry churches. Of course there were a few (Detroit, Mansfield, etc) that saw this as a non-issue.
What would be accurate to describe Titus Chu? I never had the sense he wanted to take over the recovery as the accusations were levied against brothers from the late 80's.
I do have a sense, Titus had a burden for China which he felt requires no consent or coordination with the blendeds. The blendeds may feel differently which unfortunately made the Great Lakes area the battleground for battle of wills. In the end, churches are both sides were exposed as ministry churches. Of course there were a few (Detroit, Mansfield, etc) that saw this as a non-issue.
Titus Chu wholeheartedly believed in the Recovery and viewed Lee as his "spiritual father." As such, he never criticized Lee for any failures, even supporting his coverups related to Phillip Lee. TC was forced to choose sides by Lee and company, and unfortunately he did not side with the truth. TC never felt any of the Blendeds were qualified to hold a position of leadership. He once referred to some as "five little boys," and felt that he alone was qualified to lead the Recovery post Lee.
I was told by a former full-timer, after TC returned from an Asian trip, that there were many overseas saints beginning to clamor for "Nee, Lee, Chu." Lee had programmed the saints for decades into believing that "God always had one man" to lead His move on earth. We were no different from the Catholics who cry for their next Pope. Lee knew that his false teaching would backfire in the face of incompetent sycophants and wordsmith book editors, so he then began to announce the "end of spiritual giants" and the new age of "blended brothers" prepared to lead the Recovery. All this nonsense was designed to keep the Recovery from falling into the hands of men like TC, DYL, or others, who would definitely decide to "clean house" after Lee's departure.
It is my belief that the Quarantine of Titus Chu was necessitated by these growing calls for "Nee, Lee, Chu" in the Asian world. Obviously such talk would filter back to Anaheim, and spook the likes of Benson and company. Make no mistake, TC had global aspirations to lead the Recovery, and that God had prepared him for this.
I can't remember Justyn saying anything useful.Overall I have to agree with this statement. I only note it for the fact that it is something he said and that on occasion I was somewhat persuaded (for reasons other than those Justyn ranted about).
But at the same time, while I do not consider the LCM's God to be a different God, the way they talk about Him in theological terms (not just the joyous parts of testimonies) did not sound like the God I read about in the Bible. I would agree that they have probably not crossed the line. But some of the stuff makes you wonder at times.
But at the same time, while I do not consider the LCM's God to be a different God, the way they talk about Him in theological terms (not just the joyous parts of testimonies) did not sound like the God I read about in the Bible.
I could say the same thing about the way some Pentecostals talk about the "holy ghost."
I'm not saying they actually have a different God. That's not even possible. I'm saying the God they have in their imagination is not the real God. They, for example, imagine that they are the spearhead of what God is doing on the earth. That's a fiction. Therefore, in their imagination their God does not match the real God.
Throw out that God. It's a figment of their imagination.
Yes, I'm throwing out the narrow LSM opinion that the God of the universe, the God of Abraham, Iasac and Jacob, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ has restricted Himself to only working through a group who falsely take the name of being "The Lord's Recovery".
rayliotta
02-02-2015, 05:25 PM
I'm not comfortable with OBW's little "g" god or Awareness' "another God" because that implies something I can't agree with. Although LSM may have an exclusive view that the triune God's plan, move, and desire is mainly with their group, I do believe that their God is the same as that of the Apostles'. Are you saying something different?
As others have pointed out before, and I've mentioned it recently, certain LSM leaders sometimes speak about "what they will say" when they "see Witness Lee again." I think there's a kind of fear that goes along w/the idea of having to answer to Witness Lee (despite the fact that he is, obviously, already deceased).
Is this a kind of worship? Is that too much to say?
rayliotta
02-02-2015, 05:29 PM
I was told by a former full-timer, after TC returned from an Asian trip, that there were many overseas saints beginning to clamor for "Nee, Lee, Chu." Lee had programmed the saints for decades into believing that "God always had one man" to lead His move on earth. We were no different from the Catholics who cry for their next Pope. Lee knew that his false teaching would backfire in the face of incompetent sycophants and wordsmith book editors, so he then began to announce the "end of spiritual giants" and the new age of "blended brothers" prepared to lead the Recovery. All this nonsense was designed to keep the Recovery from falling into the hands of men like TC, DYL, or others, who would definitely decide to "clean house" after Lee's departure.
"The age of spiritual giants is over." Did Witness Lee say this himself? That would be hubris indeed...
As others have pointed out before, and I've mentioned it recently, certain LSM leaders sometimes speak about "what they will say" when they "see Witness Lee again." I think there's a kind of fear that goes along w/the idea of having to answer to Witness Lee (despite the fact that he is, obviously, already deceased).
Is this a kind of worship? Is that too much to say?
Yes, to me that is more than weird. It's non-Christian religious superstition.
rayliotta
02-02-2015, 05:38 PM
Yes, to me that is more than weird. It's non-Christian religious superstition. In my opinion WL is right now wishing he could repent for his errors, deception, and lies.
When people sell out their consciences in the way that sometimes happens in the Recovery, it makes one wonder what, or who, exactly, is being worshiped...O who has bewitched you?..:rollingeyesfrown:
TLFisher
02-02-2015, 06:01 PM
As others have pointed out before, and I've mentioned it recently, certain LSM leaders sometimes speak about "what they will say" when they "see Witness Lee again." I think there's a kind of fear that goes along w/the idea of having to answer to Witness Lee (despite the fact that he is, obviously, already deceased).
Is this a kind of worship? Is that too much to say?
Only one I am absolutely certain who said that was Dan Towle. Reinsert Witness Lee's name with any other dead person....yes it is a kind of worship. I would ask these questions:
1. Did Witness Lee die for your sins?
2. Were you baptized in Witness Lee's name?
If the answer is no, drop the absurd concept "what they will say when they see Witness Lee again".
TLFisher
02-02-2015, 06:03 PM
Yes, I'm throwing out the narrow LSM opinion that the God of the universe, the God of Abraham, Iasac and Jacob, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ has restricted Himself to only working through a group who falsely take the name of being "The Lord's Recovery".
That's accurate that's what they think. Though not everyone in the local churches shares Ron's concept only those in the local churches comprise the Body of Christ.
Yes, I'm throwing out the narrow LSM opinion that the God of the universe, the God of Abraham, Iasac and Jacob, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ has restricted Himself to only working through a group who falsely take the name of being "The Lord's Recovery".
Good for you. The only Minister of the Age is Jesus Christ!
"The age of spiritual giants is over." Did Witness Lee say this himself? That would be hubris indeed...
Numerous times ... my friend ... numerous times.
Only one I am absolutely certain who said that was Dan Towle. Reinsert Witness Lee's name with any other dead person....yes it is a kind of worship. I would ask these questions:
1. Did Witness Lee die for your sins?
2. Were you baptized in Witness Lee's name?
If the answer is no, drop the absurd concept "what they will say when they see Witness Lee again".
Lee said the same thing himself about Nee, "what will I say when I see Brother Nee."
rayliotta
02-02-2015, 06:36 PM
Numerous times ... my friend ... numerous times.
So my understanding would be something along these lines --
When Witness Lee was saying that "the age of spiritual giants is over," he was essentially denying that he himself had any such position (as a giant).
Fast-forward to the late 90's, after he had passed on. Saying that "the age of spiritual giants is over," at that time, was a kind of tacit acknowledgment that Witness Lee was a kind of giant, all along. But that w/his passing, the age of giants really was over (really, we really mean it now).
What do you think, Ohio?
So my understanding would be something along these lines --
When Witness Lee was saying that "the age of spiritual giants is over," he was essentially denying that he himself had any such position (as a giant).
Fast-forward to the late 90's, after he had passed on. Saying that "the age of spiritual giants is over," at that time, was a kind of tacit acknowledgment that Witness Lee was a kind of giant, all along. But that w/his passing, the age of giants really was over (really, we really mean it now).
What do you think, Ohio?
Lee presented himself as the last, the greatest, amd the consummation of all the MOTA's. In order to succeed him, the Recovery needed a whole team of blendeds.
I could say the same thing about the way some Pentecostals talk about the "holy ghost."Yes. That is often true.
And it is a bit of a tightrope that we walk when talking about the LCM here. If it was just a little of one kind of apparent disagreement on something (more like what marks the differences between denominations) then I could agree that it is the same thing. But it is not just a particular stance on one thing. Or an over-emphasis in one area. It is a collection of nuanced disagreements with the rest of Christianity that makes even the things that they actually agree on seem like disagreements because they have to say it differently (and behind closed doors they point to the fact that the way they say it is better and therefore enhances their experience of it).
It is not just too much emphasis on the Holy Ghost. Or sprinkling v emersion. It is a litany of both real and artificial differences of their own making with which they willfully separate themselves from the rest of the body of Christ. While I do not agree that they are teaching a truly different Christ, they are clearly interested in making enough separation in their teaching in virtually every area that there is something worthy of comment. It finally reaches the point where they, by their own admission, do not want to be associated with the broader body of Christ and thereby despise the desire of Christ when he prayed that we would be one.
Someone could say that because of books like the God-Men or the Mind Benders we have refused them entrance. But while they want to be understood as "mainstream" in so many ways, they insist on standing far away from everyone else while calling them whores and harlots.
Each single point of divergence can be commented on by reference to a similarity with someone else's divergence from what we might call the center. But when there is such a collection of divergence, it is no longer enough to say that group A does something sort of like LCM error X, and group B does something like LCM error Y, and group C does something like LCM error Z. The difference is that each of the other groups showed up with one or two divergences (and often of lesser extremes) while the LCM had its own similar divergence for every one of them — and then some.
It comes to a point where either they have to be almost completely right that the rest of Christianity is horrible and they got it right, or the LCM is really the collection of error that I keep seeing. A system of error. They are not just too Arminian or too Calvinist. They are intentionally divergent on virtually everything and that cannot be washed away by a reference to a somewhat similar single item in one other particular group. The rest of Christianity is mostly at peace with each other. Christianity does display unity. But as long as the view is only the issues of difference, and the large body of agreement is ignored, we can continue to miss that the LCM has intentionally stood against unity with other Christians and made big points on a lot of issues to drive wedges in.
rayliotta
02-03-2015, 11:19 PM
Lee presented himself as the last, the greatest, amd the consummation of all the MOTA's. In order to succeed him, the Recovery needed a whole team of blendeds.
So Lee was either denying that he was the MOTA, or (the ultimate hubris), claiming to not only be the MOTA, but to be the last one -- the ultimate link on the chain (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGAiW5dOnKo).
Awoken
02-07-2015, 10:27 PM
I was/am considering this matter myself. I recently read something written by a former LCer that opined that the real strength of the apostles was in the variety of their ministries; Peter for his earthiness and accessibility, Paul in his complex thought, John for his deep and mysterious spirituality, etc.
Even though I consider my LC backdrop to have left me rather poor and spiritually lacking in a lot of respects (more "out of Laodicea" than anything), while I was fellowshipping with a Baptist brother tonight I couldn't help but think of how wonderful the Lord's body and the sheer variety of the gifts in it really is. While I was in the LC and fully buying into its contemptuous attitude towards other Christians, there was no way I could appreciate that particular brother's approach to his spirituality. Today though it dawned on me that I have a deep appreciation for his much more practical, "do"-ing instead of "be"-ing approach to Christian life (prior LCers will know what I mean by this). Even though I am still carrying a lot of LC baggage with me I started to understand something about the variety of gifts. I can benefit from this brother's very practical approach to the Christian walk, and he could also benefit from fresher and more spiritual perspectives on the Word. I believe the early apostles probably tempered each other in this kind of way without trying to impress others about how "humble" and "spiritual" they were and how much better their interpretation of scripture was than all the other apostles.
I actually do not think that everything I learned in the LC was utter garbage. The idea that there is a deeper and more spiritual side to life and to knowing the Lord than most of Christianity experiences is not necessarily off the mark. I think the real problem was the attitude and assumption that "we have it but you don't". Another distinct feeling I had today was that my idea of "spiritual experiences" has been just as off-the-mark. Why the heck can't a rational and "in the mind" conversation end up being just as spiritually compelling and convicting as charismatic, feeling-based woo? (On the other hand, the super-spiritual stuff may just seem like feeling-based woo if we don't understand it and so we shouldn't entirely write that off either. Can you imagine what the brothers who received John's account of Revelation must have thought the first time they read it?)
Grace and peace,
Awoken
I actually do not think that everything I learned in the LC was utter garbage. The idea that there is a deeper and more spiritual side to life and to knowing the Lord than most of Christianity experiences is not necessarily off the mark. I think the real problem was the attitude and assumption that "we have it but you don't".
Yes, there is a deeper side to life, and to knowing the Lord. And the LC movement was attractive in some regards, in contrast to much of the mainstream fare offered down at the "community church" of Protestantism or the liturgical, ritualistic Anglican or Catholic services. Lee was aware of this and often spoke of what the LC experience offered in contrast to other parts of Christianity. However, he made a fatal flaw, in my estimation, even greater than the scorning and despising and judging the experiences and contributions of others, as if he were qualified to do so.
This flaw, to me, was to say that there was no deeper or spiritual side to life than what he was offering. So there was #1 his teachings, which were supposedly superior to all others, and #2 the "Local Church life" experience, which was supposedly "building the Body and consummating the New Jerusalem", both of which couldn't possibly be reproduced, or surpassed, elsewhere. In other words, not only is our LC reality greater than can be found anywhere else, don't even bother looking anywhere else because how could any experience be greater than building the Body of Christ? For my reply to this, see my remarks below.
Another distinct feeling I had today was that my idea of "spiritual experiences" has been just as off-the-mark. Why the heck can't a rational and "in the mind" conversation end up being ... spiritually compelling...
It has become apparent to me that the source of Nee's and Lee's "revelations" concerning Christ, the human spirit, and the church, just to name three, were largely based on logical and/or rational constructions, many from 19th century Protestantism and Protestant spin-offs (see e.g. JN Darby and "The Bretheren"). These rationalizations ("this equals that" and "this means that") were held as end-all and be-all revelations from God, never to be questioned or supervened by other people's light from God.
God made us rational beings, at least partly. Supposedly Lee's light was so great that our rationality should be limited to "the apostle is always right", even when the thought-constructions of this supposed apostle were pretty thin, or even running against the plain words of scripture in front of us.
I've made a lot of hay over all this elsewhere so I won't belabor the point. But suffice it to say that there are a lot of places that Lee looked into scripture and essentially said, "There is no Christ here, only the fallen concepts of men". No possibility, according to Lee, that there is "a deeper and more spiritual side of life and knowing the Lord". But I've found that to linger, like Mary at the tomb, may occasionally be met by the 'parousia' of the Spirit of Christ: the Spirit of Christ reveals Christ, and Christ reveals His Father's kingdom. And yes this experience at some point includes the functioning of the rational mind. So there's more, in the word, beyond the "LC experience" as it has thus far been presented by Nee, Lee, and their acolytes.
But Lee dismissed this possibility out of hand, rejecting the native power of the Word, which power resurrected Jesus from the dead and gives life and breath to all things. So I can't take his work too seriously any more. Yes it helped once, but now I regard it as analogous to being in kindergarden or first grade. It may be developmentally preferential to wearing diapers in a crib with a rattle, but it's not the end-all and be-all of the human experience.
Having written the above doesn't mean that I'm now "somebody"; seeing something and then living it are two different propositions. "Blessed are the doers of the Word, not just the hearers thereof." But still, if you don't see or hear, how can you live it? As Paul said, "How can they believe unless they first hear? And how can they hear unless someone preaches to them?" (Rom 10:14) And Lee's thought-system effectively tried to keep us from seeing or hearing "this Jesus" (Acts 2:32). Supposedly if you prayerfully considered the Word you would always come to the same conclusions that "the ministry" gave you.
But suppose you prayerfully came to the Word, and considered, and suddenly the light began to shine, and "this Jesus" began to appear where Lee had said there was no light, and no truth, then what? How does the "LC life" experience allow one to go on? They either have to ignore the speaking Word, or throw out the ministry that ignores the Word.
RK's Comment re: Scanning
Some time ago at a blending conference RK made a peculiar comment that I often ponder upon. During a message he said something about being able to scan a person to make some kind of determination, and then said something like don't come up to me after the message and ask how we do the scanning because it's just something we do (not the exact words). Has anyone else heard similar comments on the topic of "scanning the saints"? I took it as him being able to assess or discern the spiritual condition of a saint. It sounded kind of weird then and it still seems weird...like having some kind of capacity to see through people "to scan the souls of men".
RK's Comment re: Scanning
Some time ago at a blending conference RK made a peculiar comment that I often ponder upon. During a message he said something about being able to scan a person to make some kind of determination, and then said something like don't come up to me after the message and ask how we do the scanning because it's just something we do (not the exact words). Has anyone else heard similar comments on the topic of "scanning the saints"? I took it as him being able to assess or discern the spiritual condition of a saint. It sounded kind of weird then and it still seems weird...like having some kind of capacity to see through people "to scan the souls of men".
Sounds like Ray Graver. I have heard that some have called him "X-Ray Ray" because he could walk up to any (especially a young) brother and rebuke him for being "in the flesh."
To me that is a worthless skill, kind of like the ministry of condemnation. Wouldn't it be far better to bring others to God by speaking blessing to them?
TLFisher
02-09-2015, 12:36 PM
Sounds like Ray Graver. I have heard that some have called him "X-Ray Ray" because he could walk up to any (especially a young) brother and rebuke him for being "in the flesh."
That takes no skill to do. Besides the accounts alluding to Ray Graver in The Thread of Gold and through additional reports, he strikes me as one easily offended. All you need to do is critique the binding and covers of LSM printed books, as RG receives that as an attack.
TLFisher
02-09-2015, 12:40 PM
RK's Comment re: Scanning
Some time ago at a blending conference RK made a peculiar comment that I often ponder upon. During a message he said something about being able to scan a person to make some kind of determination, and then said something like don't come up to me after the message and ask how we do the scanning because it's just something we do (not the exact words). Has anyone else heard similar comments on the topic of "scanning the saints"? I took it as him being able to assess or discern the spiritual condition of a saint. It sounded kind of weird then and it still seems weird...like having some kind of capacity to see through people "to scan the souls of men".
A similar word could be uttered, "I don't need facts. All I need is to scan a brother or sister and that provides all the discernment I need."
That takes no skill to do. Besides the accounts alluding to Ray Graver in The Thread of Gold and through additional reports, he strikes me as one easily offended. All you need to do is critique the binding and covers of LSM printed books, as RG receives that as an attack.
Interesting point.
Why is it that the more one rises in the ranks of the Recovery, the more he critiques everyone else, and the more easily he is offended?
rayliotta
02-09-2015, 06:04 PM
Sounds like Ray Graver. I have heard that some have called him "X-Ray Ray" because he could walk up to any (especially a young) brother and rebuke him for being "in the flesh."
To me that is a worthless skill, kind of like the ministry of condemnation. Wouldn't it be far better to bring others to God by speaking blessing to them?
Good thing Mr Graver was "in the spirit" while he rebuked others for being "in the flesh."
TLFisher
02-09-2015, 06:11 PM
Why is it that the more one rises in the ranks of the Recovery, the more he critiques everyone else, and the more easily he is offended?
There is something to be said for spiritual maturity and experience with the cross. Brothers easily offended may not have much experience with the cross.
I know the following quote is on the current home page of this site, but I wanted to copy it here so I could maintain access to it. I believe this quote is accurate.
"Many have assayed to define the Local Church of Witness Lee. As an ex-long term member and leader in the group, I will also attempt a final opinion: The Local Church of Witness Lee is a splinter sect of the Closed Brethren, modified by Asian culture and peculiarly developed because of its isolation from the rest of the Body of Christ."
John Myer
A Future And A Hope
I know the following quote is on the current home page of this site, but I wanted to copy it here so I could maintain access to it. I believe this quote is accurate.
"Many have assayed to define the Local Church of Witness Lee. As an ex-long term member and leader in the group, I will also attempt a final opinion: The Local Church of Witness Lee is a splinter sect of the Closed Brethren, modified by Asian culture and peculiarly developed because of its isolation from the rest of the Body of Christ."
John Myer
A Future And A Hope
And I would recommend Myer's book to any and all LC members attempting to leave that sect.
And I would recommend Myer's book to any and all LC members attempting to leave that sect.
Yes, I have read the book and can recommend it. http://www.Assemblylife.com
I can also recommend "The Thread of Gold" by Carolyn Anderson.
http://www.thethreadofgold.com
TLFisher
02-10-2015, 06:26 PM
The Local Church of Witness Lee is a splinter sect of the Closed Brethren, modified by Asian culture and peculiarly developed because of its isolation from the rest of the Body of Christ."
Summed up rather accurately. The most obvious to me would have been to say splintered sect from the Closed Brethren. I haven't read any of John's in a few years. Thanks for the find HERn.
Summed up rather accurately. The most obvious to me would have been to say splintered sect from the Closed Brethren. I haven't read any of John's in a few years. Thanks for the find HERn.
Those were John Myer's contributions.
My first training at Anaheim was on mammon and while I was in the LSM book room standing in line to purchase the RcV NT CD a brother comes up to me and asks if I want to buy a directory of the local churches I said yes and that I would just add it to the stuff I had already picked out to purchase. The brother said that it was a cash sale only so I paid him $3 cash. I remember that he was selling them to other saints waiting in line. Kind of weird to see some type of sideline business going on while waiting in line to pay at the register, especially when the topic was on mammon!
Our One Another group was cancelled tonight, but the dear 84 yo retired Wycliffe translater brother showed up. He was the only one at the cancelled home meeting, but we had such a wonderful time reading the bible and talking. He served the Chacabos (spelling ?) for 25 years living with them and learning their culture and language so they could translate the New Testament into their language. He had to create a written language for them! Dear brothers and sisters in the lords recovery, please don't let LSM deceive you in thinking that the Lord Jesus is only working in their little group. He is so much bigger than the self-proclaimed "the lord's recovery". I fear that at the judgement seat of Christ He may say to some of the BBs "I never knew you".
Our pastor mentioned the following quote from Mark Ross in his sermon on the last Lord's day.
"Yet as we have seen, the church that is in Jesus is a diverse church. This diversity among Christians is due to our lack of conformity to Christ. He has chosen to sanctify us gradually in this world. As the progress we make in sanctification varies both in doctrine and in practice, there will always be a need in this world for those who are united in Christ to live in love with one another while dealing with differences. Sometimes these differences result in the formation of different churches and denominations in order to maintain a good conscience toward God. But such divisions need not be a defeat of unity among us, so long as we do not permit them to destroy our love and welcome for one another in Christ. Some divisions are of practical necessity anyway, for not all Christians in the world can meet together at the same time in the same place.
Many distinct gatherings of Christians spread throughout the world can actually serve the purposes of God, by sprinkling us among the lost to shine the light of Christ. Our multiple groupings can also serve us well, encouraging us to be faithful to what we believe Christ has taught us, bringing us together with those with whom we can cooperate most fully. But if we allow our divisions to become breaches of love and occasions for pride and rivalry, then we will have failed in our calling, and our witness for Christ will be marred."
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/essentials-unity-non-essentials-liberty-all-things/
Our pastor mentioned the following quote from Mark Ross in his sermon on the last Lord's day.
"Yet as we have seen, the church that is in Jesus is a diverse church. This diversity among Christians is due to our lack of conformity to Christ. He has chosen to sanctify us gradually in this world. As the progress we make in sanctification varies both in doctrine and in practice, there will always be a need in this world for those who are united in Christ to live in love with one another while dealing with differences. Sometimes these differences result in the formation of different churches and denominations in order to maintain a good conscience toward God. But such divisions need not be a defeat of unity among us, so long as we do not permit them to destroy our love and welcome for one another in Christ. Some divisions are of practical necessity anyway, for not all Christians in the world can meet together at the same time in the same place.
Many distinct gatherings of Christians spread throughout the world can actually serve the purposes of God, by sprinkling us among the lost to shine the light of Christ. Our multiple groupings can also serve us well, encouraging us to be faithful to what we believe Christ has taught us, bringing us together with those with whom we can cooperate most fully. But if we allow our divisions to become breaches of love and occasions for pride and rivalry, then we will have failed in our calling, and our witness for Christ will be marred."
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/essentials-unity-non-essentials-liberty-all-things/
Exclusive ministers like Witness Lee would never abide by these principles. If they did, they would lose their identity and reason for being.
When J N Darby hijacked the Plymouth Brethren movement, his definition for Christian unity was explained in a circular entitled, "Separation from evil, God's principle for unity." It takes a while for these two divergent principles of Christian unity to completely manifest themselves. Another Brethren founder A N Groves properly noted that the Exclusives under Darby soon became identified with what they stood against, rather than what they stood for.
Witness Lee, at heart a Darby descendent, followed this same path. The two of them majored in minors concerning love. To follow Lee, one must judge all as he did. One was never permitted to pick and choose which items or which brothers to condemn. Lee could convincingly preach oneness all day long, yet never practice charity towards those who differed from his judgments.
What to throw out?
The first thing to discard is the exclusive form of unity.
I think that the most important words are "until we all arrive at the unity of the faith."
That stands in stark contrast to the way that so many super leaders want it to be. They would say "You must follow my version of the unity of the faith." The take no consideration for the possibility that they could be wrong, therefore are not the place to which unity is moving.
But the most important thing about the unity of the faith is that it is probably not based upon the right polar positions, or even the right mix of positions. It is probably not Calvinism, or Arminianinsm, or even some specific place in between. That does not mean that some particular place in there is not "right," but that even in being right, that is not "the faith."
And it is doubtful that any one of us (from among all Christians, not just the ones frequenting this forum) is even close to having it all "right." Yet many of us are fully in the faith. And many are arriving at unity in the faith as we continue to meet with people who are more similar to ourselves, yet not precisely so, as we recognize the faith in those who are more unlike ourselves.
I can not say that there is nothing in the Mark Ross quote that I might take exception to. While not said directly, it seemed to suggest that there is a need to create different groups. That might be less a function of need as of the reality of our inability to deal with all aspects of conflict. Of the inability to accept that we don't agree on everything, even though we do agree on the faith. It is the thing that still unifies us. It is the thing that brings people of quite diverse congregations together for many things, even if not the regular Sunday worship.
HERn, I enjoyed and agreed with the eloquent quote your post. But my first thought was how LCMers would be instantly suspicious of such sentiments. They would be inclined to call it "shaking hands over the fence." The problem with that view is not that it is wrong to desire strong expressions of unity, but that it insists that unity must be expressed in a certain specific way, in the LCM case submitting to LCM elders and leaders "on the ground of locality."
But, as OBW suggested, the arrival at the unity of the faith is not something whose practical outworkings are clear to us. We can assume there will be love, harmony and cooperation, but we cannot say how that will look from leadership or gathering standpoints. It is the height of arrogance to expect all Christians to submit to a specific set of leaders or meet in specific places, no matter what you think of the benefits.
The LCM got locked into a view of oneness which in essence meant nothing more than bowing before arbitrary elders (always their's interestingly) while mouthing platitudes about "one church one city." As Ohio suggested, it has become clear that this is nothing more than a conveniently disguised scheme to (1) control members and (2) discredit non-conforming Christians and groups. In other words, exclusiveness.
I think that the most important words are "until we all arrive at the unity of the faith."
Hear, hear. WL made being "absolutely identical" a starting point to the so-called normal church life. Yes, like bricks in the wall, daubed with slime. Each one absolutely identical. Full unity: dead and static.
When J N Darby hijacked the Plymouth Brethren movement, his definition for Christian unity was explained in a circular entitled, "Separation from evil, God's principle for unity."
What to throw out?
The first thing to discard is the exclusive form of unity.
Hear, hear. WL made being "absolutely identical" a starting point to the so-called normal church life. Yes, like bricks in the wall, daubed with slime. Each one absolutely identical. Full unity: dead and static.
Once we allowed Lee to define all that was evil, we began sliding down that slippery slope. We had thus abrogated our own responsibility to test and prove all things according to the scripture. Being "absolutely identical" then becomes the only safeguard against being singled out by those in power. Saints learn to live in fear of being singled out for standing out and being "different."
This uniformity program entered into full speed during the heyday of the "New Way." I was at one elders and deacons training meeting and watched a dear brother get ruthlessly excoriated for not wearing his LSM-issued blue or brown necktie. It was like time stopped and we all got to watch the trainer AY make an example out of this brother so that the rest of us would "learn a valuable lesson."
Here in the GLA, Titus Chu was always a marked man for refusing to be being "absolutely identical" to the other lackeys under Lee. How those LSM trainers longed to force TC to register as "just one of the brothers" at the training center, so that they could daily inspect his bed and underwear drawers like the rest of us. Forced humility to bring him under subjection.
Personally, I thought it was kind of humorous when I received an official citation for not arranging my underwear properly. These kids were assigned to enter our training dorms during scheduled activities, otherwise I would have made him sniff out my dirty laundry bag too.
This uniformity program entered into full speed during the heyday of the "New Way." I was at one elders and deacons training meeting and watched a dear brother get ruthlessly excoriated for not wearing his LSM-issued blue or brown necktie.
Unity became uniformity. How can one not say that this quenched the Spirit?
Unity became uniformity. How can one not say that this quenched the Spirit?
This brings up another one of Lee's favorite toys, something we have not discussed much on this forum -- the need for incessant training by Lee and company.
I was at one elders and deacons training meeting and watched a dear brother get ruthlessly excoriated for not wearing his LSM-issued blue or brown necktie.I would not have done well in that kind of environment. It would have hastened my departure. I might have just told whoever that he was full of excrement and headed for the door.
Prior to my departure, I bought into the system. For a while afterward, I still had the thought that it was actually the right doctrines. But I would have left much clearer had I been faced with that kind of nonsense, or been present when it happened to someone else. I don't tolerate that brand of bovine feces very well. No amount of checking the brain at the door turns my BS-o-meter completely off. Probably a character flaw.
I would not have done well in that kind of environment. It would have hastened my departure. I might have just told whoever that he was full of excrement and headed for the door.
You might have remained stranded (quarantined) on that island forever. :rollingeyesfrown:
"But if we allow our divisions to become breaches of love and occasions for pride and rivalry, then we will have failed in our calling, and our witness for Christ will be marred."
In my opinion a fundamental problem with LSM Leeism is their refusal to receive anything outside of WL. The Spirit is rich in expression...to restrict yourself to Leeism is to refuse what the Spirit is providing through the entire body of Christ. Leeism fosters pride and and the rejection of the Spirit's working outside of LSM. If there is such a thing as an oracle of God it's Jesus Christ, it could never be someone like WL...Paul maybe, but certainly not WL. Do you think Paul would have his photo taken beside a huge RV that was built using the money from the saints?
In my opinion a fundamental problem with LSM Leeism is their refusal to receive anything outside of WL. The Spirit is rich in expression...to restrict yourself to Leeism is to refuse what the Spirit is providing through the entire body of Christ. Leeism fosters pride and and the rejection of the Spirit's working outside of LSM.
In any large metropolitan area, there are going to be numerous gatherings. You can't expect every Christian in town to be in the same building at the same time. Nowhere in the Scripture is this indicated. Even "Jerusalem" and "Zion" were surrounded and supported by a vast geographical and social network. So to expect everybody to get in one room, under one minister, as the only valid representation of God's people today, is unrealistic at best and delusional at worst.
Sure, WN saw division. And WL made a lot of noise about it, here in the USA. But their proposed solution of "one church" is simply not practical. In reality you'll have numerous meetings, gatherings, assemblies, whatever you call them (gasp - 'churches'!!). The Spirit moved across the earth, and people began to gather in Jesus' name. One gathering may have a piano. One may have a banjo. One may have 3 guitars. Whatever. God isn't bothered by a diverse representation.
But clearly the LC of WL, what you call 'Leeism', is bothered by diversity in representation. It sees diversity as a kind of proto-sectarianism. Its proposed solution is to have everyone get in the same room, read the exact same translation of the exact same Bible verses, then recite the exact same explanation to each other, and anyone who doesn't gets marginalized. This seems to go against the whole expression of the Bible: the Bible seems very inclusive, in Jesus' name. "Receive those whom God received in Christ Jesus". No qualifiers, beyond that we have sinned, repented, and confessed. Those saying, "None may add qualifiers" have themselves added the most restrictive qualifier of all. Because they've given themselves the license, or "the ground" to reject everyone. They can say they're the most inclusive, while rejecting everyone who isn't as inclusive as they are.
InOmnibusCaritas
03-19-2015, 08:38 AM
In any large metropolitan area, there are going to be numerous gatherings. You can't expect every Christian in town to be in the same building at the same time. Nowhere in the Scripture is this indicated. Even "Jerusalem" and "Zion" were surrounded and supported by a vast geographical and social network. So to expect everybody to get in one room, under one minister, as the only valid representation of God's people today, is unrealistic at best and delusional at worst.
Taiwan LCs have many meeting halls. The LC in my city meets concurrently in 4-5 different locations every Sunday. The point wasn't everyone gather under the same roof but that all Christian congregations recognise themselves as the church in that locality rather than identifying themselves along denominational lines. Lee's implementation is a mutated version of this ideal.
Taiwan LCs have many meeting halls. The LC in my city meets concurrently in 4-5 different locations every Sunday. The point wasn't everyone gather under the same roof but that all Christian congregations recognise themselves as the church in that locality rather than identifying themselves along denominational lines. Lee's implementation is a mutated version of this ideal.
Since Lee and his successors forced all their member churches to be recognized by them, with numerous written and unwritten stipulations, can we not help but conclude that the Recovery has been organized along to denominational lines? Many of us have wondered if their brand of denominationalism is far worse than those which they regularly condemn.
Historians have stated, for example, that J N Darby became a far worse "pope" than the one in Rome he continually critiqued.
The point wasn't everyone gather under the same roof but that all Christian congregations recognise themselves as the church in that locality rather than identifying themselves along denominational lines. Lee's implementation is a mutated version of this ideal.
So everyone agrees that one "ekklesia" can allow multiple gatherings in one city. But from there, a kind of narcissistic subjectivism takes over, it seems. When other congregations recognize each other as part of the one church, the Nee model (at least in my LC experience) said that this was merely "ecumenicalism"; the current leader was fond of saying, "We don't care for that." Yet when the LC did it they called it "building the Body of Christ".
The ideal, as I see it, is to love one another, even as Christ loved us and gave Himself up for us "while we were yet sinners". The ideal is to "receive one another even as God received us in Christ Jesus." It's probably harder to mutate this ideal, than the Nee version. An ideal that so readily mutates isn't ideal. If you do a Google search of "one true church" you see how often this idea takes hold of people, and what are the consequences.
InOmnibusCaritas
03-19-2015, 11:07 AM
Since Lee and his successors forced all their member churches to be recognized by them, with numerous written and unwritten stipulations, can we not help but conclude that the Recovery has been organized along to denominational lines? Many of us have wondered if their brand of denominationalism is far worse than those which they regularly condemn.
Historians have stated, for example, that J N Darby became a far worse "pope" than the one in Rome he continually critiqued.
I think we need not wonder. The Recovery's brand of denominationalism is far, far, far worse. Two of the most ironic things about the Recovery:
1) It was designed to break down the spirit of denominationalism among Christians;
2) It is now a denomination that doesn't understand that it's a denomination.
InOmnibusCaritas
03-19-2015, 11:15 AM
So everyone agrees that one "ekklesia" can allow multiple gatherings in one city. But from there, a kind of narcissistic subjectivism takes over, it seems. When other congregations recognize each other as part of the one church, the Nee model (at least in my LC experience) said that this was merely "ecumenicalism"; the current leader was fond of saying, "We don't care for that." Yet when the LC did it they called it "building the Body of Christ".
The ideal, as I see it, is to love one another, even as Christ loved us and gave Himself up for us "while we were yet sinners". The ideal is to "receive one another even as God received us in Christ Jesus." It's probably harder to mutate this ideal, than the Nee version. An ideal that so readily mutates isn't ideal. If you do a Google search of "one true church" you see how often this idea takes hold of people, and what are the consequences.
The gospel itself is ideal but is readily mutated into prosperity gospel, social gospel, liberation theology, etc. We must not judge a theory by its abuse.
I don't think Nee's model ever existed. The ones that we have are based on Lee's model.
You are absolutely right that our unity is more ontological than church polity per se. When we love one another as Christ has loved us, all these church unity and ecumenical movement models are secondary issues at best.
The gospel itself is ideal but is readily mutated into prosperity gospel, social gospel, liberation theology, etc. We must not judge a theory by its abuse.
I don't think Nee's model ever existed. The ones that we have are based on Lee's model.
Communists will tell you genuine communism never existed either. All that really says is that communism is not practically applicable, and neither is Nee's model.
Nee's model is like perpetual motion machines or alchemy or risk-free investments. It is an inherent contradiction. Energy cannot be created, elements are by definition immutable, investors cannot expect payment for assuming risk when there is none. And oneness cannot be achieved through its own violation.
Other than being useless, these were great ideas.
(Not exactly useless. They do teach us what doesn't work. But the key is to learn and move on, not keep banging our heads against a wall trying to make something work that by definition cannot. We can only honor those hurt by Nee's model by learning from it.)
Communists will tell you genuine communism never existed either. All that really says is that communism is not practically applicable, and neither is Nee's model.
Great points.
Genuine "communism" did exist once. In Acts 4.32-37. It was a marvelous testimony of God's great salvation and grace. As quickly as it happened, it also ended. See Acts 5.1-11. I also believe that at certain times in church history "communism" happened again. Then it ended again.
I know InOmnibusCaritas might not like to hear this, but many of us former members have concluded that Nee's idealized church oneness program, much like Catholicism and modern day communism, was simply utilized as a ploy to bring others under subjection.
awareness
03-19-2015, 08:07 PM
Great points.
Genuine "communism" did exist once. In Acts 4.32-37. It was a marvelous testimony of God's great salvation and grace. As quickly as it happened, it also ended. See Acts 5.1-11. I also believe that at certain times in church history "communism" happened again. Then it ended again.
I know InOmnibusCaritas might not like to hear this, but many of us former members have concluded that Nee's idealized church oneness program, much like Catholicism and modern day communism, was simply utilized as a ploy to bring others under subjection.Yes, and that's why Nees' "Deputy/Delegated Authority" should be thrown out. That was the rafters and beams of Nee's model ... and steeple.
And Lee ran wild with it.
InOmnibusCaritas
03-20-2015, 01:22 AM
Great points.
Genuine "communism" did exist once. In Acts 4.32-37. It was a marvelous testimony of God's great salvation and grace. As quickly as it happened, it also ended. See Acts 5.1-11. I also believe that at certain times in church history "communism" happened again. Then it ended again.
I know InOmnibusCaritas might not like to hear this, but many of us former members have concluded that Nee's idealized church oneness program, much like Catholicism and modern day communism, was simply utilized as a ploy to bring others under subjection.
I don't know if Nee meant to bring others under subjection. I know that Lee certainly did. At any rate, I no longer have any vested interest in Nee/Lee.
But since my entire family and almost every friend I had from before 2006 are still in LSM LCs, I want to know if I can do anything to disabuse them from that system. Whatever Nee taught is moot because he is only paid lip service in LSM churches. It's all Lee for these people. I love them very much, I've served Pharaoh, I've done my time in the wilderness, I've learnt a thing or two, and now I'm back hoping to bring them out of Egypt (with apologies to Moses).
You might have remained stranded (quarantined) on that island forever. :rollingeyesfrown:I thought quarantined meant you were out. That would have given me what I gave myself.
I see quarantine as only effective on those who think they have something to lose by not being engaged in the system. On those who will spend their last bit of strength trying to get the quarantine lifted.
If we admit that leaving on our own is like a self-imposed quarantine, that just shows the hold the system has had on us. That we take sometimes years to eject that system out of our nostrils — to lose the desire for its leeks and garlic — shows how it holds on even when we think we no longer have any interest.
If you leave, they have no right over you. If they toss you via quarantine and you keep trying to get back in, they have you by the throat.
So I don't see how walking out would leave me on any island forever. It would only be true if I still wanted back in.
awareness
03-22-2015, 10:52 AM
I don't know if Nee meant to bring others under subjection.Haven't you read Nees' Submission and Authority?
I can get you a pdf copy if you like.
Also, I can get you a copy of Lily Hsu's book, My Unforgettable Memories: Watchman Nee and the Shanghai Church, in mobi or pdf.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.